This is just my opinion; feel free to agree or disagree.
There is a lot of talk about multiplayer going around, and for good reason. But I would say that to bring Halo ‘back’ to its preeminent-status not just among shooters but all video games- 343i has to really put forth a lot of effort into its singleplayer.
Argument
I would argue that Halo was ‘Halo’ due to the strength of its campaign. Even after games like Modern Warfare and Battlefield started to grab huge chunks of the FPS multiplayer market, while it could be debated about what provided the best multiplayer experience, what couldn’t be argued is who had by far the strongest campaign. The only thing that came even remotely close was Modern Warfare 1, but it was going up against Halo 3 at the time. From a series standpoint, no contest right? From its release in 2001 to about the end of the decade, Halo was undisputed king singleplayer wise.
As of 2013? Not so much. As of the past few years, I’ve found the Far Cry series to be the preeminent FPS campaign experience. Going out side the box by differentiating itself from all the other AAA shooters on the market, its focus on a lengthy, character driven singleplayer inside an open world has paid off big for Ubisoft. It took everyone by storm, considering it released in a really crappy spot (late November, after CoD and Halo), and received little to no marketing. It was a critical and financial success. It seems that with all this focus on FPS multiplayer, there was a healthy appetite for a decent campaign experience.
Reasoning
Released a few weeks earlier, Halo 4’s campaign was, by comparison, a little lacking IMO. The characters of John and Cortana were well acted and the dynamic between them was deep. But that can be attributed to years of the two characters being together. Linear gameplay typical of the old generations of shooters. Really short campaign. Cheap enemy AI.
To say nothing of its rather cheesy villain-which is sad considering the Didact is such a deep and compelling character. Which brings the next point: Characters, factions, and motivations were barely described, if at all. And if they were, it left many of the more deep Halo Lore masters kinda confused. Compare this with previous Halo games or the more recent Far Cry entries, and it’s disappointing.
The previous Halo games went into some depth to show who your enemies where and what there motivations were. You could understand everything without having to go to outside media to get the whole story- though it would be enhanced. Good luck trying to understand the depth of the Didact and his Prometheans, as well as Mdama and his Covenant if you came in blind. To say nothing of comparing Halo 4’s depiction of the Didact and Mdama to Vaas and Hoyt Volker. It just makes the former look like jokes when you put them up against each other. Halo can and should do better.
Why is single player so important? Remember that data shows that almost half of the people who own a 360 don’t really bother with the online component for whatever reason. And even those the that do connect to the internet aren’t always concerned about multiplayer (some use it for stuff like Netflix and such- I was the same way). There is an enormous segment out there who are really only concerned about singleplayer. Before I had a stable connection to the internet, my Halo experience was all about the singleplayer. It was good enough that I didn’t ever sell or trade my old Halo games. There are countless others who view Halo in the same way: all about singleplayer.
And if what we saw in Halo 4 is a sign of things to come, there is a lot of reason to be concerned. I don’t want my future opinion of the Reclaimer Saga to be “Short, linear campaigns, with bad/cheap AI and ‘meh’ characters”.
Halo deserves better. With Far Cry setting a new standard for FPS campaigns, and Destiny coming in to take a hold on the futuristic FPS market, if Halo doesn’t step up its singleplayer experience, it’ll get left behind.
Just my opinion.