Maps should be inspired, Not copied.

Games Other Halo
1

The title may have you confused. Yet the full meaning is

Multiplayer maps should be inspired, not copies of campaign.

Halo Reach has the lowest liked base maps of any Halo game. With good reason, the maps are nothing new, or special, it’s things we have all seen in campaign. Infact all the DLC maps are vastly more popular. Meaning that it’s not the game really, more the direction of it’s base maps.

The only maps in Reach I have grown to really like and respect are. Forge World (few variants), Spire, Sword Base and TBH that’s about it.

In Halo 4, 343 needs to make maps inspired and based off campaign levels. Yet not total rip offs. For example Zanizbar was based off the first Earth level of Halo 2. HEadlong on the second Earth level. Yet at the same time maps like Lockout and such were really not based off anything.

In the games it goes like this (in my opinion and such, Not facts)

HALO:CE-Maps not really based off any levels. However based on places around the Halo installation. Yet mostly off beat, random, but fun maps

Halo:2-Maps based off campaign levels and places. While still having a few off beat maps as well. Interactive, and fun in all counts.

Halo:3-A more advanced version of Halo:CE. Off hand areas, but still part of some canon with the game. Yet a mix of Halo2’s “Campaign inspired places”.

Halo: Reach-Just clones. Except the new maps and Forge World. Odd

My ideas

Halo 4 needs to do with Halo2 and Halo 3 did. They had the best maps really, they had a story, they had a soul, and were just fun. However this does not mean Halo Reach is terrible in everyway with maps. I think Invasion and Campaign Based Maps would be amazing.

Normal maps should never be campaign maps. However Invasion and special game modes could and do well. If Invasion has special maps, only for invasion, it would give it more purpose while adding more depth to the overall game.

Agree. Or not?

2

First of all, it’s general knowledge that the maps were designed first as multiplayer maps, and then implemented to campaign. But the campaign implementation was a bad design choice nonetheless. I would almost say that all of the maps worked better in campaign than in matchmaking.

Anyhow, it wasn’t solely because of campaign implementation that the maps were bad. They simply were bad. Whatever Bungie’s map design team was thinking at the time, these definitely weren’t the best maps they had made. It almost seems that they would had spent too much time on aestethics than the map dsign itself.

I also blame the setting of the game for the boring maps. There was just something else than the bad design that made the maps boring altogether, it was the aesthetic look of the maps. None of the original non-remake multiplayer maps in Reach looked interesting except Zealot. All the other maps were either grey Forge World maps; cold like Sword Base, Boardwalk, and Countdown. Or they simply were uninteresting to look at like all the other maps except Zealot, and Reflection. Zealot and Countdown happened to be the only maps in the game that were at least playable.

343i definitely needs to step up the map design for Halo 4. I agree with you, I want to see maps that look beautiful and have a story like every map in Halo 3 did. But I also want maps that play well like almost every map in Halo CE and 2 did. I want to see maps that are aesthetically as interesting as Epitaph, while at the same time have as deep and interesting gameplay as Lockout. If 343i manages to nail both of these I could play on the Halo 4 maps forever.

What comes to maps based on campaign, I don’t feel that necessary. While most of the maps should take place in similar spaces like campaign, I wouldn’t mind seeing a multiplayer map based on a Halo, even though there were no Haloes in campaign. As long as the enviroment benefits the aesthetics of the map, I don’t really care is it part of the campaign or not.