I don't see how this could be a negative thing for Bitcoin. In fact there is a debate about which would be better, an inflationary currency or a deflationary currency. In theory, it may be a bit difficult for some people to analyze, but in practice it is easy to realize that a deflationary currency only brings damage to an economy. On the other hand, Bitcoin is a currency that, in my opinion, has worked much more efficiently over the years.
Pools get less rewards for their work as halvings take place. The negative point lies in the fact that pools will rely on collecting fees to such a dramatic level in the future, that it's basically too expensive to use Bitcoin as a currency for shopping and stuff. If the price keeps going up alongside the constantly increasing difficulty, then it all this won't be so drastic at the beginning. But if the price is not going up nicely, then the fees will need to be upped in order to compensate for the work that pools need to do.
If the price won't rise, it just means that adoption has halted, and raising the fees may in fact be counterproductive and lead to an opposite effect, i.e. collecting even less fees since people may make less transactions with higher volume, or just transact less altogether. On the contrary, lowering the fees may actually increase their total due to larger quantity of microtransactions. Anyway, a radical solution would be to increase the block size significantly, so that one block could accommodate more transactions and thus make the fee total higher per every block found...
But this would evidently work only if adoption increases leading to more transactions processed per unit of time
