> 2535442389477354;13:
> Evidence does not imply proof.
Evidence is how you support a claim. If by proof you mean a reasonable degree of certainty that the claim is true, accurate, and comports with reality then evidence is the only ay you’ll ever get there.
> We know there is the new slipspace engine and we saw the game demo.
And that is almost all we know. Halo infinite will be on a new engine. It will be an FPS. It will focus on the chief. It will be ‘Halo 6.’
> The demo seemed to hint at open world style game play,
No it didn’t. There wasn’t any game play shown. It was literally a demonstration of what the engine was capable of graphically. Any claims about gameplay at this point are completely baseless assertions and to use Hitchen’s razor what is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
> as many people have pointed out.
People have a tendency towards wishful thinking and believing things without cause. The number of people speaking about something or believing something is completely unrelated to whether that thing is true or accurate. In this case we have no data on Infinite’s gameplay aside from 'It’s an FPS."
> I am only making the assumption here to talk about Halo like it is open world
You made quite a few assumptions to get here.
> and what we want to see from 343 that goes along with that.
I assume this is the ‘royal we?’
> We do have evidence, we don’t have proof.
No you don’t have any evidence. You saw a video that showed no gameplay, nor anything that hinted at what the gameplay would be and decided it would be cool if ‘x’ happened. Evidence is how you support an argument and so far there is nothing that would support an argument that Infinite will be an open world game or that it won’t.