So thinking about the issues people have proposed abouts co-op campaign. A big issue stems seemingly from trying to respawn players if they split up and progression. Triggers with cutscenes. you could tether players together, but in a good way, a way that’s fun and dynamic. Not with teleports to player one, but by using simple switches and a difficulty curve/more enemies. And a “spotting” sysytem based on Map boundaries idea. So as you leave the "Play area, instead of dying it spawns a phantom or banshees and drop pods. Say you have 3 players in co-op and they all split up. They are going to have a hard time completing an objective solo for one. But then make it so there are triggers or switches that require all players to be there. If you split up to complete 3 separate objectives and clear them out you still can’t progress without your teammates to pull the lever with you kind of thing. And if you clear the base and leave, a phantom just brings all those enemies back. Which would be a good way to encourage teams to coordinate on one objective. Plus the “spotted system” idea so to speak. and get swarmed with enemies. Which means the group needs to either go help and detour from the main objectives or wait till he dies and respawns nearby. which adds more dynamic fun I would say. Stray to far from the group and a phantom/banshees and some drop pods come to herd you back or just have a new detour encounter with friends. I’d like to hear more ideas and im sure 343 wouldn’t mind some input into their potential issues.
Take this with a huge grain of salt cause I’m no game developer, but I’d assume this would only increase any technical problems they’re experiencing with co-op. I’m guessing that one of the many hurdles that comes with co-op in a semi-open world setting is rendering issues when players get too far apart. When you play solo the entire map isn’t rendered all at once, just the section you’re in. So having players in different areas would already strain the engine and increasing enemies in those sections would only compound the problem.
Gears of War 5 had players travel together between locations during the open-world segments, Destiny 2 had a player teleport feature for when major encounters were beginning, and Halo has had flash saves which would keep you in the heat of the moment, exactly where you were upon logging off or quitting.
Without any technical expertise, knowledge of the subtle complexities of game design, or even how far along the shut-down-and-polish state of the current campaign is, I would say: “Why not all three?”
Maybe the Gears 5 system would detract from individual player exploration, so scratch that, but what about the concept of a major encounter system? What if players were allowed to explore and progress on their own, but would be temporarily brought to the game host- player one- at the start of a “major encounter”? Players would be returned to their save points afterwards, and everyone can just do their own thing (or just travel with the host) until they’re needed again.
But that’s just one idea, I’m certain there’s a lot of logical things I didn’t think of.
> 2535468876553926;1:
> So thinking about the issues people have proposed abouts co-op campaign. A big issue stems seemingly from trying to respawn players if they split up and progression. Triggers with cutscenes. you could tether players together, but in a good way, a way that’s fun and dynamic. Not with teleports to player one, but by using simple switches and a difficulty curve/more enemies. And a “spotting” sysytem based on Map boundaries idea. So as you leave the "Play area, instead of dying it spawns a phantom or banshees and drop pods. Say you have 3 players in co-op and they all split up. They are going to have a hard time completing an objective solo for one. But then make it so there are triggers or switches that require all players to be there. If you split up to complete 3 separate objectives and clear them out you still can’t progress without your teammates to pull the lever with you kind of thing. And if you clear the base and leave, a phantom just brings all those enemies back. Which would be a good way to encourage teams to coordinate on one objective. Plus the “spotted system” idea so to speak. and get swarmed with enemies. Which means the group needs to either go help and detour from the main objectives or wait till he dies and respawns nearby. which adds more dynamic fun I would say. Stray to far from the group and a phantom/banshees and some drop pods come to herd you back or just have a new detour encounter with friends. I’d like to hear more ideas and im sure 343 wouldn’t mind some input into their potential issues.
The easiest and fastest solution to this problem, was to copy Destiny and their systems. But no someone was too big headed, and now their in a ROTT.
> 2670661386182421;2:
> Take this with a huge grain of salt cause I’m no game developer, but I’d assume this would only increase any technical problems they’re experiencing with co-op. I’m guessing that one of the many hurdles that comes with co-op in a semi-open world setting is rendering issues when players get too far apart. When you play solo the entire map isn’t rendered all at once, just the section you’re in. So having players in different areas would already strain the engine and increasing enemies in those sections would only compound the problem.
