UPDATE: There was a small part where I said there weren't any scout troops, and I trimmed it out because of the occasional skirmishes you find. They aren't the exact thing I was trying to imply but since it wasn't clear, I cut it. Join the Discord and meet more remarkable souls like yourself! discord.gg/F4u2R9Urfn Mayo merch here! teespring.com/stores/underthemayo Support me on Patreon. patreon.com/underthemayo TH-cam Memberships to my channel now available, click the "Join" button. Follow me on Twitch at twitch.tv/underthemayo.be/HCQ_N571VAA
Sad that Microsoft cared more to milk players with free to play baloney than actually releasing a complete AAA game at launch. I love Halo, Halo CE is probably my favorite FPS of all time, but it should've ended with Reach and the departure of Bungie. 343I just can't match the Bungie Halo games. Even Halo MCC was a disaster at launch in 2014. Same for Gears of War, should've stopped with Judgement. Ah well, I hope they don't mess up the Perfect Dark reboot.
I personally really enjoyed the campaign, but I'd be lying if I didn't want a more linear campaign with open levels like Halo 3 with big cinematic set pieces and more environmental variety.
like ff7 remake the world of previous of halo games were open world linear levels or semi open world linear worlds. It allows for more meaningful content and much much better presentation.
As some who also loves Halo, I'm not gonna let this fly, even if it is called Halo. This shit sucks and I'm pretty fakkin pissed about it, tell ya the truth.
i agree with a lot of stuff, but i must say i found it very refreshing to play an open world game with good combat and not a billion upgrades and stuff u have to unlock before the gameplay really gets going.
I agree, but i think one part of the open world game system that is intrinsically rewarding is progression and levelling up items and gear, even minor things like shallow armor/ammo upgrade trees can be rewarding. without it, its kinda bland.
@@javiiibot5887 ehhh not really those tend to be the worst open worlds IMO. The dev time spent on making the open world could've been used to improve combat, further mechanics, improve enemy ai, improve level design, add more enemy variety, etc to many many games. The games quite literally pad their content out through the progression usually leading to generally lackluster combat to systems and ideas that aren't as fully realized in terms of gameplay. Basically any ubisoft game and even some of the more mainstream games like spiderman ps4 and the batman series (given I really appreciate the story and the combat/some bosses of spiderman and batman are pretty solid in those games in particular but screw ubisoft games). The contributions most open-world make (pretty much all Ubisoft ones) are: do you want to spend time backtracking between missions and do monotonous combat loops. Then there's the other end of the spectrum that use open worlds as a means for mechanical creativity, adventurism, or a LOT of rpg mechanics and choices ie don't starve, minecraft, terraria, subnautica (basically most survival games that are good), the outer worlds, the witcher 3, disco elysium, (basically really good rpgs that are furthered in player choice by the world), breath of the wild, metal gear solid 5, nier automata, shadow of the colossus, maybe elden ring, borderlands 2, monster hunter world, and horizon zero dawn (games who use the open world as a means for the combat to shine in its creativity, scale, and options which is REALLY hard to pull off)
I really relate to your point about the game needing a story recap of somekind. More games should add a library that contains all the lore of a long running series. Games like guilty gear strive having it made it so i could appreciate the story of the new one despite being my first GG game. That would benefit everyone, especially new players
Was hoping the database was that in infinite a guide to weapons vehicles enemies lore and characters. Dooms database puts it to shame and doom doesn't even need it lmao. Thats what we need more comparison between these effin shooty games lol
@@underthemayo actually 343 specified that even I think the IGN reviewer specified that instead of making a fresh new start they continued from Halo 5 right after the legendary ending. And it's not really that hard to understand Halo lore. Because if you watch one two three videos from hidden Xperia you probably catch up the speed .
I can honestly say, I agree with this wholeheartedly. Every franchise considering most of them are on title number 10 by now (exaggeration but you get the point) should come with their own recap. If the entire story up to that point. It would benefit new fans to the franchise immensely. Plus, fill in gaps for the diehard fans. (Hey, we make mistakes too.)
Being up to date with the Halo story wouldn't have really helped. The game starts halfway into it's own story and doesn't tell you what happened at the start until the end. Crucial plot details are hidden in miss-able audio logs.
@@Spillow-C that would've been legit though. Having a game like ODST but with Chief. They could've taken inspiration from the short story called "Head Hunters" where, get this, a pair of Spartan 3's do guerilla warfare behind enemy lines with little hope for survival and even encounter elites.... _with red energy swords_ . Eh?
There's too much handwaving. "Oh the spartans are all dead, no you don't see, or experience this in anyway but we have crackly annoying audio logs instead" "the infinity got fucked up by scrapyard trash wielding space monkeys despite surviving a forerunner dyson sphere and the didact, yeah makes total sense." "remember the flood? one of gaming's most terrifying enemies that brought the forerunner to their demise and have the ability to warp space and time? yeah there's a new thing thats worse, how? just believe us.
I understand your dislikes with Halo Infinite. I love the campaign personally, but I can see why you don't feel the same. I have been a Halo fan for almost all of my life, and I can handle opinions against Halo. Respect to you, my guy.
Trust me even if you had been a Halo nerd (like me) this game has no story whatsoever. Big green man shoots the aliens on a hoola hip is the game and the story was forgotten.
Agree 100%. I struggled to want to beat this game on legendary because it was so much of the same. When I reached that mission where you had to reconstruct the forerunner sequence FOUR times, I took a day break to mentally recharge. It was exhausting, and reminded me of other open world games from last generation (I guess this generation since it released on Xbox one). I'm not a Halo fan either, but I give each release (in reason) the benefit of the doubt. You're rewarded with basically nothing for completing this game, and my mind reflected that nothingness. A surprisingly shallow game that took 6 years to release, maybe another delay was needed? Game doesn't even have coop, let alone a mission select feature.
the open world feels very lonely and depressing. i feel like there should have been more on release than there actually are! Like why not add something like when we save the marines we get materials for the main base and it can be developed the pelican could pick up vehicles from the base instead of appearing out of thin air with a scorpion tank . maybe we could even have some raids with a big convoy of marines fucking over big bases etc! how awesome would that be? Surely it wouldn't be impossible considering how many squads we save in the game!
I was expecting Gmanlives level of shitting on the game just because it's not your cup of tea but damn you got some pretty solid points that i didn't even realise until you said them. I love Halo, i grew up with it but Infinite really feels off. Thank god for the weapons and gunplay because without them, it would be the first Halo game i didn't finish (and i finished 5).
@@phant0mdummy It’s one thing to not like Isolation, it’s another to call one of the most acclaimed horror games “objectively bad”. The internet needs to stop beating a dead horse with the word objective.
@@phant0mdummy that's one thing I've noticed that kinda get on my nerves with mayo, not to sound like a broken record but judging by his video on how he'd "fix halo infinite" it seems like his criticisms can boil down to "it needs to be more like doom" personally I have no problem with him wanting more doom I love the game too but it seems like he wants other games to drop mechanics that's been a staple in the series just to make the game more fast pace and have more doom like mechanics, like he wants every game to appeal to his tastes rather then judge it as it is, as a normal person playing the game that's more then understandable but as a review it just seems wrong to me
You hit the nail on the head at 11:03. I realize that having the marines pilot vehicles may not have been possible in an open world setting, but I feel like they could have at least made it work in specific set pieces. This game never comes close to the epic multi-vehicle battles we saw in Halo 3.
@@MrRastawannabe Disappointing for sure! When that mission starts, the classic theme starts playing, then I'm handed a squad of Marines, a rocket hog, and Scorpion, getting me all geared up for a battle like the end of The Covenant. I wouldn't be surprised if marine driven vehicles were still in the game when that mission was planned.
My only problem with the campaign is that it needs more, it feels like they just put the bare minimum for an open world and called it a day. Also, every mainline entry switches things up with enemy types, the original trilogy has flood and 4 & 5 have prometheans. It’s not the worst thing since Reach and ODST have only one enemy faction, but it feels weird in a master chief game not to have an enemy mixup that makes you have to rethink your approach to enemies.
Halo Infinite was confirmed to be a 10 year project and we are getting campaign DLC and it was believed to be called Halo: The Endless but it hasn’t been fully confirmed.
i think the focus has shifted entirely to the multiplayer aspect of halo. The first one was a campaign then an added multiplayer mode. This one seems like multiplayer then they added a campaign later to tick the box Ah well, Quake reboot when?
I mean sure but if thats the case than what did the they work on for the past 5 years ? The Multiplayer is so barebones that it doesnt even have seperate gamemode selection. To me it very much seems like they were developing single and multiplayer at the same time but neither made any real progress. Remember: They delayd this Game like 3 times, its very likely that microsoft just said :"Push it out the door cause we are bleeding money on this product and this needs to make atleast some kind of profit. Fix the rest later"
Gotta get that microtransaction/cosmetic storefront working Day 1. No campaign co op or forge. Remember when you bought a game and actually came complete? 5 years man...
12:18 - 12.40 I read an article sometime ago that basically said open world games nowadays are designed less like Super Mario 64 and more like Donkey Kong 64. If that's the case, they sound empty and overly spacious.
