Analysis videos all show many side missions in Halo Infinite. Im here to hoping they aren’t repetitive and the same. Like every one of them isn’t always on some forerunner outpost or in a cave or camp.
I’d hope 343i give missions in Infinite a lot of scenario variety and replayability like “Take down the moving scarab” or “liberating the siege kraken”. And hopefully if there are retrieval missions, it isn’t some dude or package but “retrieving a prototype Hannibal Mammoth.”
Missions can diverse itself to sometimes be ground, air or even both approachable with. Just some more recommended than others but all objectives as fun as the rest.
And hopefully stealth approachable where assassinations isn’t a high profile kill to alert enemies
I would love to have stealth missions or at least the option of being able to do it, it will be difficult for a game like halo but at least the option of aerial or ground attack.
NEW QUEST: Retrieve Craig and bring him over to Camp Echo
> 2533274985070673;3:
> I would love to have stealth missions or at least the option of being able to do it, it will be difficult for a game like halo but at least the option of aerial or ground attack.
It work to an extent. Like Halo CE, Reach were able to do it.
What I hope doesn’t happen is an Assassin’s Creed/Far Cry type of thing where the only side objective is a thousand enemy camps scattered around the map and it’s just normal Banished.
Obviously there will be skulls and terminals to find as well, but that and enemy camps hardly justify an open world. We’ll see what they’re cooking up. I just hope it’s not going to be repetitive and boring
Just spitballing here but what I would like to see in side objectives and open world features is a lot of lore and some unique gameplay situations.
For instance, I’d love to see characters you meet throughout the Campaign handing out side quests (or however you’d call them) that would explain what happened to them between Halo 5 and Infinite. Characters like Palmer, Locke, the Arbiter, Laskey
and Halsey could hand out side missions after you find them. Also, the Installation’s monitor or Excuberant Witness. If they physically join you on their side missions and fight beside you, even better.
In terms of terminals, or lore collectibles in general, I’d love to see a combination of everything we’ve seen before. Halo 3 style terminals for Forerunner stuff (a good platform to discuss Precursors and Medicant Bias), Halo 5 / ODST data drops/audio logs for more info on the Banished, Created and UNSC presence on the ring and also CEA style terminals as the “main” lore collectible with the most important info.
I agree. They not only need to be different and not repetitive but they also need to add substance in the game and provide the player with additional story, content, or decisions. Perhaps saving a base means on a certain mission or area, you get Marine reinforcements. I’d like to see branching story options based on side missions.
> 2533274846978810;7:
> Just spitballing here but what I would like to see in side objectives and open world features is a lot of lore and some unique gameplay situations.
>
> For instance, I’d love to see characters you meet throughout the Campaign handing out side quests (or however you’d call them) that would explain what happened to them between Halo 5 and Infinite. Characters like Palmer, Locke, the Arbiter, Laskey
> and Halsey could hand out side missions after you find them. Also, the Installation’s monitor or Excuberant Witness. If they physically join you on their side missions and fight beside you, even better.
>
> In terms of terminals, or lore collectibles in general, I’d love to see a combination of everything we’ve seen before. Halo 3 style terminals for Forerunner stuff (a good platform to discuss Precursors and Medicant Bias), Halo 5 / ODST data drops/audio logs for more info on the Banished, Created and UNSC presence on the ring and also CEA style terminals as the “main” lore collectible with the most important info.
I think it’d be cool to have character based side missions. Like Locke will give you ONI based covert or assassination missions. Halsey gives you missions on potential research for the ring, armor, weapons, etc. Palmer organizes Spartan fireteams for harder missions or something. And Laskey needs help establishing bases on the rings so you need to clear out Banished Outposts, reinforce existing Marine FOBs, or retake them. Arby could give you SoS side missions or something.
I could see the installation’s monitor giving out unique world based missions. Perhaps unlocking new or hidden areas of the ring. If Flood are in the game, sending you on containment missions and stuff. Possibly allowing you to learn more about the Primordial. Etc etc
As that dude with the caterpillar eyebrows says, “The possibilities are INFINITE”
> 2535419166122192;5:
> > 2533274985070673;3:
> > I would love to have stealth missions or at least the option of being able to do it, it will be difficult for a game like halo but at least the option of aerial or ground attack.
>
> It work to an extent. Like Halo CE, Reach were able to do it.
Yeah but those missions were not stealth at all, there was alwyas a open conflict, i’m requesting too much for a Halo game but i would love to have the chance to kill all the enemies without being detected.
> 2533274836669416;9:
> > 2533274846978810;7:
> > Just spitballing here but what I would like to see in side objectives and open world features is a lot of lore and some unique gameplay situations.
