What in the blind hell does that even mean? Its a video game. Why couldn’t they have just called it what it is? A vidro game, made for recreational entertainment. Same as Ace Combat. Same as Call of Duty. Same as Spyro the Dragon. Why do people have to keep slapping weird descriptions onto things? To boost sales or something?
And none of this is really relevant for those of us who will be playing it on the Xbox One anyway.
EDIT: I should also note that I did NOT bypass the swear filter so I have no idea how “hell” became visible. Sorry.
What they mean is that they plan on using Halo Infinite as a base for all Halo stuff for the next few years. So instead of doing yearly/bi-yearly releases like most franchises, they plan to constantly update Halo Infinite (like Rainbow 6 Siege, or most MOBA’s). Hope this makes sense
> 2533274948829160;2:
> What they mean is that they plan on using Halo Infinite as a base for all Halo stuff for the next few years. So instead of doing yearly/bi-yearly releases like most franchises, they plan to constantly update Halo Infinite (like Rainbow 6 Siege, or most MOBA’s). Hope this makes sense
It does. I guess I’m just old fashioned. I am used to just going out and buying the next game.
IMO they are putting way too much faith in this product. I can’t think of any game that lasted 10 years, barring maybe World of Warcraft which is entirely different. More importantly, 343i haven’t managed to create a game that lasts 2 years yet, lmao
> 2533274846978810;4:
> IMO they are putting way too much faith in this product. I can’t think of any game that lasted 10 years, barring maybe World of Warcraft which is entirely different. More importantly, 343i haven’t managed to create a game that lasts 2 years yet, lmao
None have, except for MMOs like the listed World of Warcraft. Ten-year plans are silly. Anthem was supposed to have one, look at where that game is now.
If this game bombs, which I have a feeling it might, then the “ten-year plan” will quickly turn into a year-long plan in an attempt to salvage the game. And like you said, 343’s failures with Halo 4 and Halo 5 don’t inspire confidence that this game will survive for as long as ten-years, or even five-years. Trying to be “the next Siege” or “the next Fortnite” will always remain a terrible idea.
> 2533274846978810;4:
> IMO they are putting way too much faith in this product. I can’t think of any game that lasted 10 years, barring maybe World of Warcraft which is entirely different. More importantly, 343i haven’t managed to create a game that lasts 2 years yet, lmao
Its almost impossible to do. Some ways to innovate future games require design changes that software updates only cannot do. They NEED to make actual games. Mostly because unless its an MMO, people will get bored.
I wouldn’t mind if it means they will be adding to the custom games sandbox. Like what they did with reach. I play halo for it’s custom games, and always getting updates for new stuff would be cool.
And for an example of a game that’s lasted ten years and is not an MMO - Minecraft, also a sandbox
It has been working out alright for a couple of games though:
Nowhere near 10 years yet but neither show signs of stopping at the moment - Monster Hunter World launched in Januray 2018, and it’s mixture of special events and regular updates, adding new monsters, silly crossovers with things like the Witcher series, and then big story expansions like Iceborne that basically add a whole other game into the same original source. I can imagine that sort of style of content rollout for Infinite’s Campaign but spread out over a longer period of time.
That’s where the second example comes in - Rainbow Six Seige, which launched in December 2015. Despite the fact there are only a few very limited game types, the player base has continued to increase for that game over a number of years, and it has been helped by very regular content rollouts like map packs, playable operators, in-game events and increasing customisation options regularly.
I don’t think Infinite will follow either model exactly but I think the options are definitely there for keeping people engaged over a longer term - both those who are interested only in campaign, or only multiplayer (especially with it being f2p), and definitely for those who spend equal time in both.
It means it’s going to be a game as a service, it’s going to have content added to it over time.
> 2533274813608672;8:
> It has been working out alright for a couple of games though:
> Nowhere near 10 years yet but neither show signs of stopping at the moment - Monster Hunter World launched in Januray 2018, and it’s mixture of special events and regular updates, adding new monsters, silly crossovers with things like the Witcher series, and then big story expansions like Iceborne that basically add a whole other game into the same original source. I can imagine that sort of style of content rollout for Infinite’s Campaign but spread out over a longer period of time.
>
> That’s where the second example comes in - Rainbow Six Seige, which launched in December 2015. Despite the fact there are only a few very limited game types, the player base has continued to increase for that game over a number of years, and it has been helped by very regular content rollouts like map packs, playable operators, in-game events and increasing customisation options regularly.
>
> I don’t think Infinite will follow either model exactly but I think the options are definitely there for keeping people engaged over a longer term - both those who are interested only in campaign, or only multiplayer (especially with it being f2p), and definitely for those who spend equal time in both.