I agree with a lot of the points made in this video, but your criticisms of Halo's health system are pretty shortsighted. Acting like the game stops for 6 seconds when your shield pops is disingenuous, and all I need to point to is the Raleigh qualifier being streamed right now and how pro players squeeze every drop of game value out of every second in a match, even when on the verge of death. When the player's shield breaks and becomes headshot-vulnerable, the player is incentivised to modulate their play to be defensive. Note that doesn't mean the player is compelled to crouch behind a box and zone out for six seconds. Behind cover you can throw grenades, reposition using movement abilities to get flanks, you can peek cover rapidly to deal consistent but reduced damage while avoiding it yourself, grapple an adjacent coil and peek out to dink a brute that's pushing you, or just to reload your guns and plan your next move. The sandbox gives you tools to make effective use of your time regardless of whether or not your shields are up. It's up to the player to take advantage of those tools. Sorry for the soapbox, luv your content. TLDR: Halo shields good
The halo shields is tricky between the bungie and 343 era... Bungie's shield is stronger but sacrifice movement speed While 343 shield is weak(also health) but pumped the mobility.
"TLDR: Halo shields good" Slight caveat: Halo shields are good... ...for console shooters. What made Halo work so well was that it was designed from the ground up to be a console shooter; the aim assist stuff first implemented in Halo 1 was (and I say this as a PC snob) very well done, and to this day, Halo 1 is actually really fun to play... on a controller. For a PC shooter player though, playing Halo with mouse and keyboard feels painfully slow, and the shield mechanic makes it feel even slower. Because Halo isn't about twitch reflexes and insane agility the way PC shooters are; it's about the strategy of positioning, weapon choice and movement more like playing a vehicle combat game. Essentially, the shield mechanic works in Halo because Halo is about maintaining lock on a target and timing your survival window so that the target dies before you do, and using movement to ensure that your survival window happens at the right moment. It does not work from a PC shooter perspective, because PC shooters are about ACQUIRING target lock, and evading it, not necessarily maintaining it. But, yeah, speaking as someone who tried playing the MCC with mouse and keyboard before realising how it's meant to be played... Halo feels depressingly, cripplingly slow compared to PC shooters, until you use a controller, at which point it all works wonderfully. And the shield mechanic accentuates this.
@@NicholasBrakespear Gotta agree, it almost gives the game a confusing pace to my pc shooter brain where I'm moving with the grappling hook and using the dash and scanning to peak corners efficiently and it all just... stops as soon as the enemies have a decent line of sight to me, especially if they're hitscan. The start stop pace is great for controller because a typical fight in PC oriented shooters is continuous and thus hard and exhausting to execute when you constantly need to be changing targets and moving erratically. It's better than it was in the past with the addition of the grappling hook, but Halo will always feel like a console shooter to me with this health system. Higher difficulties exacerbate the problem as well, leading to difficulty being a measure of how slow and tedious you want the game to have to be played. You have some wiggle room on normal, a little on heroic, and no fun allowed on legendary. Also I think this system is fine in multiplayer because you're under pressure when you're recharging shields pretty often. It's a test of your skill, observation, and movement to recharge your shield in that context. There's lots of spots in this game's campaign (especially in the open world) where you can grab precision weapons and a shield stripping weapon of some kind and just absolutely mow down hordes of enemies without even moving or thinking other than clicking heads. Jackal snipers seem almost intentionally placed to slow you down and play this way. It's less of a problem in the boss fights because most of the bosses rush you straight out of cover so you are forced to move and use your equipment. All of this is totally just my opinion though, it's fine if anyone disagrees.
@@BigBait12 One of the biggest obstacles I faced getting used to Halo multiplayer (and that's leaving aside the fact that I had to start using a controller, because aim assist favours controllers so heavily in multiplayer) was that in a PC shooter like Unreal Tournament... I could deliberately, knowingly leap into combat with 5 health, and rely solely upon my agility to kill at least one person before I die. In fact, having played UT99 for years, my muscle memory and spatial awareness is such that I can toy with opponents and just dance around them, not getting hit. In Halo multiplayer though, I would charge into combat with the same assumption - that I could gain an edge by clever dodging - and found that... it simply didn't work. Aim assist plus slow movement meant I could strafe all I liked; they'd track my movements easily. So I had to mentally adjust to the notion of only attacking when I knew I had a weapon advantage, or an angle advantage. It's a valid game design, and an interesting change of pace... but the Halo games really should have a "plays best with controller" warning on them, on PC.
I love Halo Infinite's campaign. The freedom of the sandbox allowed me to choose a huge variety of interesting and challenging ways to take encounters, but I agree with your major points. Halo Infinite doesn't hold you accountable to play in the fun ways, and I do find myself wishing for more Halo 1 style large, semi-linear levels instead of one huge open world.
the writing is awful, like a 13 year old drama student wrote it. worst attempts in history of tugging at my heart strings and just making me die of cringe instead. my god i had to shower and gargle to wash away the writing.
I liked it too, they played it very safe tho. But it was more of a peace offering to CE fans and a way to unite the old Halo community. If you jumped into halo post H2-H3 this story will most likely go over your head, pretty much all dialogue had nods back the OG trilogy.
While I love the idea of FOB's, I agree that being able to spawn an infinite number of tanks and heat seeking rocket launchers really breaks the game. I think a much better system would be that everything you call in had to be found in the world and stored at the base. Once it's gone, it stays gone until you find another. It would be more balanced and more rewarding for exploration. Or they could have a simple currency/resource type thing too.
I was confused why there would be so many spots with power weapons like snipers scattered throughout the map (which I find when getting all the collectables) when I can just spawn those snipers at a FOB.
@@PlainOlSoapBar Exactly. Halo has always been about finding unique or extra firepower by exploring the levels. This would make even more since for an open world, but the FOB system as it is implemented contradicts that by giving those rewards through a checklist of samey activities, but it could still be designed in a way that it doesn't have to.
I loved the campaign, it’s far better than the other two efforts from 343, probably my 4th favourite game behind 2,1 and 3. But it does have issues, I was disappointed there were no scarabs, a lack of different enemies. Banished are fun as hell to fight but we needed something else (flood) lack of set piece vehicle battles, the side missions had more of this than the actual campaign, the part towards the end was excellent and exactly what I wanted, but we needed more. Just a few negatives for me in an overall fantastic game. One which I can’t see how can be described as empty.
It's because he's a new potential fan. Not a diehard loyalist to the franchise. Us diehard fans can't see these issues because we are blinded by loyalty. All his points are valid, if you set aside your fanboyism. And no, I'm not bashing you. I'm literally just saying, take a step back, and walk in his shoes. His points make perfect sense. And I've been a fan of Halo since the OG days. As with you, I started with Halo CE. I have read every novel that has been released. But if I seperate myself from the franchise, his points make perfect sense. Don't knock the new fans. They are doing more good for this franchise then we ever will. As they have absolutely no investment in the franchise. To compare it in a better way, come at him with Doom. You didn't play Doom since Doom 95. You started with 2016 or Eternal. You, can see all the criticisms and issues he may have missed because he's a loyal slayer fan. See where I'm going with this?
@@xPreatorianx1 bro I am a new Halo fan thanks to Infinite. I agree with all the critics' points but I don't think it's fair to paint the game in such an overall bad light. The worst crimes of Infinite are a few stupid bosses (something a lot of great FPS games have done) and wasting development resources in a shallow and homogeneous open world that could have been invested in better level design (I think some levels are BAD, I'll acknowledge it). Even the harshest of critics praise the combat for how incredibly fun it is sometimes. That's why I don't mind the open world, neither I mind the repetitive missions, it is just an excuse to play more of such amazing combat. For me Halo Infinite's strengths outweight it's weaknesses, especially considering how much more fundamental good combat is to Halo (instead of a rich open world, something it doesn't even need).
i only play halo infinite for its fantastic gameplay, ive played halos 1,2 and 3 and 4 eventho i hated 4 for its poor gameplay. Ive also played A LOT of doom games, doom 1, 2, a bit 3, all the way to the reboots. As a person who put a lot of his life in doom and halo, i love both franchises, but i can see where you're coming from, mayo.
10:21 As some one who has played all the games extensively and read a few of the books I can sefely say i felt the same. The game felt like a JJ abrams movie like the force awakens all set up for later with next to no pay off 20:11 Littrally the first mission I found BR that BR has never left my inventory since I got it and I have done all the side missions I have all the skulls all audio logs spartan caches ect. Along with a fully completed campaign...no other Halo title would of aloud for that and they would been enough preasure in the sandbox to make me switch it which infinte didn't have I did my first run on heroic. And I never felt hard pressed enough to switch it and the weapon itself with the easy ammo recovery through the kinetic ammo droppers mean I have a weapon which can clear 80% of enemies no problem with minimal shots fired and near infinte ammo
Also played all halo games (though never finished 5) more of a multiplayer guy but this way also my experience- just loaded up a BR + Sword/Hammer every time- sure I swapped out the secondary when it ran out but there was enough ammo to always keep the BR
@@underthemayo definitely not. I felt the same way. I’m a lifelong fan, specifically the original trilogy are my favorite games of all time. I also love halo reach a lot. I did not like 34 threes titles, and this new one doesn’t change that much…
I remember in a lot of the great missions from halos 1 through 3, the game wouldn't always give me whatever weapon I wanted. I had to pick from among the options available and figure out a strategy. Especially on legendary playing solo. Sounds like that isn't the case at all on infinite. 👎
@@bucket9486 I would need the glitched tank cannon to deal with those on legendary xD. If you dont know about it, look up "halo infinite tank cannon glitch."
As someone who only played the game on Legendary, this is very much wrong. Infinite is probably the only halo game where an aggressive playstyle is actually reliable on Legendary.
@@evrimenustun9548 All the halo games are arguably doable with an aggressive playstyle on legendary, if you use plasma pistol and pistol/dmr/br combo. Well except against forerunners.