> >
> > For instance, I’d love to see characters you meet throughout the Campaign handing out side quests (or however you’d call them) that would explain what happened to them between Halo 5 and Infinite. Characters like Palmer, Locke, the Arbiter, Laskey
> > and Halsey could hand out side missions after you find them. Also, the Installation’s monitor or Excuberant Witness. If they physically join you on their side missions and fight beside you, even better.
> >
> > In terms of terminals, or lore collectibles in general, I’d love to see a combination of everything we’ve seen before. Halo 3 style terminals for Forerunner stuff (a good platform to discuss Precursors and Medicant Bias), Halo 5 / ODST data drops/audio logs for more info on the Banished, Created and UNSC presence on the ring and also CEA style terminals as the “main” lore collectible with the most important info.
>
> I think it’d be cool to have character based side missions. Like Locke will give you ONI based covert or assassination missions. Halsey gives you missions on potential research for the ring, armor, weapons, etc. Palmer organizes Spartan fireteams for harder missions or something. And Laskey needs help establishing bases on the rings so you need to clear out Banished Outposts, reinforce existing Marine FOBs, or retake them. Arby could give you SoS side missions or something.
>
> I could see the installation’s monitor giving out unique world based missions. Perhaps unlocking new or hidden areas of the ring. If Flood are in the game, sending you on containment missions and stuff. Possibly allowing you to learn more about the Primordial. Etc etc
>
> As that dude with the caterpillar eyebrows says, “The possibilities are INFINITE”
I’m really liking some of these ideas.
One that I had was that there could be Forerunner doors located around the map/s which would only be accessible once you reached a certain level, as the campaign looks to have an ‘upgrade’ system, perhaps there could be a tech tree you could advance to progressively unlocks certain doors.
Or you could tie it to the completion of a campaign mission, where you shut down security measures on the ring because “insert plot reason here”.
What’s inside could be anything.
A Flood lab with an outbreak that you must quell before leaving, collectables like skulls and terminals, mini boss fights against Banished science teams, etc.
HiddenXperia is definitely my go to for Halo breakdowns!
“When you first saw Luc’s eyebrows, were you…” yeah, I don’t need to finish that off.
as long as they aren’t as bad an ubisoft’s I’m sure many of us here would be happy.
Repetitive, boring missions are the bane of all open world games. Just look at Ubisoft games. Ever since Farcry 3 became a smash hit, all of their game worlds now become huge maps with the same missions. Opening up the map (ala radio towers or some other mechanic), fortress/enemy strongholds to destroy or overtake, random useless collectible chasing that serve no purpose to the game or the story other than maybe unlocking a weapon, and special target take downs (like a spy, or traitor or something). It’s become such a copy and paste hellscape that being a open world is almost a deterrent for me now in wanting to buy a game.
> 2533274836669416;9:
> > 2533274846978810;7:
> > Just spitballing here but what I would like to see in side objectives and open world features is a lot of lore and some unique gameplay situations.
> >
> > For instance, I’d love to see characters you meet throughout the Campaign handing out side quests (or however you’d call them) that would explain what happened to them between Halo 5 and Infinite. Characters like Palmer, Locke, the Arbiter, Laskey
> > and Halsey could hand out side missions after you find them. Also, the Installation’s monitor or Excuberant Witness. If they physically join you on their side missions and fight beside you, even better.
> >
> > In terms of terminals, or lore collectibles in general, I’d love to see a combination of everything we’ve seen before. Halo 3 style terminals for Forerunner stuff (a good platform to discuss Precursors and Medicant Bias), Halo 5 / ODST data drops/audio logs for more info on the Banished, Created and UNSC presence on the ring and also CEA style terminals as the “main” lore collectible with the most important info.
>
> I think it’d be cool to have character based side missions. Like Locke will give you ONI based covert or assassination missions. Halsey gives you missions on potential research for the ring, armor, weapons, etc. Palmer organizes Spartan fireteams for harder missions or something. And Laskey needs help establishing bases on the rings so you need to clear out Banished Outposts, reinforce existing Marine FOBs, or retake them. Arby could give you SoS side missions or something.
>
> I could see the installation’s monitor giving out unique world based missions. Perhaps unlocking new or hidden areas of the ring. If Flood are in the game, sending you on containment missions and stuff. Possibly allowing you to learn more about the Primordial. Etc etc
>
> As that dude with the caterpillar eyebrows says, “The possibilities are INFINITE”
That sounds like a great idea. I always wanted quest missions to give some form of impact on the map to the player’s advantage. Locke will give you covert missions that change the difficulty of enemies in the area, Halsey gives research missions that unlocks tech around the map or even changes the map, Palmer increases UNSC frequency around the map (how often you see them), Laskey makes more safe zones.
Things to change the map to your advantage sounds the best idea.
