This post is just a simple explanation for casual players as to what these terms mean in regards to games from a competitive gamer/developers perspective(David Sirlin). I see a lot of people throw these terms around with no real understanding of what they truly mean, and I think that this forum would be a much better place if everyone could a general grasp on the true definitions and concepts involved when using these terms, and how they relate to a game like Halo 4.
Balance:
"A multiplayer game is balanced if a reasonably large number of options available to the player are viable–especially, but not limited to, during high-level play by expert players.
–Sirlin, December 2001"
Balance, in general, is a games ability to give a player a large variety of options,(in relation to Halo-weapons, powerups, and strategies), that are capable of working successfully at all levels of the games skill spectrum. If an expert player can use one option to dominate other expert players, it is overpowered. If a gameplay option does not have any real use among expert players, it is not viable.
Player skill plays a huge role in determining whether or not a gameplay option is balanced. Players new to the game (and those stuck playing at the lower level of the skill spectrum either from playing casually or simply not having the dexterity) have simply not experienced the full breadth of exploits and more useful tactics that expert players have. While certain weapons may seem balanced at the low end of the skill spectrum, if they become totally useless(or overpowered) to those who have scanned every aspect of the game, from top to bottom, for the best tactics and honed in on them, they aren’t actually balanced.
This is why you see such a huge variance in MLG gametypes from the default experience. MLG gametypes remove weapons like the AR and the spiker, because at an expert level of play, they simply aren’t viable. They removed loadouts, because they found that an expert level of play, certain loadouts become overused, overpowered, while others were left ignored. These variations from default gameplay are not because they are afraid of change, or that they expert players don’t wish to have a wide variety of viable options, its simply because they weren’t balanced to work in a high skill environment.
If the game is balanced better, you will see less of a variance between default and competitive settings and this is what 343 NEEDS to strive for.
Fairness:
A game is fair if players of equal skill, have an equal chance of winning.
Options that you are locked into(like characters in a fighting game or classes in starcraft) MUST give players of equal skill, an equal chance of winning. If two equally skilled players are locked into a certain set of options and one players set of options has a clear advantage, we get an unfair “check mate” gameplay experience.
Options that open up after a game starts(like weapons placed on the map) do not have to be fair against each other. You can have some options that are stronger or some that are weaker(but still have a legitimate purpose), and as long as all players have access to them, they have not been qualified as being imbalanced.
If Halo 4 is to introduce “perks” or progression based options that impact gameplay, and lock players into that choice, they must be very careful to make sure they are balanced perfectly. And even if they do, they MUST ensure that the players have an option to avoid that type of gameplay completely, if they so choose.
Symmetry and Asymmetry
"Let us call Symmetric games the types of games where all players start with the same sets of options. We’ll call asymmetric games the types of games where players start the game with different sets of options. Think of these terms as a spectrum…
-Sirlin"
An example of a symmetric game would be chess. Both players have the exact same same set of moves, pieces, and strategies available to them. The only difference is which player starts first.
An example of an asymmetrical game would be Magic: the gathering. Both players have wildly varying sets of moves and cards available to them based on whats in their predefined deck of cards.
Most competitive games(including most sports) lean towards the symmetrical aspect of balance, as they are easier, from a developers standpoint, to balance, and when a game is more balanced, it is easier to discern skill levels and provide a large skill gap.
Halo has always leaned towards the more symmetrical aspect of balance, and as a result has been more competitive than virtually any other console FPS. 343 needs to ensure that they maintain this niche, and don’t let it slip away.
Depth
"A multiplayer game is deep if it is still strategically interesting to play after expert players have studied and practiced it for years, decades, or centuries.
–Sirlin, January 2002"
This is a pretty straight forward concept. A game that is balanced well will have longevity and still be interesting and fun, years after development. If the game gives players loads of viable options and opens up a plethora of strategically interesting things to do, it can be considered deep.