Based off of what little we’ve seen and heard regarding Halo Infinite, it seems reasonable to assume that 343i have switched gears and committed to a more classical style of design -at least in the aesthetic department. I’m wondering how much of that is going to translate into overall game design and how far 343 plans to lean into that principle.
I’m interested in how much 343 are willing to risk in terms of new content and mechanics as well. If we end up getting a game that feels bare-bones and stripped of gameplay features, some could rightfully feel cheated while, on the other hand, if they decide to add a plethora of new mechanics it could end up feeling over-saturated and unnecessary, perhaps even game-braking. I am of the opinion that less is more when it comes to most things, especially games. If a game has only a small handful of features but all of those features are well polished, concise, fun and feel at home then that is a game that is, as far as I’m concerned, high quality. It would have to be, since the developers have less features to focus on balancing and fine-tuning.
Both sides of this coin appear to be risky at this point, since the Halo community is split right down the middle in terms of what they prefer/expect to see. On one hand there are those who have been begging for a return to classic Halo design principles while others go as far as to ask for a Battle Royale mode. I’m not sure whether it’s worth 343’s time to invest in both departments and try to please both sides of the aisle. That seems to me like a fools errand, and I doubt the devs would be willing to go through something like that -trying to appease every corner of the community. It’s inevitable then that one side of the community is going to end up being thrown under the bus but, the question is then, what are 343i willing to do to mitigate that?
I suspect they may have to put all of their focus on making the game THAT much more polished that even those who have concerns or grievances regarding certain features or design styles will have to cave and admit that the game is just that good. If I was a game director at 343i, I would start by choosing a handful of things I’d want the team to focus on and then make sure that every one of those things are executed as well as humanly possible -that feels like common sense to me. Piling on features on top of features for their own sake would be a waste of time and would ultimately be to the game’s detriment.
All that said, which features feel as if they aren’t necessary in any of the mainline Halo games? For me personally, I’d have a hard time thinking of any features present in the original trilogy that feel out of place or tacked on. The earliest game I can think of that features mechanics that feel unnecessary is Halo Reach, namely referring to spartan abilities such as sprint or what have you. Judging by a recent forum post, the community is heavily divided on the sprint issue and I simply don’t understand why. I don’t believe that realism or speed have anything to do with it, those excuses seem outlandish to me. And weighing the pros and cons introduced into the game by the inclusion of sprint and other movement mechanics points to the fact that their inclusion makes the game worse overall and diminishes the role of vehicles.
Regardless, if there is room for new features in Infinite, what would those be and how would they affect gameplay? I’m not only talking about what the player character can do, but also things like map and environment design, enemy AI and variety, weapon variety, vehicle variety, multiplayer modes, etc. Specifically, if we’re focusing on building a Halo game that feels like classic Halo games, what can we add to/remove from it that wouldn’t muddy the soul of what Halo is?