I don’t think the performance is necessarily the issue but that’s a great point. Co-op could still work without that issue if people play online on separate consoles. I feel they would have very specifically said that they are canceling splitscreen. Not Co-op completely, that’s what I would do to soften the blow. But this raises the dreaded answer to the problem which is always online. Hopefully just dedicated servers. Like you said rendering issues being you wouldn’t see the battle that’s going on on the other side of the map. And two full scale battles on a single console could run poorly just like you said so imagine 4. it would be in a different “cell” so to speak. Like destiny had with tunnels and winding sections where you load into a new area or “cell” which is its own instanced play area. Then the connection to the area you left is no longer loaded. But if it’s splitscreen it would have to load both areas on one console. Up to 4 seperate areas or battles and even if you scaled each players screen down to 480p that would be pushing the limit even on the series X. don’t forget this also has to run on Xbox one, one x, series s. So do you limit the amount of co-op players bases on console generation/model. Series x might handle splitscreen well but may have to limit co-op to two player on series s. Xbox one definitely won’t be able to handle 4 player co-op campaign. On the series x, at 480p 4 player splitscreen. That would be like running it in 4k but with halo wars levels of enemies and effects on screen at once. Which again is why players splitting up is the issue unless it’s on a dedicated server, or through online services. There needs to be an organic way to herd players together but still allow freedom. Partly because most games are meant to be beat in about 6-8 hours depending on difficulty but with 4 players in an open world that could be cut down to 2 hours max. Unless like I say you make the whole team coordinate and tackle objectives as a team with no slitting up
> 2535472923259036;3:
> Gears of War 5 had players travel together between locations during the open-world segments, Destiny 2 had a player teleport feature for when major encounters were beginning, and Halo has had flash saves which would keep you in the heat of the moment, exactly where you were upon logging off or quitting.
>
> Without any technical expertise, knowledge of the subtle complexities of game design, or even how far along the shut-down-and-polish state of the current campaign is, I would say: “Why not all three?”
>
> Maybe the Gears 5 system would detract from individual player exploration, so scratch that, but what about the concept of a major encounter system? What if players were allowed to explore and progress on their own, but would be temporarily brought to the game host- player one- at the start of a “major encounter”? Players would be returned to their save points afterwards, and everyone can just do their own thing (or just travel with the host) until they’re needed again.
>
> But that’s just one idea, I’m certain there’s a lot of logical things I didn’t think of.
That’s a decent idea where people could run around and explore, collect but you could have it where if your team leader starts a mission you can just go there. Or you could have it where there’s a time limit to get to the area before the battle starts(vehicles should be all over) or even cooler have like a pelican pick you up or a futuristic Halo rendition of the old military Fulton recovery system (also known as skyhook) fits with the grappleshot so well and you could be air lifted to the objective really quick and drop in like a legit spartan
> 2533275009172217;4:
> > 2535468876553926;1:
> > So thinking about the issues people have proposed abouts co-op campaign. A big issue stems seemingly from trying to respawn players if they split up and progression. Triggers with cutscenes. you could tether players together, but in a good way, a way that’s fun and dynamic. Not with teleports to player one, but by using simple switches and a difficulty curve/more enemies. And a “spotting” sysytem based on Map boundaries idea. So as you leave the "Play area, instead of dying it spawns a phantom or banshees and drop pods. Say you have 3 players in co-op and they all split up. They are going to have a hard time completing an objective solo for one. But then make it so there are triggers or switches that require all players to be there. If you split up to complete 3 separate objectives and clear them out you still can’t progress without your teammates to pull the lever with you kind of thing. And if you clear the base and leave, a phantom just brings all those enemies back. Which would be a good way to encourage teams to coordinate on one objective. Plus the “spotted system” idea so to speak. and get swarmed with enemies. Which means the group needs to either go help and detour from the main objectives or wait till he dies and respawns nearby. which adds more dynamic fun I would say. Stray to far from the group and a phantom/banshees and some drop pods come to herd you back or just have a new detour encounter with friends. I’d like to hear more ideas and im sure 343 wouldn’t mind some input into their potential issues.
>
> The easiest and fastest solution to this problem, was to copy Destiny and their systems. But no someone was too big headed, and now their in a ROTT.