So we will give you an energy hammer and then leave you in an open field with nothing to use it against and the enemies are far from and can snipe from a mile away. Btw the coolest guns are useless, so you have to stick to the boring ones. You know what just throw things at the enemy because the guns are just the same
I wish this game brought back the hybrid health and shield system from the first game. It gave you flexibility but you still had to watch your health and seek health packs
Thank you. Since the game came out, something about it felt off for me. I was disappointed even without playing it and I couldn't put my finger on exactly why. Unfortunately, since the game came out, almost everyone's reviews are overwhelmingly positive. Everyone is constantly praising the open world and grappling hook and "it's just like the second mission of Halo but the whole game". No one is really talking about the issues with the game or pointing out ANYTHING negative, like they're afraid to be disappointed again because the last two games were crap and they've been waiting 6 years for this. No is talking about how there is a complete lack of variety in environments. Previous games had mountains, snow, jungles, deserts, forerunner, covenant and human structures, whereas this game has one single tree and grass biome, which is extremely boring. You don't go to any amazing impressive locations cause the whole game takes place on one small piece of the ring. In previous games you would go to multiple places throughout the ring. No one is talking about how the switch to open world takes away a huge part of what made Halo so great. There's no epic skyboxes with battles going on making you feel like you're in an actual war. There's no scripted cinematic moments, no impressive set pieces, no moments where you join up with a whole squad of marines with vehicles and drive into battle like in Halo 2, 3 and Reach. No is talking about how the game is extremely repetitive, has a complete lack of atmosphere, as you said the world is dead. Nothing is happening anywhere ever except for the bases. I don't hate the game and I do plan on playing it and judging it for myself, but it's about time someone reviewed the game without nostalgia goggles. They tried so hard to make the game look and feel like Combat Evolved, but for some reason they stuck to specifically and only the second mission where you drive around and help some marines. It's like they forgot the the mission after that had cliffs, and the control room has snow, and 343 guilty spark had jungles.
When I was a teenager I always wanted an open world halo exactly because of those amazing skyboxes and the feeling that there was so much going on outside the levels you were playing in. Unfortunately the general understanding of what an open world game is has changed quite a bit since then, as have the business models that fund development.
The open world aspect does feel tacked on. Like, if this were like MGS5 where you take on side quests to upgrade your bases, weapons, vehicles and manage the marines, then the open world could feel justified. Also, the ammo refill stations caused me to always carry a Battle Rifle to every Encounter. And who can deny the effectiveness of the Sentinel Beam Marine Razorback? But overall, I still enjoyed Halo Infinite. Hopefully 343 can get there shit together and have a smoother development for the next Halo game.
This man speaks my mind. I could never really enjoy the game for the exact reasons mayo listed. But it’s still a great game, for again, the reasons he mentioned.
As a Halo fan, I have to agree with this video. Your comment on the FOBs going against the core of Halo was very poignant. Halo designs its challenges around the idea that you have to chose which 2 weapons you'll be carrying with from the selection that's left on the battlefield. You can't always have what you want. Sure the ability to chose out of every weapon gives self expression, but it comes at the cost of how the franchise is fundamentally designed. Halo has never been a game where every weapon is desirable at all times. Sure a plasma pistol is great against shields, but it's terrible against cannon fodder. Whereas a rocket launcher is just good and is significantly more desirable than the plasma pistol. Even in situations where the plasma pistol does its job well. As such, if you can chose between a rocket launcher and a plasma pistol at any point, you'll pick the rockets. But in previous games, the plasma pistol is super common whereas the rockets are only in a select few areas, so you're more inclined to save the rockets for when you need them and rely on the pistol in the meantime (as an example). Now it seems like you can just grab rockets whenever you want.
I'm torn on this point. On one hand i feel like the abilty to pick whatever weapon i want doesn't feel very much like Halo, while on the other hand i feel like, the game doesn't let me use my favorite weapons enough. I really enjoyed the Striker Sidekick Pistol, so once i unlocked it, i kept bringing it into all subsequent storymissions. But the game didn't really give me any means to keep it on me, despite giving me the option to bring it. During Story missions, ammo crates are few and far between and regular pistols don't restock the Striker's ammo, so i had to either drop it right at the beginning, after emptying it, never getting it back (because it's only obtainable at FOBs) or carry an empty gun around half the mission until i find a crate. I feel like the game doesn't really know what it wants to do with the system.. either drop it completely or make it more viable, but the way it is now, it feels just as torn as i am.
With some of the points you've made, I would really like to see your opinion on Halo 3:ODST (since it is open world with linear missions but of course the world is smaller and I guess the campaign is shorter) comparing both games, but I can understand if you never do it, because all the problems you have with the franchise gameplaywise, also pretty sure you can only play it on PC by getting The Master Chief Collection. Still, I think it would be interesting to hear your opinion
Bro ive been playing halo since 2001. Ive read the books. Youre review is spot on. I felt exactly the same way as you. The deeper i went into the game the more i realized it was soulless and wasnt going to improve
There's apparently going to be Story Expansions throughout the intended 10 year plan but if the Main Story feels like we are not only missing an entire game in between the last and the quality feeling already like a DLC then there is almost no hope to be discovered that they'll deliver
That's what happens with these so-called "10 year plans": They release a fraction of a full game now and take a long time to deliver content that could've already been in the game if they delayed the release while people spend money on skins for online multiplayer in between updates.
The lack of imagination in level/environment design becomes so apparent even after a few hours in. There are two environments after the brute ship at the start; pacific northwest America, and chrome interiors. Hell, every single level in the forerunner areas follows the same formula of "go through corridors, find a switch without power, find the power seed, bring it over and plug it in, then activate the switch". One part even has you do it 4 or 5 times in the same mission.
@@ciandelaney61 The game reminds me of that halo ce level where your driving in warthogs early game. Except just a really big consistent version of it.
True , it dose get quite repetitive after a wile in that aspect and become a bit of a grind . Sadly I expected that when I knew there was going to be one major biome only. That's the issue usually with big open worlds, it can still be fun though , the sandbox of combat is great . Despite the repetitivenes of the environment, you can still make it fun for yourself , granted i preffer much more to have variety ofc .
@@Kspice9000 Yea that's what Infinity is so far , is those more non linear open sandboxes, where you could use vehicles as well but turn into one big sadbox for the hole game almost . Not necessarily a legit bad thing imo bc it is an evolution of that technically but it definitely needed more biome diversity at least . Glad there will be dlc expansion that hopefully will add the needed variety .
The static nature of the open world is, I think, actually one of the game's biggest stumbling points. Because if they'd introduced more dynamic BIG events going on, even if they were temporary, a largely uniform map would feel very much alive, and all the game's other flaws would fade into irrelevance. For example, in the remarkably solid Mad Max game, in addition to the static map objectives of things to capture and discover... there were convoys. Big convoys of trucks. They'd zoom around a large area, on a lengthy patrol route. They weren't hugely dynamic - they would run laps around their track forever if left alone. But they were large enough in scale that, like the threat of a freight train slamming into you, they represented a seemingly dynamic element that could interact and converge with other gameplay elements, and they created the illusion of life and activity in the world that was independent of your interactions with it. In Halo Infinite, I see ships in the sky... doing nothing. I see a damaged ring world that looks like it should be in a precarious state of collapse, but is instead frozen in place. If the game featured armoured columns patrolling at random; if it featured huge ships occasionally launching attacks from the sky when the Master Chief escalated combat to a sufficient degree; if it featured marching armies that would attempt to recapture bases, or environmental effects like electrical storms triggered by failing forerunner technology, or earthquakes, or rogue weather suddenly covering the landscape in snow... if the world pulsed and writhed with activity, even if it didn't ever make permanent changes to the map (like, say, a Scarab flattening an entire FOB so that it no longer exists at all), just this animation of the existing world would surely make its uniformity irrelevant. In Deep Rock Galactic, the mission selection map changes on a regular basis - with different biomes, different regions, cycling their availability. What if parts of Halo Infinite's map became dangerously hostile at certain times - what if the presence of a huge warship directly overhead meant that any hostile activity below would be punished harshly? It wouldn't take much to truly "finish" this game. But sadly it bears all the hallmarks of being remarkably polished... for something that deserved another year of heavy development.
The thing with the health issue is that Halo has already solved that problem, THREE TIMES. In the first Halo, you have shield and health, shielding regenerates on its own, but you needed to find health packs to refill your actual health. This was changed from Halo 2 onward, this was changed so that both health and shields regenerate, although independently of each other, if you start regenerating shield and health and you take a single bullet, your shield stops recharging but your health continues to regen since it didn't take damage. Halo 3: ODST & Halo Reach both reverted the health system back to the Halo CE style, re-strengthening the old dynamic between weapons that deal better damage to shields vs health. That being, if you're health has already taken a hit throughout your fights, then you're better off searching for a health pack than waiting around for someone with a plasma weapon to come around and tear down you shields, leaving your 2 points of health as easy pickings. Of course, this has consequences in the multiplayer, having both shields and health regenerate is far healthier for Halo than needing to have health packs in the map. Health packs become inevitable choke points that draw in players, distracting from the gamemode objective and slowing down gameplay, worst case scenerio: the players good at camping out health spawns make going for them entirely pointless and everyone ignores them anyway. And it's not like hiding behind cover works all the time in multiplayer either, your opponents are fully capable of running up on you and gunning you down while you're weakened, the smartest thing to do while trying to regen health to to continuously move throughout available safe points on the map, keeping distance from where you know or can assume enemies will be, and moving in right as your health is at a safe level again. All this avoids having the player track down a health kit everytime they're badly hurt and inevitably being gunned down by the stream of other players doing the same thing, in a situation where the first one who sees an enemy is the one who wins.
@@keilafleischbein59 Health packs are annoying and pointless. They come from a bygone era of arena shooters where that was the norm. You might like it and that's fine, but the vast majority of people (especially younger audiences) hate it.
