Is anyone else disappointed that it's open world?

Hear me out.
I think the base gameplay looks fun and as long as it’s fun I’m not too bothered about the graphics.

(Disclaimer: This is my opinion, if you love open world games all power to you.)

Open world sounds great on paper “wow I can explore the entire ring?” Etc… but I feel like halo, especially with its gameplay works best with a linear style to the campaign.

If they manage to make each mission as action packed and focused as previous games then hats off to them but unless each mission area is as crafted and well thought out as their linear counterparts I feel like gameplay will suffer.

Looking at the map and seeing things like “marine rescue” makes me feel like there will be many smaller side quests which personally sound very samey and underwhelming.

In terms of progression the last thing I want to do is be forced to do a crap ton of repetitive smaller missions to continue with the story.

Linear campaigns allow you to change environments and set pieces level by level truly making it feel like an epic adventure and what you’re doing is actually meaning something.

E.g: In Reach you go from Visegrad Relay, Dogfighting in Space, Evacuating a Crumbling city.

In 3 you go from Earth to The Ark.

I understand 343 wants to focus on the ring and exploration but unless the explorable areas are extremely diverse and the missions are unique and interesting.
(Not saying there wont be great missions and locations but open world games ground you to the location it’s set in implying less diversity in environments compared to other games)

Lets not forget about LASO, Checkpoints, Mission Specific Playthroughs.

Anyway its only 8 minutes of gameplay and you can probably say all of this speculation from me is stupid as we haven’t seen 95% of the game.

I’m just worried Open World and Halo wont gel as well as people think but we’ll have to wait and see and I seriously hope I eat my words.

Open world doesn’t even sound good on paper. Why on earth 343 decided that adding some Ubisoft into Halo was a good idea is a complete mystery to me, as are many of their other bafflingly poor game design decisions with this franchise. It just smacks of incredible laziness to me.

It’s clear at this point that the higher ups in control of Halo do not actually like the original 3 games. Because they aren’t even attempting to make a sequel to the original trilogy titles. The soul of those games is just dead and gone, and 343 obviously wants it that way.

I don’t really know what to expect, so I’m willing to try something new. As long as it isn’t a “go here to get the thing to unlock the other thing over there, then come back here”. It looks promising.

I personally don’t like open world anymore. It would be better if every mission would be kinda “open world” with one main objective and a few secondary objectives imo. Each mission could be in a different setting on the ring, with room to explore and different vehicles.

It worked in ODST, but ODST was well done.

> 2592250499807011;2:
> Open world doesn’t even sound good on paper. Why on earth 343 decided that adding some Ubisoft into Halo was a good idea is a complete mystery to me, as are many of their other bafflingly poor game design decisions with this franchise. It just smacks of incredible laziness to me.
>
> It’s clear at this point that the higher ups in control of Halo do not actually like the original 3 games. Because they aren’t even attempting to make a sequel to the original trilogy titles. The soul of those games is just dead and gone, and 343 obviously wants it that way.

“343 adding Ubisoft into their games”

You couldn’t have expressed my current thoughts more accurately

> 2533274842628861;5:
> It worked in ODST, but ODST was well done.

Yeah but ODSTs open world was more of a hub world which lead to more linear style missions.

Saying ODST was open world is a bit disingenuous imo.

I’m hoping that the open world is more like Silent Cartographer etc where we have larger level areas - somewhat open world, but still with some movement between different settings like the different areas in previous games. I’m somewhat hoping it won’t all be based purely on the one ring, and that we’ll see more of the state of the rest of the universe as well; though I am happy to be wrong if the game works.

At the moment I’m definitely curious about the direction, and definitely still excited: it still looks fun, as you say, and I’m looking forward to seeing where things go! I know there is a lot of debate on graphics, story direction, etc. But I’m still trusting that Infinite will be a great game - maybe not everyone’s cup of tea though

Nope. Installation 07 is a mysterious world full of history and surprises. I can’t wait to explore and see what’s out there. It’ll be a different experience, sure, but I’m willing to give it an honest try.

