Halo has been a game based on a linear story with few choice in regards to how it plays out, the 2nd level of Halo comes to mind. The best part of Halo campaigns was the story and open world leads to chose your own adventure. I am not a writer I am not a story teller I want to play the game not write it. I want to see the genius storytelling take me through another kick–Yoink- chapter in objectively the best franchise in history. This open world concept as a general rule is the product of lazy and indecisive development. “Oh we don’t know how the story should progress make them choose” or “we can’t decide the ending let the player pick” is another way of saying “we are incapable of creating a story people like so we will make them make their own and then if it sucks it’s their fault.” Every game had low points in the story, was Halo 2’s cliffhanger ending annoying as hell? Yes. Was Halo 3’s normal ending rage inducing until you learned we survived? Yes. Was the mental instability and loss of Cortana in 4 kinda stupid? Yes. BUT it led to Halo 5 which besides you only playing as MC for like 4 levels I actually liked. I like diving into the forerunner history. It would be better if they did it Gears of War style where the story had forks but they ended at the same spot. IE: choose a tank and blow through an enemy base or choose a sniper and active camo and stealth it. Choice is good in a game but the story matters more.
An open world game isn’t necessarily choose your own story. There’s plenty of open world games that have a rather fixed narrative and have it as their main focus. Assassin’s Creed, the latest Zelda, FF15, Nier Automata, etc give little if any real ‘choice’ over the story, but feature wide expansive worlds.
That said, your stance on branching narrative being lazy couldn’t be more wrong. Branching stories and narratives are significantly harder to write and keep consistent.
Halo 3 ODST would like a word… with its partial open world which is mean’t to be the same feel that halo infinite going to be but on a bigger scale i’d imagine, hell even Halo 3 ODST has has a narrative story change based on if you collect the sadies story.
the way you put it op is like you want another Call of duty game to play rather than Halo
It’s been confirmed to be not fully open world already.
> 2533274979783002;1:
> Halo has been a game based on a linear story with few choice in regards to how it plays out, the 2nd level of Halo comes to mind. The best part of Halo campaigns was the story and open world leads to chose your own adventure. I am not a writer I am not a story teller I want to play the game not write it. I want to see the genius storytelling take me through another kick–Yoink- chapter in objectively the best franchise in history. This open world concept as a general rule is the product of lazy and indecisive development. “Oh we don’t know how the story should progress make them choose” or “we can’t decide the ending let the player pick” is another way of saying “we are incapable of creating a story people like so we will make them make their own and then if it sucks it’s their fault.” Every game had low points in the story, was Halo 2’s cliffhanger ending annoying as hell? Yes. Was Halo 3’s normal ending rage inducing until you learned we survived? Yes. Was the mental instability and loss of Cortana in 4 kinda stupid? Yes. BUT it led to Halo 5 which besides you only playing as MC for like 4 levels I actually liked. I like diving into the forerunner history. It would be better if they did it Gears of War style where the story had forks but they ended at the same spot. IE: choose a tank and blow through an enemy base or choose a sniper and active camo and stealth it. Choice is good in a game but the story matters more.
I anticipate the game will be more like Gears 5 than a full-fledged open world game like Breath of the Wild or Red Dead. Segments of the game are linear, whereas others are more of “choose your objective”, or even optional objectives or missions.
Open world == RPG
The Tomb Raider was pretty much open world, yet totally story driven. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.
I feel like it’s going to be less “open world,” in the way that the mass consciousness of gamers has come to expect and more like a very expansive but still fundamentally linear experience. They’ve been vaguely driving at this point with comparisons to Silent Cartographer, ODST’s campaign, etc.
I kind of think 343i will get backlash at release for not having messaged this clearer. I agree that fully open world isn’t likely the best for Halo, and have voiced that opinion around here for a long time. I don’t think based in what we’ve seen of Infinite that they’re overdoing it, though. However, people who expect to be able to circumnavigate Zeta Halo on a Warthog are likely to be very upset when the game comes out and they can’t.