I have to say destiny has its strengths in that department but the always online thing is a big fear. and small instanced play areas are alright but the idea is one open area instead a bunch of conjoined smaller areas, its not one big map really. Each “level” will have a seamless transition with a pelican flight or something to the next “stage” I imagine. All speculation. But they are sprawling and open. But if you keep getting disconnected that sucks, dedicated servers would be great. But I think the real issue is balancing and progression. It would be one thing if they canceled just splitscreen as it’s too resources heavy on one console. But if your playing online there should be no issue. But I think it’s because having more than one player cuts the game time in half. Pobably causes all kinds of issues with checkpoints. If people split up one dies does he respawn next to where he died, or next to player one, way on the other side of the map. What if you finish a mission and it triggers a cutscenes right while your friend is in a heated battle. Do you both get pulled into the cutscene regardless of distance on the map. And if not you may miss a major scene or moment. Couldn’t one person also just camp the mission start area and have every one just keep spawning on him over and over since it’s not like usual Halo where it’s a corridor and doors behind you lock. I think if a mission starts all players should get skyhooked and brought to the fight and drop in spartan style
In past Halo games co-op mode meant there was just more of you to fight the waves of enemies. The campaign was linear and you all moved as a unit or formed flanks to help slay the enemies. When a checkpoint needed to be accomplished before moving on, i.e. destroy the anti-air cannons or take down shield generators, this could be handled together or split up in teams. Apply the same aspect to Infinite. If a team member decides to split up to “check out whats over here” and goes down a rabbit hole and gets detached from his fireteam, so be it. If he finds secrets, intel, etc… he can relay that info to the team and they can accomplish this exploration in single player. If the bulk of the fireteam cannot move on because a team member is off in la la land, they will just have to wait. This encourages them to stick together. This will really encourage leadership, decision making, and cooperation. If a teammate wants to disregard the majority vote to “continue on this way” Im confident the group will chose not to continue playing with that person. True friends and fans will want to benefit from this co-op experience in the most efficient, fun, and co-operative manner. “We’re going to take down these shields. You guys move forward and get the other one.” or “scout ahead.” Etc… No need to make respawn jumps, or zone blockades. If your teammate strays to accomplish something or just to be an annoying freelancer, the group will have to be patient. The team will handle frustrating teammates, the game doesnt need to cater to them. Strategically placed vehicles can aid in covering some ground to meet back up. Use the open world aspect to your advantage if you can technologically. Encourage co-operation, leadership, democracy, and a unique TEAM experience you benefit from in co-op that would otherwise take longer in single player. You got this guys!!
4 buddies stand atop the highest cliff just having completed a tough checkpoint. The fireteam is looking at the massive beautiful scenery in 4k. They see the structure in the distance that they need to take over. As they’re devising a plan Jim is looking off to the west and sees a small curious object way off in the distance. The fireteam has a strategy to attack the next structure and jumps off the cliff to carry out their plan. But Jim doesn’t go with the team. Jim says, “I’ll be right back.” Bob, “Dangit Jim! Where are you going! I swear, if we have to wait for you again I’m done.” Jim says, “Just keep going. I see something I wanna check out. I’ll meet up with you guys at the structure.” Fireteam, “Ugh. Whatever dude.” Jim hustles down the terrain hoping what he saw isnt a waste of time. The fireteam pushes on toward their objective. They come to the structure and it is an all out war. One fireteam member is holding a sniping spot just outside the structure making call-outs and taking down what he can with his sniper. The other 2 members are doing what they can to survive the barrage of covenant and brutes. Waves of suicidal grunts with plasma grenades. Plasma cannons pinning them down. The plan has been aborted and desperate survival mode is in full swing. The elites and brutes are closing in. The teammate with the sniper is out of ammo and has to abandon his post to hustle down and help his comrades stay alive. Callouts have turned into the blame game and frustrated realization that they will probably die and have to spawn to wherever the heck Jim went. As the enemy closes in on the hunkered down 3 team members. “YEEEEEEHAAAAAAWWW!!!” Jim comes drifting in on a razorback taking out the approaching enemies sliding to a hault!!” Jim, “Your uber has arrived and I’ve got gadgets and gizzmos a plenty.” The fireteam notices Jim’s razorback is loaded down with rocket launchers, snipers, EVERYTHING! The fireteam says’ “You son of a B. I’m in.” The fireteam snatches what they can off the razorback, load up in the back, and proceed to have a glorious killing spree montage.