@@Lrg3Topping health packs are not annoying and pointless, nor are they bygone. TF2 Overwatch DOOM Eternal Sea of Thieves Fortnite All those modern and POPULAR games have health packs and use them well. And it's not just an older audience. Kids love healthpacks and shield potions in Fortnite. You just want to pretend they're bygone because you want to make excuses for 343. Even bungie's last two halo games returned to health packs. 343 just doesn't know what to do with them.
@@Lrg3Topping healthpacks need to be reinvented as an equipment drop. You can hold onto a health pack at full health and save it for later. That would be how infinite could evolve health in halo instead of stagnating to the bygone era of halo 2 and 3 where healthpacks just don't exist.
@@keilafleischbein59 I still think the dominant strategy would be to hang back and pick everything off in that scenario, Doom is brilliant because your ability to regain health is directly tied to your ability to keep moving and getting up close. In CE you were encouraged to get aggressive on higher difficulties because there were very few long range weapons that could pop elite shields(the sniper is actually the only one) efficiently. The Magnum was not an effective shield stripper and was better used as a finishing weapon, the most effective shield strippers in the game were actually only viable at medium to close range so a lot of times hanging back would actually just stagnate combat encounters especially when you factor in how Elites had very strong AI that was constantly moving around making it difficult to kill them from afar and the fact that Halo CE had very low magnetism/tracking compared to later installments. I still think health packs work because they actually forced you to strategically mange your health and take calculated risks which only enhanced CEs more aggressive play style but i think infinites problems are much deeper when it comes to encouraging aggressive play. Nearly every weapon is long range capable and weapons like the pulse carbine allow you to strip shields at a distance. So realistically there's never a reason to get aggressive which is why infinite may feel like a duck and cover shooter
I respect your opinion here, personally this is my favourite game this year, but your points did get me thinking about how this Halo compares to others
Your delusional, halo infinite is reflection on the current state of AA games and how they lost touch with their audience. There just any soul to the game it feels bland all the way through
I think you went a bit easy on the bosses in Infinite, they all just boil down to being bullet sponges with 1 or 2 gimmicks that are countered by spamming your ever-present equipment abilities rather than through engaging with the wider sandbox. Take the mainline Elite bosses for example, all you do to beat them is spam the threat sensor and grappleshot to reveal them when they are invisible and to get out of their melee range, what if instead you had to use the limited supplies in the arena to deal with them in varied ways; You run out of threat sensor and grappleshot charges so you have to use other strategies like hitting them with the disruptor when they uncloak for an attack to make them take DOT thus sparking their shields even when they are invisible, or you could carpet their last known location in fire by utilising fusion coils or the ravager's alt fire to reveal them, or there could be specific environmental elements like tesla coils that you could shoot with a shock rifle to charge them up and create defensive areas within the arena that you can catch your breath and take stock in. I feel that, with how much Halo Infinite has returned to Halo's identity as a sandbox interaction driven FPS, all the bosses throughout the campaign are massively missed opportunities to have some really unique and engaging gameplay.
I may be going too easy on them, that's fair. But it's one of the only times where I felt like using multiple things at once was being asked of me in some way. Using threat sensor AND grapple hook, with throwable explosives, that's not bad. Good starting point at least.
Overall problem is the game is too character driven instead of setting driven. Halo 1 is the perfect example of a setting driven story -- the Halo world is the story. Characters are largely irrelevant. A level like 343 Guilty Spark is the perfect example of story telling without characters. Gameplay is great though. Beat it on legendary, which was a good challenge but never unfair.
Very nice video. Pretty much everyone who's played Infinite has said that they like the implementation of the grappling hook and how it expands the player's options within the weapon sandbox, and I agree. The new updates to the Halo sandbox were much appreciated. Your boss analysis also resonates with me, about how they're designed to push players to gain more understanding of the sandbox mechanics, especially at higher difficulties. Aside from the Monitor boss, of course. As a Halo veteran who's played all main games except Halo 5 (watched the cutscenes online and understood the community reaction), I completely understand and agree with your thoughts on the story's implementation. The developers stated that the story was meant to be a mystery appealing to both veterans and newcomers... and that resulted in a mildly frustrating experience for veterans who were wondering what exactly happened with Cortana and Atriox after everything that happened in the Halo universe post Halo 5 (there was a lot of extended reading and it was very dubious), and I can definitely see how newcomers would be scratching their heads at all of the lore dumps. The emotional beats between Chief, the Weapon and the pilot were enough to keep me invested, but the overarching conflict with the Banished, Endless and the Harbinger wasn't very impressive as not much was explained about them, other that they're dangerous and they need to be stopped. The current development plan is to use Halo Infinite as a stepping stone for 10 years' worth of Halo developments, which basically means a lot of story-related DLC, which I am not sure how to feel about. 'Huh, what, who?' was similar to what I felt at the end of the campaign. It was easy for to empathize with the main trio, but other than that, not much was accomplished because of all the blatant sequel hooks. No, it's not you. The story was pretty dry compared to previous Halo titles with properly explained stakes and epic setpieces. Halo Infinite had a lot of rocky cliffs and long grey halls of Forerunner architecture. Pretty to look at, but not much biome variety. I agree with you on the bland and lifeless state of the open world. Not as bad as what most people expect from Far Cry, but it doesn't offer much aside from giving players more reasons to play Halo Infinite. The developers stated the side missions are completely optional, and it does show. Your side quest idea actually sounded pretty exciting, and... from what I can tell, the developers structured the campaign the way they did because they were expected to revolutionize the Halo formula... and this was the result. They didn't have much faith in creating a linear campaign. Unfortunate, but it is what it is. What I like about the Valor system is that it's simple to understand. I liked being able to unlock the Scorpion tank and the Wasp aerial vehicle. But once you unlock the Rocket Warthog, that's that and there's nothing else to do when the campaign is over. Your statement about breaking Halo's design philosophy might be considered controversial... but I do understand the sentiment. The developers said they wanted the players to create their own awesome gameplay moments... when the actual implementation of the system lacked grounded context and meaning compared to the older setpieces of the past Halo titles. Using the weapons, you find on the battlefield instead of loading up everything you and your Marine squad need at the start of every side mission. Reclaiming UNSC territory on Installation 007 from the Banished doesn't have much meaning, and it shows. The earlier Halo titles didn't have ammo crates, aside from one Halo: Combat Evolved set piece where there was a bunch of spare Rocket Launcher ammo for blowing up the reactors. I didn't hear about two-thirds of the game being cut, but that feels accurate given the inevitable delays that occurred after the 'Craig' incident. '1/3 of the map isn't even accessible outside the main mission': I noticed this, and so did a bunch of other people who wanted more out of the campaign. Kill walls have been in Halo since Halo Reach and Halo 4, and they tend to discourage exploration in a way that Halo: Combat Evolved never did. There are a bunch of lore-related easter eggs for the lore enthusiasts, such as hints of what happened to the previously established characters, but looking back, what I loved most about Halo: Combat Evolved was fun, robust sandbox gameplay that went hand-in-hand with a grounded sense of exploration... in that there were different biomes and locations that were all given proper weight and context in-universe. I remember being amazed at the mission variety between the corridors of the Pillar of Autumn, the lush green hills of the mysterious ring world of Halo, the foreign, violet architect of the Truth and Reconciliation, the snowy canyons of the Control Room, and the murky swamp that surrounded the facility that housed the Flood. So, Halo Infinite had fun gameplay, but everything else was so-so.
Thanks for a well thought out comment. A breeze to read. So far fans have been pretty understanding of where I'm coming from. We'll see as the days go on, if this gets any traction.
This was exactly what I was thinking while playing the game. Halo infinite is just a far cry game set in the future with less stuff to do. That being said im still enjoying my time with infinite and i still find the far cry games entertaining
I do really like the combat in Halo Infinite. 343 really did improve it from Halo 4 and 5 but the whole time playing this game I started calling it Far Cry: Combat Evolved. The world and the FOB points just felt really boring.
If I see another mention of bloody far cry... It's like there's NO other open world games other than Far Cry. Jeezus. I haven't played Any Far Cry and already I feel like I'm sick of it
I had a visceral emotional reaction to the title, but the worst part is that I agree with everything you say the more I think about it. After a while I just decided to ignore all the side stuff and blaze to the end, and that was a lot more enjoyable. It's frustrating that they spent so long on this game and the open world content is this bare bones. Makes my little halo heart sad:(
"I ignored everything intentionally" "Man this is barebones" literally your fault and mayos fault. But I expect it from mayo, he enjoys mortalkombat and you have to be literally mental to like that trash
Basically, if you like Halo, you'll like Infinite. If you don't like Halo, this won't change your mind. It has the same sandbox cover shooter feel to it which is definitely the safest approach to get fans back in after 6 years. I did wish it innovated a bit more in its design. Eternal wasn't afraid to take risks in its design philosophy. Infinite definitely feels like it played the safest approach while adding some cool new stuff.
And I don't think it HAS to be that way. If this game had had 2 years more time to actually do what they wanted, even a non-fan like myself could have found a lot more here to enjoy.
@@underthemayo I think they could do this in the future but I think this safe approach was best for this game because if this game fell flat halo would be dead
@@underthemayo although I entirely understand your complaints with the story it is not friendly to non halo fans at all and the delivery isn’t the best but personally I love the setup it does feel like a jj Abrams movie where it just sets up for later movies but I’m fairly fine with that I’m just excited to get halo content with fun gameplay with a story that is not actively bad and harming the franchise
What if you love Halo and find Infinite to be a bit shit? The campaign is underwhelming for me and, bar 5, I've really enjoyed all the previous instalments.
