I’m talking about in regards to the campaign, do you believe the ‘shoot-em-up’ style has become too basic and repetitive, or do you believe it is the foundation of Halo?
In other words, if H5:G expanded it’s gameplay to include stealth, mystery among other variations of gameplay, would you consider it “Not Halo”? or would you love the innovation to it?
How much should they change, and keep the same?
Well I should hope that everyone wants a variety of experiences. I wouldn’t say that past Halos were particularly repetitive (in regards to gameplay).
I’m a supporter of more refined stealth mechanics and more stealth opportunities. I’m also an advocate of optional/secondary objectives.
Halo has always allowed a bit of quasi stealth: the ability to sneak around before you fire a shot, to hide and reappear where enemies don’t expect you. There’s also been an exploration aspect to it, with skulls, easter eggs, and terminals hidden around levels. In Halo 4 there were even interactable objects that gave you some dialogue with cortana, or audio logs that explained something a scientist had discovered.
If they give you some new gameplay tools that can aid exploration and stealth, fine, but the main Halo games should be about combat first. I’d love to play a third person stealth game in the Halo universe, but that’s for another game.
stealth should always just be a prelude to combat beginning, trying to sneakily find an advantageous place to begin your attack from. repositioning to confuse enemies and make them think you’re in places you’re not is fine, though enemies shouldn’t yell “I lost track of him” like brutes in Halo 3 did, it made it too transparent and made them seem to give up too quickly.
Combat isn’t necessarily repetitive if enemies are varied, do interesting and unique things often, and the level design is good. and not all games need to focus on more than one main style of gameplay. often times they end up being ok at everything but the best at nothing.