I’ve heard some naysayers out there describing Halo Infinite campaign as a generic far cry-esque game. I find this to be a bit unfair as this take can be applied to virtually any open world game. How they set themselves apart is they differentiate in terms of gameplay and the setting. Gameplay is distinctly halo where you cannot find it anywhere else and to apply that kind of gameplay to an open world setting is almost perfect because it echoes that sort of environment that we found back in the original halo.
every open world game has its share of fetch quests, side quests, clearing out areas or outposts and gathering collectibles but it is the gameplay loop, versatility, enemies, and the setting that differentiates one open world game from another and Halo infinite is clearly doing that.
what do you guys think? do you agree or disagree?
I just think the general sentiment has shifted massively over the years, if Halo 4 went open world it would’ve been heralded (if done correctly) as the most innovative title in the series, now that its been 10 years and every other franchise has already adopted this I feel that attitudes have shifted and now what would’ve blown people’s minds back in 2012 (mind you, this was only 1 year after Skyrim, just for perspective) is just seen as a “bore”
back in early 2000’s: the longer the game the better!
2010’s: could you make this game feel more open? (the RPG decade)
now in the 2020’s I feel that this decade is most characterized by Roguelikes. No longer can games just have tons of content, in fact too much stuff is typically overwhelming, and so if you make a game that is bite sized with lots of depth it gets tons of praise nowadays. Halo Infinite is basically a decade behind.
I also find it funny that people act as though Halo’s linear storytelling was anything special… yeah linear storytelling is just as overdone as the open world setting is.
I couldn’t disagree more. Yeah it’s different gunplay and setting, but you can easily find the equivalents in this and many Ubisoft titles. FOBs seem like a combination of watch/radio towers from many Ubi games and checkpoints from Far Cry. The many side objectives feel a lot like Ghost Recon Wildlands. The calling in vehicles also feels like Wildlands apart from in that you could call it in anywhere in that game. There’s a lot of similarities that can’t be overlooked.
People like me are complaining about this because we’re tired of meaningless padding. God I’m hoping without the sidequests it’s still a long game.
And yes every game used to be a linear storytelling game, but that’s where it shined, people loved the story and levels etc. And I remember Bungie had a belief of 30 seconds of fun or something, and I think I may get a bit bored between the missions in this.
I feel it’s going to be like an enhanced ODST campaign, with an open world with stuff but the missions are locked off to different “arenas”, dunno what else to call them XD But unlike ODST, Infinite doesn’t have the atmosphere ODST had. I’d happily load up ODST, pop on heroic, and chill around New Mombasa Streets.
I dunno, people can like this stuff, it’s fine, but you can’t deny the resemblance and ignore people’s concerns with it. Maybe it would have been great around the time Far Cry 3 released, but we’re kinda tired of it. Just look at Far Cry 6 or recent Assassin’s Creeds.
Wildlands was / is a not a good ghost recon / open world game. Worst thing about that game being the AI and repetitive missions. They spent all their budget on the graphics engine.
at least the AI in infinite should be decent and challenging if you go by halo 4 & 5.
> 2535438627034925;4:
> Wildlands was / is a not a good ghost recon / open world game. Worst thing about that game being the AI and repetitive missions. They spent all their budget on the graphics engine.
>
> at least the AI in infinite should be decent and challenging if you go by halo 4 & 5.
I didn’t mind Wildlands for what it was, but yes, for a Ghost Recon game, it was terrible, same as Breakpoint. They’ve lost everything that was Ghost Recon and I’m a huge fan of the series. And AI we’ll have to see, but it doesn’t change the objectives etc, that’s what makes it feel like a Ubi game.
Frankly, the Viability of open world comes down to the storytelling.
Halo itself is probably a major contributor to the Open world design of games despite it initially not BEING open world.
Halo’s levels, especially CE set an open AREA with multiple possible approaches strung together with a narrative.
Drive the warthog left or right, do Objective. Travel into an area with X Y or Z vehicle. Maybe Highjack a Banshee and fly straight to the top. Etc. Halo’s Objectives were broken up with Narrative set pieces that were then Open Areas that could be approached relatively freely. All Halo Infinite has to do right is make the Missions and Objectives flow narratively well and convincingly and you will WANT To decouple all the somoflanges, or Collect all the Goober keys because it will play out JUST like Halo always did, except you’re now Choosing what order you’re doing it in (probably some what limited)
Ultimately, I have faith in it working despite my relative fatigue with Bad open world games, too.
Edit: Also I had a thought. If the player is not only driven by what THEY Want to do but what other objectives other characters Need you still get a really amazing game. Batman Arkham series games were largely “open world” especially Arkham City. but the side quests and narrative made those games what they were. Exploring the open world because you got to DO more story and ALSO take on challenges really worked out.
Honestly i just want it to still be focused on the story, i dont care about “create your own fun” buffets. I want expertly crafted and curated experiences that drive a sense of urgency.
> 2533274811158328;6:
> Frankly, the Viability of open world comes down to the storytelling.
>
> Halo itself is probably a major contributor to the Open world design of games despite it initially not BEING open world.