I didn't like Halo and I enjoyed the shit out of Infinite's campaign, maybe because there are more movement options like the grapple shot, which is my favorite thing of the entire game
I had fun and enjoyed it. Feeling free to play doing whatever I wanted was very nice and I actually liked the way they designed their open world because I find very tedious how other games of that genre are made. It's pretty simple and to the point, just combat. Sure, as an experience it's not a better campaign than Halo 2 or 3, but the story was interesting to me and gave closure to Cortana's story. I understand your complaints tho, sorry to hear that
I am a mega Halo fan and I had the exact same experience you did. I was expecting something on the level of Halo 3 again, nut what we got was another Halo 5 but ironically with some parts that are the anti thesis to H5. It's a huge disappointment and I'm surprised most Halo fans actually liked it.
Mayo, you're completely right here. I've been a diehard halo fan for as long as I've played video games, and as happy I am that this is by far the best halo campaign 343 has ever made, it's not really up to snuff for a halo campaign. This is by far the least replayable Halo game to date, it doesn't even offer much in terms of replayability. You need to start the campaign over to play against the bosses, which is by far one of the greatest strengths this game has (in most cases, some bosses are pretty weak in terms of gameplay and fun), and this game lacks so much of what made a Halo game such a fun experience. The scenery never changes. The first Halo game had too much damn backtracking and even it had more environment variety, and what environments we have aren't even remotely alien aside from the giant metal columns protruding out of the ground. To even attempt that level of variety in an open world game would require either having a gigantic map, or taking advantage of the plot needing a broken apart halo ring. Why couldnt a chunk of the island be a desert and another snowy? While the gameplay of this Halo is certainly some of the best, even it suffers from some of the decisions made by the game's format. There aren't any handcrafted encounters that intentionally let certain sandbox elements shine. Halo 3's first scarab fight gave the players rocket launchers, mongooses (geese?), and marines. The marines can't even drive in this game, you'd likely spawn a Razorback instead, and there's nothing even remotely similar to the Scarab fight in this game. It's been 14 years since the last scarab fight using AI instead of scripting. One of the most iconic and replayable parts of the Halo series has been missing for over a DECADE. I did have fun with this game, I enjoyed the interactivity between the grapple and the rest of the sandbox, but this game lost so much of what made Halo campaigns so damn fun for the sake of a open world which they couldn't even properly deliver on. In six years Halo 2 released, Halo 3 released, and Halo reach released. In the exact same span of time. I know there were severe development issues, but the same people have been in charge of 343 since they inherited the franchise and it REALLY makes you want to ask why nothing has changed. Every single entry done by 343i has had some dramatic change of focus from the rest of the franchise. Some dramatic reinvention of the game's style/format. While Halo infinite's multiplayer is a wonderful return to form, something many have wanted for so long, the campaign totally fails to deliver in the same regard.
I’m 100% with you. Also a lifelong halo fan here. The original trilogy are my favorite games of all time, I also love halo reach a lot. Then 343 took over and I really have not enjoyed anything they’ve done (it hurts my heart to see Mayo play Halo 1 on the terrible anniversary graphics). Halo infinite I think was a good game but it just lacks SO much of what makes the Bungie titles such a beloved series.
18:28 that's basically the whole lore of Halo in a nut shell. Whenever marines tagged along with Chief on missions, they would always get clapped left and right no matter the situation you found your self in. Those NPCs were all just a little suicidal on the field too LUL.
For me, the open-world reminded me of ReCore... without the puzzles and interactivity of ReCore. And I know Armature's title has some problems. It's funny how we accuse ReCore to be empty yet Halo Infinite is even more barebone. Sure it can be fun to grapple but I never felt the necessity to use the other items because they were just there. If the grapple was its dedicated button instead and you still had the ability to use the rest, why not... The red-armored Hunters were incredibly annoying. In fact, the Hunters were just painful as a whole. I think I only liked a 1/4 of this game's progression and I loved Halo 3... as I do respect the original and the second episode. The series is now limited by its own roots, Infinite serves as an accentuation of those limits. Sure some people will break the boundaries and show how hilarious the physics are. If you have to cheese a game to make it fun or playable, it just shows the flaws in the core design. And yes, even on Normal, I got frustrated due to hitscan and pinpoint accurate snipers. The final boss was lame, the penultimate one was great. The Spartan Killer? Now THAT was pretty cool. But yeah, I can't help but feel like this game wasn't ready for launch at all. I won't be surprised if people get a second opinion on it and reconsider... much like Halo 4 in the past.
I completely disagree, the snipers accuracy has never had any issues for me and on heroic and legendary the bosses all felt amazing to me, never played it on normal and I’m sure that’d make some of the harder bosses a little less rewarding but infinite is probably the first halo game I feel properly showcased a villain.. they finally created an amazing set of enemies with the battle types consistently changing on each boss encounter and the progression had me on the edge of my seat most of the time
@@macpenry5691 Each enemy has appeared in the first game with the exception of the Brutes (Halo 2) and the drones (Halo 4). The charging Brute is now its own thing instead of a last-resort method from the Halo 2 and 3 Covenant Brutes. They're just braindead Hell Knights with the armor of a Dread Knight. Infinite has created no new enemies. The Elites were at least fun because they had the camouflage and energy swords. That's it. You don't have to agree, but trust me when I say the Jackal snipers were annoying: they were! You barely can react to the shots because of hitscan and the overall sound design makes it even more annoying. Just a shame that the dash ability isn't its own button like a certain shooter... Oh and the Red-Armored Hunters? Emptying entire ammo magazines to expose their backs since they can, on Normal, pivot without issue while you grapple is on cooldown and can still aim you without issue... isn't satisfying. I was honestly expecting them to replicate the issue of the Magnum. Since they didn't, they were just annoying and dreadful to fight. That's what I experienced. Even Halo 3 on Normal has less bullcrap. Again, you don't have to agree with me.
I agree, I can't stand 2 weapon limits after DE. What bothers me more is recharging health. I keep looking for something to actively pick up mid fight and instead I'm forced to hide behind cover and wait when my health is low. It feels like I'm doing nothing for half the fight even though the recharge times are relatively quick.
@@doomer604 In Doom, you want the enemy to surround you. In Halo, you want to surround the enemy. You have to consider your ideal positioning. Stand somewhere that has good sightlines for you, and bad sightlines for the enemy. Stand where you can dodge the shots that come at you. You won't have to wait for your shields to recharge if you don't get hit. If you try to run in like the Doom Slayer, you're gonna get clapped. Master Chief is a supersoldier, not a demigod.
You should play Metro: Exodus. You'd probably hate it because the gameplay is generally really really slow most of the time, but it has a great take on (semi) open world design that's way more focused than most games. It gives you a concise list of like 12 things to do and then moves on to a new area and a new list, instead of pretending it's fun to clear 500 bandit camps over and over again.
Metro Exodus is probably the only fps that feels good to take slow. The open world is just a really immersive vehicle for the story missions and it shepherds you very naturally around the whole thing
The biggest Issue with infinite is what all Modern Openworlds suffer from: Its world is nothing more than a selling point on the back of the box. Everything besides the critical path is just a waste of time. Sidequests gives you either useless collectibles or Vehicles and NPC Helpers. Wich wouldnt be so bad expect that the Main missions are gated off linear levels where you cant bring in any of the vehicles or groundtroops you liberated in the openworld. So how about this: You crash land like normally, have a couple fun fights but then you get a message from the main bad guy: Zeta Halo is actually functioning and almost ready to fire. Now your like: Oh shit there are actual stakes in the game, better get going. The problem is that the control room with the main badguy is really high up somewhere in a heavily secured base. You can of course book it to the end right away but you will certainly get your ass kicked. The prupose of the openworld would then be to build up enough strenght by liberating enemie camps, unlocking weapons and saving marines to launch a full on assault on the main base. If you feel extra fancy you could even implemant a Dead Rising still timer where you got 72 hours in game, wich equates to 10 real time hours, before Zeta Halo is fired. Voila now the game has tension, unlocking stuff has purpose and you could even have mutiple endings based on how well you playd.
That’s unfortunate especially as Halo already has such an unique world and setting and 343 is not using it to its full protential. An halo open world could have been a great idea If executed better
I think your example at the end sounds really cool, and reminds me of Shadows of Mordor/War. The whole point of completing things and leveling up was to attack heavily defended, high level targets, and you had troops you could deploy, allies to call in. I actually thought to myself several times how great something like the nemesis system would have been, especially during the high value target side missions.
All of your points are valid to an almost flawless degree. The reason I say almost, is because there will be nit picking fanboys who will cherry pick your points like there being no “history” on the ring when there is. It’s those ring statues. Maybe more. Either way, not enough. I’m I’m surprised you didn’t mention the fact that there are audio logs that are just such a cheap story telling method.
Why I'm happy with this game, as a long time die hard fan, is because it gives a solid foundation. That's all the halo community needs. A good sandbox with sound combat and a decent game engine. Give the reigns to the community, release forge, and this game will live on for 10 years I guarantee it.
@@Ibrahim-wr5fs people still play halo 3 custom games because of all the creative maps. Go on MCC there's still tons of groups for that specifically. I didn't say another game wouldn't come out, I said the forge would allow for a community to thrive. Especially if they implement AI spawn points.
THIS is why i think they should bring back the health packs from CE and Reach. It's a lot more dynamic than hiding behind cover, and rewards map knowledge and strategic play.