I’m not disappointed at all. I’m predicting a nice marriage between focused environments and ‘open world’.

I don’t mind it, I actually liked it to be honest

I think it depends on exactly how they implement it. If its anything like the recent assassins creed games, yeah thats gonna be terrible. Too much bloated copy paste content everywhere. But if its like halo odst, I think it’ll be fine.

I liked it. It’s a fresh take. Enough of telling me how I have to play the story. Let me get in a warthog and explore. Looking forward to finding out what is hidden on the ring and how much there is to explore.

hmm the full on approach to open world is definitely a concern. Linear missions have their place and open world likely means moments of downtime by that nature. Linear missions are action at a mostly consistent rate which can be tackled the same within the freedom of the sandbox available. If they’ve been dropped then my anticipation will drop with it I feel. Exploration is a nice aspect to compliment the main action but if the main action is very stop start on account that you’re having to traverse here and there just to reach these sections then it’s at the expense of consistent action. Definitely not good

I’m open minded to the idea, it could turn out pretty good than what we think. Given Zeta Halo has a lot of lore behind it, this will give us the opportunity to explore the ring to learn about the Timeless One or the Palace of Pain.

Quote from Chris Lee interview:

"What you saw in the demo that we showed, you have this map, " he continued. “There’s this huge open section of the ring. As you get to that point in the game, this is several hours into the campaign, then you have the ability to traverse that whole area and explore where you want to go on the ring. That’s what we mean by open and explore the different places that you can go to.”
Seems to suggest that what we saw today is where the game starts to open up but may be more linear in the hours before this?

> 2533274882758018;1:
> Hear me out.
> I think the base gameplay looks fun and as long as it’s fun I’m not too bothered about the graphics.
>
> (Disclaimer: This is my opinion, if you love open world games all power to you.)
>
> Open world sounds great on paper “wow I can explore the entire ring?” Etc… but I feel like halo, especially with its gameplay works best with a linear style to the campaign.
>
> If they manage to make each mission as action packed and focused as previous games then hats off to them but unless each mission area is as crafted and well thought out as their linear counterparts I feel like gameplay will suffer.
>
> Looking at the map and seeing things like “marine rescue” makes me feel like there will be many smaller side quests which personally sound very samey and underwhelming.
>
> In terms of progression the last thing I want to do is be forced to do a crap ton of repetitive smaller missions to continue with the story.
>
> Linear campaigns allow you to change environments and set pieces level by level truly making it feel like an epic adventure and what you’re doing is actually meaning something.
>
> E.g: In Reach you go from Visegrad Relay, Dogfighting in Space, Evacuating a Crumbling city.
>
> In 3 you go from Earth to The Ark.
>
> I understand 343 wants to focus on the ring and exploration but unless the explorable areas are extremely diverse and the missions are unique and interesting.
> (Not saying there wont be great missions and locations but open world games ground you to the location it’s set in implying less diversity in environments compared to other games)
>
> Lets not forget about LASO, Checkpoints, Mission Specific Playthroughs.
>
> Anyway its only 8 minutes of gameplay and you can probably say all of this speculation from me is stupid as we haven’t seen 95% of the game.
>
> I’m just worried Open World and Halo wont gel as well as people think but we’ll have to wait and see and I seriously hope I eat my words.

Open world sounds not only perfect for a Halo, but is also what Bungie were ideally aiming for In CE & 3.

It fits.

As for gameplay…:man_shrugging:

My prediction is that there will be “open missions” not open world. So in the demo, the first open mission is take out the aa guns and help the pilot search for a slipspace drive.

And then as Chris Lee said, several hours into the campaign there will be a massive area that you can explore. That will be a new mission that will be especially large.

I’ve heard it’s not open world. Think Gears 5 where you have more linear cinematic missions dotted with a few open world environments where you can go do your own thing.

I don’t mind open ended areas like the second level of CE. But I’m not trying to play Far Cry or AC where there’s a map.