This.
Halo feels big because it has big environments, but its stories also feel massive because its levels are often seperated by many kilometers, if not light years. It has varied, well designed, yet still open experiences.
Many open world games create the size of large by filling it full of clutter, or simply creating wide open areas of clutter. They can also, oddly enough, feel small since they tend to focus on like a small island, or the area around a city.
I hope halo hasn’t sacrificed its immersive sense of scale for a sea of busywork and collectables. We already have seen and been told the environs won’t have the variety we’re used to.
> 2533274811158328;6:
> Frankly, the Viability of open world comes down to the storytelling.
>
> Halo itself is probably a major contributor to the Open world design of games despite it initially not BEING open world.
>
> Halo’s levels, especially CE set an open AREA with multiple possible approaches strung together with a narrative.
>
> Drive the warthog left or right, do Objective. Travel into an area with X Y or Z vehicle. Maybe Highjack a Banshee and fly straight to the top. Etc. Halo’s Objectives were broken up with Narrative set pieces that were then Open Areas that could be approached relatively freely. All Halo Infinite has to do right is make the Missions and Objectives flow narratively well and convincingly and you will WANT To decouple all the somoflanges, or Collect all the Goober keys because it will play out JUST like Halo always did, except you’re now Choosing what order you’re doing it in (probably some what limited)
>
> Ultimately, I have faith in it working despite my relative fatigue with Bad open world games, too.
>
> Edit: Also I had a thought. If the player is not only driven by what THEY Want to do but what other objectives other characters Need you still get a really amazing game. Batman Arkham series games were largely “open world” especially Arkham City. but the side quests and narrative made those games what they were. Exploring the open world because you got to DO more story and ALSO take on challenges really worked out.
Yep.
I am all in this semi-open world design because it is set in the Halo universe.
> 2533274845983347;2:
> I just think the general sentiment has shifted massively over the years, if Halo 4 went open world it would’ve been heralded (if done correctly) as the most innovative title in the series, now that its been 10 years and every other franchise has already adopted this I feel that attitudes have shifted and now what would’ve blown people’s minds back in 2012 (mind you, this was only 1 year after Skyrim, just for perspective) is just seen as a “bore”
>
> back in early 2000’s: the longer the game the better!
> 2010’s: could you make this game feel more open? (the RPG decade)
> now in the 2020’s I feel that this decade is most characterized by Roguelikes. No longer can games just have tons of content, in fact too much stuff is typically overwhelming, and so if you make a game that is bite sized with lots of depth it gets tons of praise nowadays. Halo Infinite is basically a decade behind.
>
> I also find it funny that people act as though Halo’s linear storytelling was anything special… yeah linear storytelling is just as overdone as the open world setting is.
> 2533274811158328;6:
> Frankly, the Viability of open world comes down to the storytelling.
>
> Halo itself is probably a major contributor to the Open world design of games despite it initially not BEING open world.
>
> Halo’s levels, especially CE set an open AREA with multiple possible approaches strung together with a narrative.
>
> Drive the warthog left or right, do Objective. Travel into an area with X Y or Z vehicle. Maybe Highjack a Banshee and fly straight to the top. Etc. Halo’s Objectives were broken up with Narrative set pieces that were then Open Areas that could be approached relatively freely. All Halo Infinite has to do right is make the Missions and Objectives flow narratively well and convincingly and you will WANT To decouple all the somoflanges, or Collect all the Goober keys because it will play out JUST like Halo always did, except you’re now Choosing what order you’re doing it in (probably some what limited)
>
> Ultimately, I have faith in it working despite my relative fatigue with Bad open world games, too.
>
> Edit: Also I had a thought. If the player is not only driven by what THEY Want to do but what other objectives other characters Need you still get a really amazing game. Batman Arkham series games were largely “open world” especially Arkham City. but the side quests and narrative made those games what they were. Exploring the open world because you got to DO more story and ALSO take on challenges really worked out.
> 2533274806923063;3:
> I couldn’t disagree more. Yeah it’s different gunplay and setting, but you can easily find the equivalents in this and many Ubisoft titles. FOBs seem like a combination of watch/radio towers from many Ubi games and checkpoints from Far Cry. The many side objectives feel a lot like Ghost Recon Wildlands. The calling in vehicles also feels like Wildlands apart from in that you could call it in anywhere in that game. There’s a lot of similarities that can’t be overlooked.
> People like me are complaining about this because we’re tired of meaningless padding. God I’m hoping without the sidequests it’s still a long game.
> And yes every game used to be a linear storytelling game, but that’s where it shined, people loved the story and levels etc. And I remember Bungie had a belief of 30 seconds of fun or something, and I think I may get a bit bored between the missions in this.
> I feel it’s going to be like an enhanced ODST campaign, with an open world with stuff but the missions are locked off to different “arenas”, dunno what else to call them XD But unlike ODST, Infinite doesn’t have the atmosphere ODST had. I’d happily load up ODST, pop on heroic, and chill around New Mombasa Streets.