@@badgasaurus4211 I always thought having both regenerating health /and/ shields just kinda defeats the point of both of them existing. It's just one big health bar. If they brought back the health packs back, it would add an extra layer of strategy to combat. If you're full on health and shields, you might as well push enemy lines with close quarters combat. However if you're low on health, you would have to either be really good at dodging enemy fire or try a different approach. Then the game could award you for clearing a FOB or freeing some marines with some health. (this is strictly regarding the campaign ofc, multiplayer is a whole different thing)
The one thing I wanted from this game, was a reason to play it over the MCC. And I don't see a reason to play it over the MCC, other than grapple gameplay. I've never been a Halo fan either, but Forge was a blast to play when I was younger and it's super disappointing to be missing that. I think it's a pretty bad Halo game and it is extremely barebones for 6 years of development.
I agree that the explorable world of this game really feels lifeless. Personally, I wish the map was more of like an archipelago with each island having it's own unique environment; one being a desert, the other being a tropical jungle, the next being a redwood forest - you get the idea.
The segments where you fight nothing but Sentinels were sooooooooooooo boring. Easily my biggest complaint. In previous games, they appeared along with The Flood, as more of an "environmental" threat that only focused you if there were no zombies or Covenant around. Why would 343 have you fight nothing *but* Sentinels for entire segments of a mission? Left a bad taste in my mouth.
Coming from an OG Halo fan I felt the same way. 6 years and this is what we got, idk man 343 … I think a new studio needs to take over and reboot the franchise.
I feel like 75% of the campaign goes like this.. go to point X kill all the banished at point X find a power core or destroy X repeat and all of the points/bases looked very similar it just felt like a grind to play with Escharum just taunting you slowly with no sense of urgency the whole time like let me just go around and slowly destroy all the bases
I agree that I wish there was an active health recovery option. Like draining Jackal/elite shields... picking up a jackal shield. Or maybe weapon interactions. Like some guns turn grunts into a cryobomb, or forcing brutes to attack allies... maybe I'm overthinking it.
Seriously, how the FUCK can you play Halo Combat Evolved in remastered graphics?!?? That shit is TERRIBLE!!! All the charm is lost!!! I’d argue the original graphics are superior in both pleasantness on the eyes and just looking better overall as an art style and fitting the look the game was going for!!! I don’t respect anyone who prefers the remastered graphics and their opinion on Halo loses MASSIVE credibility!!! Halo Combat Evolved DESERVES to be ONLY PLAYED in original graphics WITH original sound effects AND original music!!! Anything other than that is an abomination and should be avoided at ALL COSTS!!! 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Surprisingly, ammo refills left a very sour taste in my mouth in the first mission, I realistically never ran out of kinetic ammo for my pistol and AR, I prefer unsc weapons over covenant but I enjoy the mix and match dynamic of battlefield scavenging. After the first mission I completely ignored all ammo crates and weapons at the FoB, I had to force depth into my playthrough but it worked
You forget to mention the music. Part of the reason I felt Halo Infinite was so lacking was because the music was mostly ambient this time around. Ambient music works with open world games such as Skyrim so the gameplay doesn’t become repetitive, but for a halo game, this is kind of a crime. Even Halo 5 had more memorable music. I don’t even remember hearing Set a Fire in your Heart or Through the Trees as I played Halo Infinite. What a shame.
@@underthemayo in my opinion, it’s not a super big issue due to the things I said above, plus it’s probably a good thing you cut it as the songs that did come out are really good.
I can agree with this largely. I started off having a blast, but then I started to trail off. now I look at the map probably about halfway into the game and it just looks daunting. also, it feels like the enemy types are just so very limited. it feels like I'm playing an MMO, just running from group to group that are waiting for me to kill them, but with much larger downtime spots. map bosses so far have been recolors, and the story missions start to feel more detatched. I went from a steady flow to "wow, I gotta go really far for each of these" in the next part.
Funny, I liked the open world for its sparseness at times, how there isn't a structured mission everywhere, just randomized patrols. Feels organic. Some specialized missions like you mentioned would be nice, but any timers would just be a drag. There's certainly a lot of Easter eggs and small collectibles throughout, which is what I'd expect from an old ps2 era open world game, and I appreciate it. Sniping being the best option has always been something of a thing for Halo. In this game usually the brutes and elites will hide from your sniper rifle, while you pick off the grunts and jackals from afar, and then go in. Which is fine. You can def cheese the open world stuff with marines, but there are a lot of people who enjoyed doing that with marines back to Halo 1, so I can't blame 343 much for including that. You can always choose not to bring the marines along, which is what I did after the novelty wore off. I do wish you could revisit past assassination targets or something. Oh, and I 100% agree about the drones, they were an annoying grind. Not horrible but it was a rather dull 30 mins of fighting them. Story wise this game is cleaning up the mess of turning Cortana evil and other things from Halo 5, so it wisely chooses to focus on smaller issues, and push the poor story decisions that can't be entirely retconed to the end of the game. I really liked the pilot, he reminded me of a less malicious version of "the ugly" in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Him overcoming his cowardice, and the weapon and chief learning to trust eachother makes for good, low scale drama, and it's surprisingly well written. A lot of the rest of the story is more Conan like "You're a great warrior, I'm a great warrior, let's fight", or just the Harbinger doing shit and explaining nothing. Compared to the average Halo story, which aside from Halo 2 are always a bit barebones or have issues, I thought it was above par. Overall, I think you just have higher/different standards when it comes to gameplay, and you didn't like a lot of the dryer, talkie non-setpieces used to tell the story. Which is fine, but I do find that kind of an odd complaint, when that's basically how both recent Doom games have told their stories.
gotta disagree on your last point. most of the exposition you're exposed to is while you're on the move/in combat, and is usually skipabble entirely. story cutscenes are short as very little actually happens through cutscene. Doom 16 did have a fair amount of holograms but it's emphasized pretty emphatically in both games by his actions that the Slayer doesn't care about the lore or story in any way, and the player isn't really explicitly made to care either. It's not necessary to understand the threat, the stakes, the player motivation. If anything a majority of the "lore" is all diary/codex entries.
As someone who is a big fan of far cry and halo I really enjoyed this game, however, I can see how you didn’t. Also agree that the environment got old fast and that the story was dumb. After 5 I’m pretty much done with halo’s story line.
Well tbf the Banished storyline is good or was till 343 got a hold of it, people forget that 343 didnt come up with the Banished story(that was the studio that made halo wars 2). 343 are not good at making Halo.
Well not that the story is great as it stands rn, it's much much better than we got in halo 5. Tho the story as a whole do shines a bit, there are many plot holes and gaps that needs to filled, questions needed to be answered. And I am hopeful for the future dlcs. The ending has me pumped up
@@mayanksharma5006 also its easy to write from existing work that sombody else wrote coming up with ur own is harder, its even harder to keep a story good that someone else wrote because most writers dont like playing with other writers toys.
I loved this game. The open world definitely makes things easier to cheese. But I love fighting the banished. Definitely my favorite gameplay of the franchise.
@@fwamable394 he says that Halo is like a cover shooter but when its not, along with another misunderstandings. Alot of the problems is that Mayo wants all games to be like Doom Eternal when that would ruin a game.
Then the game should make playing it well necessary for success if you wanna judge people's opinion on it based on how well they play the game. When the viable most effective option for new players is to hide behind cover and they don't actually need to learn to be aggressive, don't get upset when people call your game a cover shooter.
I would love to have a discussion with you about this game, I agree with a lot of your points and some aren't really applicable but you still have a solid argument. At the very least, I can understand your issues with its world and map. Especially the 4 beacons, good lord what a way to pad time. Damn great video Mayo
Halo infinite isnt really an open world game. Looking to games like RDR or GTA is a bit of an unfair comparison because these worlds are trying to achieve different things Halos "open world" is a lot closer in design to a single elongated level in mario 64/mario odyssey. I definitely agree that there should be more biomes and there's nothing lore-wise stopping that from happening, but you arent going to experience anything remotely similar a GTA style open world
If its not a RDR/GTA like game I prefer a game that has an open world to allow for either a different gameplay approach or to take a different angle or entrance to an objective and to allow the mechanics, systems and AI to shine like say MGSV. I think RDR and GTA need to allow for less set peice driven missions at this point. Ones that allow for player expression and creative solutions or at least share more of the qualties prior games have had when you were not in a story mission. I think gameplay wise where Halo Infinite is at it's worse is when you are forced indoors. I hope next time or in a DLC they have something than grass, trees,rocks and metal to look at and find a way to remove or improve the boring indoor sections that throw out the refreshing freedom of the combat outdoors.
@@GuyOnAChair I disagree halo is at worst when you outside the indoors make the combat much better. GTA and Red dead have some of the best open world Red dead 2 is Living breathing world with some the best NPC interaction its really about living in the world and the sense of discovery is some the best out their even after 5 playthroughs i still find new things. The open world random encounter missions are great some Are like mini RPG missions which have branching paths then you have the side missions which are more scripted but allow for allot variety and theres allot of side activites to take part in along with great story. Witcher 3 has scripted quests but they have some really good writing. GTA5 and skyrim have tons to do in the open world. Games like halo dont need an open world maybe open missions but unlike Dishonored or hitman taking diffetnt paths does not add to the experience.
@@John-996 The original Halo's big moment was when you went outdoors the first time. A console shooter not stuck in tiny corridors for performance reasons. Its best levels have all been outdoors and ironically the levels considered worst are all seemingly indoors.
if you can find the the black eye skull, it forces you to play more aggressive because you only recharge shields if you melee an enemy. So playing from a far and just sniping is more likely to get you killed
I'm aware of the black skull. But I don't think looking for a secret skull on a repeat playthrough is really a solution to my personal gripes. I'm already done with the campaign and didn't enjoy it enough to want to go back through it. Also, I don't want to completely remove the regenerating shield mechanic from Halo. I just want to add active health options to it.