They have I don’t think ever, said Open World explicitly. This has all been people assuming things.
It’s going to be open compared to past halos, with some perhaps Metroidvania inspired upgrades that allow you to explore previously unaccessible areas, but it’s not going to straight be open world.
> 2533274861158694;7:
> I feel like it’s going to be less “open world,” in the way that the mass consciousness of gamers has come to expect and more like a very expansive but still fundamentally linear experience. They’ve been vaguely driving at this point with comparisons to Silent Cartographer, ODST’s campaign, etc.
>
> I kind of think 343i will get backlash at release for not having messaged this clearer. I agree that fully open world isn’t likely the best for Halo, and have voiced that opinion around here for a long time. I don’t think based in what we’ve seen of Infinite that they’re overdoing it, though. However, people who expect to be able to circumnavigate Zeta Halo on a Warthog are likely to be very upset when the game comes out and they can’t.
Their comment of “if you can see it, you can probably go there” is likely going to come back to bite them.
The statement works on a planet, since its curved (contrary to what some people believe) you can have oceans or impassable mountains eventually serve as a natural cut off where you can’t ‘see’ more. But since we’re on a halo ring, you can see pretty much the whole world just by looking up.
I hope the open world serves as a menu to select missions, which is what it appears to be. I like that, as long as the missions are in secluded areas I’m all good with a separate open world. It can’t hurt right?
And who are you to decide what’s halo and what isn’t? Playing as the arbiter for half the game “wasn’t Halo” in 2004, yet i’m sure most people love Halo 2’s campaign, why don’t you give it a shot first and then decide, i mean, it’s not like they’re going to suddenly remove all open world aspects just because you ask.
I think driving 31415km in a warthog will be a bit time consuming…
> 2535408097856587;12:
> I think driving 31415km in a warthog will be a bit time consuming…
Yeah this is why there’s a lot of threads of me scoffing at the idea of the rumors about a year or so ago about the ‘whole ring being playable’.
Unless they did some weird stuff with scaling (effectively making the ring like 1% the size its supposed to be) you’d just have a whole lot of nothing to patrol through. Having to spend literal hours/days to get anywhere of importance would not be enjoyable. Like it woudln’t even make sense for there to be enemies on every inch of the ring.
I think the demo best illustrates how things’ll actually work really. You have your classic opening cutscene, and an objective you control the priority of going through (The 3 turrets). You have an open world map, thats conveniently cut off by those gaps in the ring. You can wander around and encounter new things, but ultimately the area is still limited.
I think we’re getting less “open world”, and more “expansive environments”. Much like you’d get with some of the larger levels from Halo 1 and 3, or similar to Crysis 1. Albeit with no loading screens, so the environments just flow into each other.
This isn’t Halo… that isn’t Halo… news flash go work at 343 Industries if you want your specific vision to be realised. Stop hating on other peoples visions.
The story doesnt have to be “open” just because the map is. The OP is overreacting.
the game isn’t open world… Its a linea story that slowly opens the map up to new zones. It’s more like ODST where the city got new areas as you did more and more but could go back to old areas. So its not an actual open-world game where its all there from the start
> 2533274840624875;17:
> the game isn’t open world… Its a linea story that slowly opens the map up to new zones. It’s more like ODST where the city got new areas as you did more and more but could go back to old areas. So its not an actual open-world game where its all there from the start
A real shame in my eyes. I really wanted to see if 343i could pull open world off…
Although this game does appear to have open world aspects and a database, it seems to be less of a full on open world in the usual sense but more like a Halo 3 ODST (except maybe bigger) as well as the larger levels in CE like the Silent Cartographer and Halo.
I think Infinite will probably still have some linear levels and they’ll probably be initiated a bit like ODST, i.e. you travel to a part of the ring and then you trigger a mission.
I agree that Open World isn’t Halo whatsoever, but that being said… games evolve.
Combat Evolved… That’s the very point of Halo. I say give it a shot.