> 2533274819903178;13:
> Repetitive, boring missions are the bane of all open world games. Just look at Ubisoft games. Ever since Farcry 3 became a smash hit, all of their game worlds now become huge maps with the same missions. Opening up the map (ala radio towers or some other mechanic), fortress/enemy strongholds to destroy or overtake, random useless collectible chasing that serve no purpose to the game or the story other than maybe unlocking a weapon, and special target take downs (like a spy, or traitor or something). It’s become such a copy and paste hellscape that being a open world is almost a deterrent for me now in wanting to buy a game.
Most of those missions are mainly just for completionist to complete. Like collecting small time objects to spam liberating outposts. Even in Assassins creed they do the same. But its usually just the side missions and main missions normal people focus on that have the difference and hopefully Infinite can deliver the same.
Though im not asking to search for endless Terminal disks scattered around the map, but liberating camps and outposts are fine as long as they aren’t all Tent based with walls and more of a unique scenario around it.
What I don’t really understand is why everyone has to be so BLAM! ambitious about the gameplay. Grappling hook: no one asked for it. Open world: people asked for it, but not in the same way - just more open missions with some choice like in old Bungie games. Why can’t we just get back to the “basics” and do them right and not get so ambitious that we don’t do anything right and a whole ton of things wrong? Just my two cents.
As for the actual point of this discussion - I think terrain, weaponry, and objective is how they’ll be able to make it at least tolerably varied. They can’t really mix up the enemy types too too much. But, they can mix up the positions the enemies are in (are they way above you, below you, are they surrounded by areas you can’t cross?), what weapons they give you (just fists for some situational reason, a sniper, explosives), and what you need to do to the enemies (shepherd them into an area instead of killing them, kill a leader before he escapes, beat them in a vehicle race to a point and then eliminate them).
There are options, but we could have avoided the need and still made a ton of people happy, imo.
> 2535462867162482;16:
> What I don’t really understand is why everyone has to be so BLAM! ambitious about the gameplay. Grappling hook: no one asked for it. Open world: people asked for it, but not in the same way - just more open missions with some choice like in old Bungie games. Why can’t we just get back to the “basics” and do them right and not get so ambitious that we don’t do anything right and a whole ton of things wrong? Just my two cents.
>
> As for the actual point of this discussion - I think terrain, weaponry, and objective is how they’ll be able to make it at least tolerably varied. They can’t really mix up the enemy types too too much. But, they can mix up the positions the enemies are in (are they way above you, below you, are they surrounded by areas you can’t cross?), what weapons they give you (just fists for some situational reason, a sniper, explosives), and what you need to do to the enemies (shepherd them into an area instead of killing them, kill a leader before he escapes, beat them in a vehicle race to a point and then eliminate them).
>
> There are options, but we could have avoided the need and still made a ton of people happy, imo.
I don’t want my thread to be off subject but Halo fans don’t really ask for anything new and can also be arrogant towards it. They don’t seem to able to think of anything new but also don’t want anything exactly the same.Overall leads to problems I made a thread about this a few days ago in case you want to continue from there. As for the hook, I think its just for Infinite to fit moving around the map easier. Not even permanent in multiplayer.
And I think that’s the way fighting enemies will always have to be to make it interesting. Never have the enemies always in front of you, but fighting them in vertical ground always makes it more unique. Every Halo game has done it and I bet Halo Infinite can do the same.
> 2535419166122192;17:
> > 2535462867162482;16:
> > What I don’t really understand is why everyone has to be so BLAM! ambitious about the gameplay. Grappling hook: no one asked for it. Open world: people asked for it, but not in the same way - just more open missions with some choice like in old Bungie games. Why can’t we just get back to the “basics” and do them right and not get so ambitious that we don’t do anything right and a whole ton of things wrong? Just my two cents.
> >
> > As for the actual point of this discussion - I think terrain, weaponry, and objective is how they’ll be able to make it at least tolerably varied. They can’t really mix up the enemy types too too much. But, they can mix up the positions the enemies are in (are they way above you, below you, are they surrounded by areas you can’t cross?), what weapons they give you (just fists for some situational reason, a sniper, explosives), and what you need to do to the enemies (shepherd them into an area instead of killing them, kill a leader before he escapes, beat them in a vehicle race to a point and then eliminate them).
> >
> > There are options, but we could have avoided the need and still made a ton of people happy, imo.
>
> I don’t want my thread to be off subject but Halo fans don’t really ask for anything new and can also be arrogant towards it. They don’t seem to able to think of anything new but also don’t want anything exactly the same.Overall leads to problems I made a thread about this a few days ago in case you want to continue from there. As for the hook, I think its just for Infinite to fit moving around the map easier. Not even permanent in multiplayer.
>
> And I think that’s the way fighting enemies will always have to be to make it interesting. Never have the enemies always in front of you, but fighting them in vertical ground always makes it more unique. Every Halo game has done it and I bet Halo Infinite can do the same.