@@underthemayo yea I know what you mean, after I beat the campaign as much as I wanted to explore and find the skulls after, I found 2 I got bored because of how desolate the world is
You're not wrong on the design. Halo kinda needs the linear level design otherwise there needs to be some strong incentive to want to traverse back to different parts of the map. Elder scrolls design requires that as has proper side missions but this didn't seem right for Halo.
Mayo I think you hit the nail on the head with the whole "the game punishes you for going aggressive and rewards you for playing it safe" Not to compare everything to new Doom, but if you want me to play aggressive and use my tools, don't incentivize me to hide in a corner with a scoped weapon. In a weird way I enjoy COD/Titanfall 2 more than Halo. Those are military style shooters that create cinematic moments out of popping around cover for quick kills. Halo is more on the Doom side of the spectrum, but doesn't have the toolset to incentivize aggressive/FUN play.
I think most of what could be said has, but hopefully this is a small addition you’ll like. In Halo, there’s a collectible called skulls, which can be applied to a new campaign to modify gameplay elements or increase difficulty in interesting ways. One of the them is called the Black Eye Skull. Meleeing enemies is the only way to refill your shields with that applied, and I really think you’d enjoy playing the game with that twist on the gameplay loop. Enforces a more active, confrontational playstyle. Maybe look for it in the open world and try a Black Eye run sometime - helps remedy the “hiding is the safest/best option” type of gameplay loop in Halo.
I know of the black skull, but looking for a secret skull to change combat AFTER I've already finished a campaign that I didn't really like.. It's not really a solution.
@@zeldosan5138 a secret Skull is not a solution to this. Plenty of new players aren't even gonna know about Skulls or how to get them. Am I supposed to play this game on day 1 and look up a guide telling me where to find a secret Skull that i may not even know about? To change the game in a way I don't even want?
I agree with your points about the open world. As a halo fan, one of my favorite things was all the different locations I was able to go to and kill aliens in. In every previous title, even odst, I could tell levels apart at a glance because there was always a unique visual to them, even if it was just the time of day. 343 sacrificed this to give us a bland and empty open world, and it honestly killed my excitement for the game. It kills a lot of the variety that could have been offered. I mean sure there are different bases but it's always the same terrain and area. Halo campaigns used to feel like an epic taking place on a grand scale across multiple theaters of war, but this just feels like they took 1 level and stretched it into an entire campaign.
This game SUCKS!!!! The final boss fight is ridiculously stupid! You’re stuck in an open room where you have an overwhelming amount of enemies who constantly rush you, while other enemies are also constantly sniping you, with absolutely NOWHERE to take cover! They might as well call it Halo Track because you spend 99% of your time just running and hoping you don’t get sniped or cornered. On top of that, you have weapons that do an underwhelming amount of damage, have an abysmally slow firing rate, are slow to reload, and are just as likely to kill you as the enemy AI. When you finally do get to fight the boss, she can teleport virtually ANYWHERE and is doing so non-stop. She has a weapon that fires some kind of lighting projectile that is almost impossible to avoid. Again, the only way to fight her is to constantly run. It’s just fucking stupid and I don’t understand why this has become a regular occurrence in games today. Why do designers think that constantly running from the enemy with very little time to stop, aim and actually shoot equates to “fun”? When the fuck did this become the norm?!!!! It’s NOT “fun”, NOT “challenging”, it’s just plain fucking STUPID!!!!!
I really loved Infinite but at least for me it resides in that little vault in my brain like the rest of the Halo series does which would be the “it’s a good game, but it could’ve been even better if they were allowed all the time necessary with no issues stopping them” vault. I don’t blame them with taking it safe in terms of overall level and environment design since we now know the development cycle was very messy with the engine being difficult to work with. They clearly wanted to be more ambitious with the open world because recently some files were dug up from the game and a model of a mongoose designed with treads to travel in a snowy biome were discovered still in the game. Here’s hoping that those rumored DLCs will help Infinite finalize itself as that product it originally advertised itself as
Yeah. Honestly I see this campaign more as a good starting point for what's to come. It was obvious that open world halo would have its issues, seeing as it was the first time it was done. But even with its flaws the potential is there and the future is open.
Despite playing all the numbered releases, this is the first Halo game I've actively enjoyed in single player. Really love the combat in this game. I'm hoping they can flesh the game out more over time - you can see the troubled development this game had, but the fun I'm having with this game has kept me engaged well past the credits.
Could you explain what exactly was so drastically different that made you enjoy this game and not enjoy any of the others? I suspect the answer will be very funny.
@@shanecoyle8053 It's a good question. Possibly a combination of the increased mobility and expanded variety of combat options that switching between the equipment allows. The greater range of mobility is probably a key factor, as it's a big reason why, like with Mayo here, the Doom/Quake series has always been my preference. The open nature of the world helps with this too. The whole game is bookended by two long(ish) more corridor-based missions and I felt these were less enjoyable in general, the more open levels were always the more interesting part of the original game for me. Even so, the enhanced traversal and the more dynamic gameplay this encourages still makes it that bit more satisfying for me. I always fell off the earlier games by the half--way point (it was only thanks to co-op the first three held my interest to completion) but I was engaged with this one right to the end and continued to play after the credits. It's probably a game I'll return to from time to time as well, which isn't something I could say for the previous entries in the series.
The great part about infinite is that the sky isn’t even the limit for what you can do. Your imagination and drive is. You said that once you could, you entered every mission with a sniper and battle rifle. That was YOUR choice. YOU decided thats how you wanted to play. That’s what’s so fun about this! Due to the more open ended nature, it’s your choice on how you want to tackle situations. The devs designed this game to be able to answer “yes, you can do that” to any stupid way you want to attack the enemy.
Plenty of games do that though, what made halo special was that the devs limited your options just enough to where you actually had to get creative to overcome various encounters. Sometimes endless amounts of options isnt actually a good thing when it comes to creating a rewarding gameplay experience.
"Just turn it into a linear game" That, or an open-ended adventure game as a metroidvania, with more specifically, upgrade-based progression with inter-connected area akin to Metroid Prime. Feels like it would have worked well.
Yeah Mayo you're right about all of this. As a long-time Halo fan, I was still confused at exactly wtf was happening in Infinite. It felt like I woke up with more amnesia than a Bioshock game & had zero context of what was going on, especially after Halo 5. In addition, the campaign definitely felt bare bones. Nothing really *happened* throughout it. The best way I can describe it is that the campaign felt like the prologue or first few opening chapters to a much larger & longer game. The environments were very lackluster. Like in CE, we went from a ship to a forest, to a desert, to an alien ship, to a snowy forest, to a swamp, to a forerunner facility. Halo 2 went from a space station, to a city, to a forerunner facility, to a grassland & lake, to a snowy wasteland, etc. Halo 3 went from a jungle, to a base, to a grassland, to an industrial facility, to a desert, to a forest, etc. Infinite is just a Pacific Northwest forest & that's it. *BOOOOOOOORRRRRRIIINNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGG!*
Just finished the video- you hit the nail on the head. Speaking from a Halo vet's POV, the game really feels unfinished and limited in scope. One of my biggest issues was the lack of unique areas. Halo CE had the forest areas at the start, both UNSC and Covenant ships (the Banished ships look like recolored UNSC ships :/), the snow in Assault on the Control Room/Two Betrayals, and the Iconic swamp in 343 Guilty Spark. Halo Infinite just has "Halo CE mission 2", Banished ship (which as mentioned above, looks like a recolored UNSC ship), and the forerunner structures, which, giving credit where credit is due, look absolutely beautiful. Infinite's Forerunner architecture is the *perfect* evolution of Halo 3's art style. Not only that, you CONSTANTLY have someone talking in your ear, whether it's the Weapon or the pilot. One of my favorite memories of Halo comes from 343 Guilty Spark- in the previous mission, Cortana is left behind in the control room, and Chief goes it alone to find Keyes. For 5 missions, you have had a companion with you, talking you through objectives and commenting on the situation. Now you're all alone, in an unknown and hostile environment, all leading up to the reveal of the Flood. And thats something that I feel has been missing in Halo- actual tension. Unless you're playing on the highest difficulty with skulls on, there's very little tension (without bullshit *cough cough* H2 sniper jackals *cough cough* H4's pitiful ammo economy *cough cough*). Halo Infinite really tries to show that humanity has lost, but we can't tell at all. Worst we've seen is the Infinity getting destroyed by the Banished. Yeah we've seen spartan IV's die, but spartans have been dying, the only remaining spartan II's that are still alive are Blue Team. 343 really needs to *SHOW* that humanity is losing, and not *TELL* us over and over again. And I don't blame the devs, or the writers. They really have something here. If Microsoft didn't keep cycling out contractors after 18 months each, maybe the game would've been complete at release. :/ And speaking of complete at release, what's the deal with the Harbinger? If I'm not mistaken, there is *zero* explanation as to who they are or what their motivations are. Why were they imprisioned, who were they trying to release, why are they against humanity if humanity and the forerunners were waging war (lore)? I shouldn't want to ask questions out of confusion, I should be asking out of curiosity. All that aside, I love playing this game and once I get all of the collectables, I'm planning a legendary playthrough.
I love this game but honestly I’ve been waiting for a review like this. Infinite isn’t a bad game whatsoever, it is in my opinion underwhelming. Thank you for making this video Mayo, your honesty is always appreciated.