> I dunno, people can like this stuff, it’s fine, but you can’t deny the resemblance and ignore people’s concerns with it. Maybe it would have been great around the time Far Cry 3 released, but we’re kinda tired of it. Just look at Far Cry 6 or recent Assassin’s Creeds.
it won’t have the ODST atmosphere because that is not what it is trying to do. it’s clearly going back to the scale and mystery that Halo CE provided. but i have to ask what have other open world games done that set themselves apart?
every open world game has you clearing out areas (outposts in this case), saving people, fetch quests, gathering collectables, etc. what does a good open world game do when they are also guilty of the same tropes?
calling in vehicles is relatively small comparison, especially when they said enemies will adapt according to how you play. also, how else will you find ways to traverse the terrain?
I think a problem with applying the open world formula to halo is how its a military game.
Most the good open world games have you as some bloke who goes town to town dealing with issues. These are places people live. There’s various organizations and issues going on.
But in halo you’re chief, a man with a mission. On an alien ring. Your allies aren’t random people but marines who also have the same mission. They are also new to the ring, and don’t have families and such to worry about. Chief isn’t going to be joining factions.
We also have only one confirmed enemy faction in the banished.
So, you can break a game down to different gameplay loops. You have the primary gameplay loop, which is the moment to moment action. In Halo, it’s the shooting, the strafing, the use of abilities; it’s the “30 seconds of fun”. You have the secondary gameplay loop, which is what you’re trying to accomplish by iterating the primary gameplay loop: killing enemies, getting from one place to another, etc. Then you have the third order gameplay loop, which is your short term objective, e.g., clearing an area. And then you can continue up and up to more broader and longer loop orders. Fourth order is the in-game objective, a quest or mission or section of one, and so on.
The point is that for a game to truly feel distinct and unique, you kind of have to convince the player at all gameplay loop orders that they’re doing something unique. Halo Infinite may be distinctly “Halo” at the level of the primary gameplay loop, but if the higher order gameplay loops are too similar to other games, players may still be left feeling that they’re just playing any other open world game with Halo mechanics.
Players don’t just need unique mechanics. They need unique context to use those mechanics in to see meaning and value in the gameplay and be immersed. If the main progression of your game consists of the “reveal map, liberate outposts” loop that so many open world games use, then it’s very easy for the player to notice that, go “wait a minute”, and get pulled out of the experience feeling they’re just doing the same thing they’ve done so many times. Same goes for similar repetitive missions.
It’s not enough for Halo Infinite to do the standard open world experience with Halo mechanics. It needs to find a unique angle on the open world experience that ideally emphasizes something very unique to Halo.
> 2533274899826363;1:
> I’ve heard some naysayers out there describing Halo Infinite campaign as a generic far cry-esque game. I find this to be a bit unfair as this take can be applied to virtually any open world game. How they set themselves apart is they differentiate in terms of gameplay and the setting. Gameplay is distinctly halo where you cannot find it anywhere else and to apply that kind of gameplay to an open world setting is almost perfect because it echoes that sort of environment that we found back in the original halo.
>
> every open world game has its share of fetch quests, side quests, clearing out areas or outposts and gathering collectibles but it is the gameplay loop, versatility, enemies, and the setting that differentiates one open world game from another and Halo infinite is clearly doing that.
> what do you guys think? do you agree or disagree?
>
> here’s my full take on the topic
> Just another Ubisoft open world game? HALO INFINITE THOUGHTS - YouTube
Sounds like the the same logic applied and marketing speak for gears 5 ie .same uniqiqe gears gameplay in añ open world environment ect ect .didn’t work well there and I’ll be suprised of it keeps the audience here either .
The coalition and 343 are both owned and financed by Microsoft with the same franchise depleting formula .
My expectations and hype in regards to infinite are at an all time low . The trailer campaign overview left me shaking my head as to how it all went in the wrong direction from 343 yet again .
Having said that I would love nothing more than 343 knock it out the park a have me choke on my words .thankfully gamepass will allow me to test drive infinite and not feel ripped if it isn’t up to standard .
I find it funny when people compare this game to a Ubisoft open-world game because the entire gaming community raved about those for like five years between AC1 and 4. It’s just when Ubisoft started overdoing it that sentiment turned against them. Open-world games are all about the exploration, whatever the icons on the map say, and I feel like if anyone took the time to actually go back and play the old Halo games they would realize classic Halo was all about exploration as well.
I’m skeptical about the open world setting. The absolute worst part of gears 5 was the “open world” segments. I hope Halo pulls it off, but I’m not going to be holding my breath
the one redeeming thing for me if it does follow the same formula is that I’ve not played many open world games because I knew they were mostly tiresome. I did play into Far Cry6 recently for a few hours and came to the conclusion that if that was the highlight of games as we knew it then I wouldn’t be a gamer.
Halo has always had the advantage of being a much better sandbox and it could be argued that it should have always been an open world to begin with. When I think back to the semi open second level of HaloCE it’s always been easy to imagine an expansion of that. At the very least there should be lots of dynamic fun to be had with this new sandbox and that’s all I’m really expecting going in otherwise I’m inviting disapointment. We shall see