Warframe is another. It’s been updated since it launched in 2013 and it’s been in the Xbox most played top 40 since then, it will also be on Xbox Series X and PS5. It is possible for Halo to do it too.
Rainbow Six Siege is a worthless pile of garbage, no offline play, online solo terrorist hunt and no lan. Poor excuse for a video game. Didn’t stay installed long on my pc. 10 years of content is worthless if it’s all online only, i don’t understand gamers who support such bs.
This game better be playable offline.
I feel what they mean is that the game will be like MCC. New campaigns and features are added over time.
So the campaign won’t necessarily change when the new story comes out. Kind of like how the campaigns in MCC stayed the same when Reach was added. So you’ll have a hub in one game where you select what campaign you want to play.
Multiplayer will likely keep changing over time.
> 2535438627034925;11:
> Rainbow Six Siege is a worthless pile of garbage, no offline play, online solo terrorist hunt and no lan. Poor excuse for a video game. Didn’t stay installed long on my pc. 10 years of content is worthless if it’s all online only, i don’t understand gamers who support such bs.
>
> This game better be playable offline.
With all due respect, there are plenty of people who would entirely disagree with you - and it’s more than a bit reductive just to dismiss the things you don’t like about it without addressing the point of these posts: which is that a game CAN last if done right for the community that follows it
I could see them going the destiny route and just adding dlc content and a new world or ring to go to. I’m not totally opposed to it but would like to see some things we haven’t seen yet either like other forerunner worlds or constructs in the galaxy or maybe even some ancient planet with precursor artifacts all over. Just some more than another halo ring. Hell even expand on something outside the current galaxy even.
It’s ridiculous, to be honest. I have enough of a hard time keeping up with other platform/live service games and it’s frustrating that Halo has to be this way too. I just want quality, focused, single-player and co-op campaigns that are crafted to deliver a first-person shooter in the style that Halo has been known for. So if Halo is going down this live service road, I can’t say I see myself playing it too much unless it’s that appealing over the others (and even then). Sucks for me. I really like Halo–but when I say that, I mean Halo, not Destiny.
I occasionally play Warframe here and there, and that’s about the only platform game I tend to make time for–and, honestly, it’s because it does a convincing job at showing me why it works as a platform; it wasn’t a pre-existing universe/game that is now being brought back as a platform, which is what Infinite largely is. I also play a fair amount of Siege, but that’s a different sort of thing from the Destiny/Warframe/Division/Anthem kind of approach. I don’t want Halo to be tacked on to that as another attempt at this.
I check in and check out of platform games all the time and am often frustrated by keeping up with all the changes. I don’t need to jump into Infinite after six months of focusing on other projects in my life to find that I can’t play at the level other people or some of my friends are because my Assault Rifle isn’t the right “Level.”
If they’re able to keep the RPG mechanics out and just have it be a platform that continues to grow with new levels that just creates an elongated Halo experience–fine, that could work.
If this is Destiny with Halo aesthetics, that’s a hard pass on me dedicating any significant amount of time (and almost certainly no money beyond the initial $60/$70 cost of a game).
I can’t imagine that my feelings about this are that unique among the community.
I really wish we’d be questioning them more about what this Platform means in terms of long-term planning, RPG mechanics, whether or not this will require an internet connection at all times than we are about the graphical fidelity or the presence of sprinting. The graphics suck and should look better, but what even is this game?
> 2535420667885857;3:
> > 2533274948829160;2:
> > What they mean is that they plan on using Halo Infinite as a base for all Halo stuff for the next few years. So instead of doing yearly/bi-yearly releases like most franchises, they plan to constantly update Halo Infinite (like Rainbow 6 Siege, or most MOBA’s). Hope this makes sense
>
> It does. I guess I’m just old fashioned. I am used to just going out and buying the next game.
F2P game as a service is overall the most consumer friendly approach a game developer can make. It sucks for people with fear- of- missing- out addictions where they’ll spend way more money than they can afford sure. That’s an extremely small percentage of gamers, and as long as Infinite offers a reasonable progression system rather than a predatory progression system, then Infinite’s setup is going to be a huge win for all us gamers.
Thr popularity of MCC tells me that as long as the game functions pretty well, then people are happy to play the same Halo title for 10-20 years as long as there ate updates along the way.
If anyone wants retro style “games as a game”. Buy indie games. Seriously, indie games are awesome quality, real passion projects that are generally cheaper to buy and always have charm. They are also quite polished now. Astroneer, while not my favourite game, is a survival game developed by ex-Halo devs. You buy it once and you get all updates for free. Xbox Game Pass has dozens of Indie games and you can find plenty more on the Xbox store or steam.