(You can also replace the razorback with a scorpion, wasp, or whatever, and Jim can spray bullets and say something else cool.”
Co-op open world exploration does it again with its freelancing risk/reward options. Thanks Halo. 
> 2533274801953616;8:
> In past Halo games co-op mode meant there was just more of you to fight the waves of enemies. The campaign was linear and you all moved as a unit or formed flanks to help slay the enemies. When a checkpoint needed to be accomplished before moving on, i.e. destroy the anti-air cannons or take down shield generators, this could be handled together or split up in teams. Apply the same aspect to Infinite. If a team member decides to split up to “check out whats over here” and goes down a rabbit hole and gets detached from his fireteam, so be it. If he finds secrets, intel, etc… he can relay that info to the team and they can accomplish this exploration in single player. If the bulk of the fireteam cannot move on because a team member is off in la la land, they will just have to wait. This encourages them to stick together. This will really encourage leadership, decision making, and cooperation. If a teammate wants to disregard the majority vote to “continue on this way” Im confident the group will chose not to continue playing with that person. True friends and fans will want to benefit from this co-op experience in the most efficient, fun, and co-operative manner. “We’re going to take down these shields. You guys move forward and get the other one.” or “scout ahead.” Etc… No need to make respawn jumps, or zone blockades. If your teammate strays to accomplish something or just to be an annoying freelancer, the group will have to be patient. The team will handle frustrating teammates, the game doesnt need to cater to them. Strategically placed vehicles can aid in covering some ground to meet back up. Use the open world aspect to your advantage if you can technologically. Encourage co-operation, leadership, democracy, and a unique TEAM experience you benefit from in co-op that would otherwise take longer in single player. You got this guys!!
I like the idea of an open world for sure. Think it’s gonna be great, other Halo games it’s usually just keep going forward and mowing through everything. But now you’ll have teams sitting at the boundary of an objective scouting it out. Getting into positions. Maybe even retreating to go gather equipment and vehicles. Then take it on together instead of everyone running around like it’s COD, one guy flanking, one guy sniping and 2 guys just tearing up the base like a mosh pit. And exactly like you said if someone is just fooling around and not really playing you could just replace them with a new teammate. But the further away he gets the more the console has to render more scenes, enemies, effects, all that stuff. and it might mess with scripted triggers, like one guy runs off on his own and ends up triggering a boss battle or something while everyone else is busy. Another problem being you would have to end the game and restart the level without the person like you used to, unless it’s always online. Then when that person gets disconnected they just disappear maybe and the game keeps going. it’s definitely gonna make the game more tactical when tackling objectives, I like the idea of one person disappearing and right when everyone is wondering where they are. They show up in a banshee and air raid the objective. Just seems like the co-op element throws a wrench into the development. I think it could work online. but i feel there’s no way they could work it into splitscreen. It worked for other Halo games as the biggest open areas were still linear and the amount of enemies in an encounter was finite. Like in Halo 3 when your fighting the 2 scarabs. But in infinite it would be running up to 2 or even 4 battles that big if everyone splits up and goes for a seperate objective. Even the Xbox series x would struggle in that situation. But online with instanced areas like Destiny and dedicated servers like in Halo 5, it is probably doable. Also depends how big each “level” is going to be. We’ve seen some huge maps in Forge before so they may be able to pull it off with splitscreen for at least 2 people. But like i say if you split up to take on two objectives at once it could be too much for one system. 2 players in the same area is one thing but split up over a great distance. Now one console has to run two instances of the game basically. Two separately rendered areas. Twice as many enemies. And while I don’t like the idea of always online, drop in drop out kind of thing. it does has its merits. As long as the connection is solid then it would be fine. It would just be so frustrating trying to play co-op campaign and constantly getting kicked or disconnected. I do like the idea of drop in co-op in a way. Think it could be a cool way to respawn teammates also, by having them drop in like ODST’s with slight control over where you land. Nice and fluid, so if you’re having a hard time beating an objective. you send an invite and moments later you hear the drop pod coming down on top of you. reinforcements have arrived lol would be awesome