It’s not that I’m trying to be arrogant or fickle. I actually am excited for Infinite. I’m just saying that, as far as reception goes, Halo 4 and 5 have been described as … “bad” … by a ton of fans and reviewers alike in comparison to the Bungie games. That’s not to say Halo did NO wrong before and does EVERYTHING wrong now, but there’s something to be said about this: If Halo 4 and Halo 5 tried progressively “newer” mechanics and failed, would that not suggest that a solid approach would have been to go back to some of the successful older methodologies for gameplay, story, etc? I’m an engineer by trade and when I box myself into an over-engineered corner, sometimes what saves me is by going back to a more simple, more tested design and trying to re-build from that point.
How that ties into your current discussion very well is the fact that the “NEW” in this situation is the side objectives themselves, the existence of them. I think the way you vary these objectives while not “overdoing” it and introducing too many “new” elements that might turn players away is to play to the strengths of a good sandbox and level design. Stay true the KISS principle and just hand the player a weapon (and abilities) and a physical location that match well together and let the rest happen “naturally”. No gimmicks or out-of-the-ordinary weaponry, just solid playtesting and level design.
> 2535462867162482;18:
> > 2535419166122192;17:
> > > 2535462867162482;16:
> > > What I don’t really understand is why everyone has to be so BLAM! ambitious about the gameplay. Grappling hook: no one asked for it. Open world: people asked for it, but not in the same way - just more open missions with some choice like in old Bungie games. Why can’t we just get back to the “basics” and do them right and not get so ambitious that we don’t do anything right and a whole ton of things wrong? Just my two cents.
> > >
> > > As for the actual point of this discussion - I think terrain, weaponry, and objective is how they’ll be able to make it at least tolerably varied. They can’t really mix up the enemy types too too much. But, they can mix up the positions the enemies are in (are they way above you, below you, are they surrounded by areas you can’t cross?), what weapons they give you (just fists for some situational reason, a sniper, explosives), and what you need to do to the enemies (shepherd them into an area instead of killing them, kill a leader before he escapes, beat them in a vehicle race to a point and then eliminate them).
> > >
> > > There are options, but we could have avoided the need and still made a ton of people happy, imo.
> >
> > I don’t want my thread to be off subject but Halo fans don’t really ask for anything new and can also be arrogant towards it. They don’t seem to able to think of anything new but also don’t want anything exactly the same.Overall leads to problems I made a thread about this a few days ago in case you want to continue from there. As for the hook, I think its just for Infinite to fit moving around the map easier. Not even permanent in multiplayer.
> >
> > And I think that’s the way fighting enemies will always have to be to make it interesting. Never have the enemies always in front of you, but fighting them in vertical ground always makes it more unique. Every Halo game has done it and I bet Halo Infinite can do the same.
>
> It’s not that I’m trying to be arrogant or fickle. I actually am excited for Infinite. I’m just saying that, as far as reception goes, Halo 4 and 5 have been described as … “bad” … by a ton of fans and reviewers alike in comparison to the Bungie games. That’s not to say Halo did NO wrong before and does EVERYTHING wrong now, but there’s something to be said about this: If Halo 4 and Halo 5 tried progressively “newer” mechanics and failed, would that not suggest that a solid approach would have been to go back to some of the successful older methodologies for gameplay, story, etc? I’m an engineer by trade and when I box myself into an over-engineered corner, sometimes what saves me is by going back to a more simple, more tested design and trying to re-build from that point.
>
> How that ties into your current discussion very well is the fact that the “NEW” in this situation is the side objectives themselves, the existence of them. I think the way you vary these objectives while not “overdoing” it and introducing too many “new” elements that might turn players away is to play to the strengths of a good sandbox and level design. Stay true the KISS principle and just hand the player a weapon (and abilities) and a physical location that match well together and let the rest happen “naturally”. No gimmicks or out-of-the-ordinary weaponry, just solid playtesting and level design.
You do make a point. If they want to making something new, don’t make it different.
> 2533274819903178;13:
> Repetitive, boring missions are the bane of all open world games. Just look at Ubisoft games. Ever since Farcry 3 became a smash hit, all of their game worlds now become huge maps with the same missions. Opening up the map (ala radio towers or some other mechanic), fortress/enemy strongholds to destroy or overtake, random useless collectible chasing that serve no purpose to the game or the story other than maybe unlocking a weapon, and special target take downs (like a spy, or traitor or something). It’s become such a copy and paste hellscape that being a open world is almost a deterrent for me now in wanting to buy a game.
I made a post related to this subject some time back titled “HOW HALO INFINITE COULD STAND OUT IN THE OW MARKET” and it touched on the same concerns you had, but with a whole bunch of other stuff too. We might be out of luck at this point, though since Halo Infinite’s TacMap in the gameplay reveal has already shown us -