Yeah I’m pretty sure like 2/3rds of the campaign were cut from the final game and that gameplay loop like how you have to hide behind cover to regain your health there’s skulls that can change that like “black eye” you have to melee and enemy to regain your shields. But a pain you have to go and find them in the open world
As someone who's played every single Halo game and even read 4 of the books, I have to agree. The main issue with the gameplay is that nobody - not Bungie, not 343 - had the balls to make useful changes to the gameplay. - Melee damage and hit rate hasn't changed since Halo 1, even tho it makes the multiplayer worse for it; - The gameplay suffers due to the health/shield regen mechanic which kills the pacing. As for the storytelling, 343 has this idiotic obsession with "tell, don't show." This basically translates to a lot of events that happened/are happening off-screen. The main antagonist from the first cutscene is allegedly killed sometime before you actually start playing. So instead of fighting Atriox, we're pitted against another big dumb gorilla villain who quite frankly kills any tension. It's like your video on the Matrix sequels: as the player, we know Master Chief is an unstoppable badass that eats big dumb gorillas for breakfast, so not once does this villain make you feel threatened. It's just a bunch of chest-beating and howling. Who gives a shit? Honestly, the little recording devices we pick up during the campaign tell a far more interesting story than the repetitive missions we play. The open world is indeed a barren and boring pile of boredom. There's zero biome diversity with no weather effects. Even the tiny critters (that are moving at 30 FPS) are dumb as rocks - they literally jump in front of a moving Scorpion tank. Hell, the vegetation is barely there. Compare this world to that of The Witcher 3, a game that came out in 2015. The side missions remind me of Assassin's Creed 1 where you have 2-3 side missions that repeat ad nauseam. Naturally, all the neckbeard fanboys are calling this shit show "the best Halo game ever" and will lunge at your jugular if you dare criticise their god. But what really left me bewildered is how so many gaming journalists have the gall to give this game scores of 9 and 10. So here we are, a game that spent 6 years in development only to deliver an extremely mediocre and repetitive experience in singleplayer. It's a good thing the multiplayer is solid because that's its only saving grace. P.S. this game's performance is abysmally bad. I get 80-100 FPS indoors and 40-60 FPS outdoors on medium-high settings @1440p. Meanwhile, I can run Doom Eternal with everything maxed the fuck out at the same resolution and I get 140-220 FPS.
A large part of that is thanks to Microsoft trying to save money, instead of dedicated and commited devs, Microsoft forced contractors, people with highly varying creativity, commitment, investment and familiarity with the franchise were cycled in and out in by the hundreds adding up to thousands by the end in total. Microsoft in their attempt to save money, lost more money than they could have known by screwing the development.
I wouldn't say that's a fair comparison with matrix. For one, you're the one playing, not masterchief, and it's easy to die even on heroic. I definitely don't feel powerful in the game, and maybe a bit too weak sometimes. So everything in general feels threatening, especially those red hunters. The regular hunters are ok, but the red hunters are just unfair. As for the health regen mechanic, it's been in halo since the first game, and it suits the game more. Idk how they could change it without the player base having a massive outcry about it. It's a big change to make to the combat of the game. At most, maybe it would be alright to let shield start regenerating after you kill something, so you don't have to sit in cover waiting for it. Wouldn't be OP, especially for legendary difficulty, and I don't think it would be too far of a leap that halo fans, including myself, would hate it. I think halo infinite is good to play once, and then play a different game. Replayability definitely isn't there, unless you're a 100% completionist. The combat is very fun, but again it's not worth doing once you've done the campaign. Doom eternal is the main game to play nowadays for good combat. Agree with all the issues with open world, but I expected them to be there, because it's the only open world halo game, and halo games aren't about open world exploration. As a first person shooter I would give infinite a solid 8. It's good, but it does have issues that can't be ignored. I automatically give battlefield and cod games a 1, since they're just copy paste games. As a halo game it's a 6, which is better than halo 5, which I gave a 4. The only good thing in halo 5 is combat, and that's it xD. Definitely the worst halo game. I think halo infinite is a step above that, which is good. It shows 343 is willing to improve on their games. But infinite doesn't even touch a game like halo reach, or the first 2 halo games. Lastly, as for your performance, your pc might just not have good hardware. I run everything in halo infinite on high, and texture details on ultra, and it's smooth 60fps, outdoors or indoors. I do use vsync. Sometimes it might drop to the mid 50's if there are too many explosions around, but so far I have no complaints about how the game runs.
as a tryhard halo fan i agree with almost all of your points, the gameplay is a lot of fun although not a whole lot of variety to mix things up, but i wished they didn't stick with a single "biome", every other Halo title had plenty of variety in set pieces from deserts, swamps and snowy environments. I even wished wildlife to be a thing aside from rodents and avian, passive or not. Reach introduced Moa and Guta and while they didn't do much for gameplay it was still nice to encounter them during missions.
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
![[FULL] RETROSPECTIVE : Final Fantasy Tactics](/img/n.gif)
UPDATE: There was a small part where I said there weren't any scout troops, and I trimmed it out because of the occasional skirmishes you find. They aren't the exact thing I was trying to imply but since it wasn't clear, I cut it.
Join the Discord and meet more remarkable souls like yourself! discord.gg/F4u2R9Urfn
Mayo merch here! teespring.com/stores/underthemayo
Support me on Patreon. patreon.com/underthemayo
TH-cam Memberships to my channel now available, click the "Join" button.
Follow me on Twitch at twitch.tv/underthemayo.be/HCQ_N571VAA
How much for your though?
Don't care plus halo better then ur favourite game
I Enjoy the hell out of it.
Sad that Microsoft cared more to milk players with free to play baloney than actually releasing a complete AAA game at launch.
I love Halo, Halo CE is probably my favorite FPS of all time, but it should've ended with Reach and the departure of Bungie.
343I just can't match the Bungie Halo games. Even Halo MCC was a disaster at launch in 2014.
Same for Gears of War, should've stopped with Judgement.
Ah well, I hope they don't mess up the Perfect Dark reboot.
Do you think you can give your thoughts on Warhammer 40k Space marines and it's sequel coming next year?
I personally really enjoyed the campaign, but I'd be lying if I didn't want a more linear campaign with open levels like Halo 3 with big cinematic set pieces and more environmental variety.
like ff7 remake the world of previous of halo games were open world linear levels or semi open world linear worlds. It allows for more meaningful content and much much better presentation.
Blows my mind you enjoyed it that much. It was good for me more ok a 6.5\10 but rather repetitive and souless open areas
Couldn’t agree more
Repetitive missions in campaign how the fuck did you enjoy it
@@TH-camrr285 ikr even ubisoft games have more creativity then this
As someone who loves Halo. Yall have to admit, had this been a game not called Halo launching with this level of content, nobody would let this fly.
As some who also loves Halo, I'm not gonna let this fly, even if it is called Halo. This shit sucks and I'm pretty fakkin pissed about it, tell ya the truth.
iunnor a lot of people aren’t letting it fly just look at the player base
The only Halo I accept is bungie's Halo. Not more, not less
i agree with a lot of stuff, but i must say i found it very refreshing to play an open world game with good combat and not a billion upgrades and stuff u have to unlock before the gameplay really gets going.
I agree, but i think one part of the open world game system that is intrinsically rewarding is progression and levelling up items and gear, even minor things like shallow armor/ammo upgrade trees can be rewarding. without it, its kinda bland.
@@javiiibot5887 infinite does have that though. You have your ability upgrades
@@tristen9736 and holy fuck are the upgrades strong
@@javiiibot5887 ehhh not really those tend to be the worst open worlds IMO. The dev time spent on making the open world could've been used to improve combat, further mechanics, improve enemy ai, improve level design, add more enemy variety, etc to many many games. The games quite literally pad their content out through the progression usually leading to generally lackluster combat to systems and ideas that aren't as fully realized in terms of gameplay. Basically any ubisoft game and even some of the more mainstream games like spiderman ps4 and the batman series (given I really appreciate the story and the combat/some bosses of spiderman and batman are pretty solid in those games in particular but screw ubisoft games).
The contributions most open-world make (pretty much all Ubisoft ones) are: do you want to spend time backtracking between missions and do monotonous combat loops.
Then there's the other end of the spectrum that use open worlds as a means for mechanical creativity, adventurism, or a LOT of rpg mechanics and choices ie don't starve, minecraft, terraria, subnautica (basically most survival games that are good), the outer worlds, the witcher 3, disco elysium, (basically really good rpgs that are furthered in player choice by the world), breath of the wild, metal gear solid 5, nier automata, shadow of the colossus, maybe elden ring, borderlands 2, monster hunter world, and horizon zero dawn (games who use the open world as a means for the combat to shine in its creativity, scale, and options which is REALLY hard to pull off)
Not progressing in a open world ? Must be super boring and not appealing at all ...
I really relate to your point about the game needing a story recap of somekind. More games should add a library that contains all the lore of a long running series. Games like guilty gear strive having it made it so i could appreciate the story of the new one despite being my first GG game. That would benefit everyone, especially new players
Devil may cry 5 had a good recap menu option
@@underthemayo oh yeaaaah. I didn't need it cause i played the other games but that just shows how good it is for new players
Was hoping the database was that in infinite a guide to weapons vehicles enemies lore and characters.
Dooms database puts it to shame and doom doesn't even need it lmao.
Thats what we need more comparison between these effin shooty games lol
@@underthemayo actually 343 specified that even I think the IGN reviewer specified that instead of making a fresh new start they continued from Halo 5 right after the legendary ending.
And it's not really that hard to understand Halo lore.
Because if you watch one two three videos from hidden Xperia you probably catch up the speed .
I can honestly say, I agree with this wholeheartedly. Every franchise considering most of them are on title number 10 by now (exaggeration but you get the point) should come with their own recap. If the entire story up to that point. It would benefit new fans to the franchise immensely. Plus, fill in gaps for the diehard fans. (Hey, we make mistakes too.)
Being up to date with the Halo story wouldn't have really helped. The game starts halfway into it's own story and doesn't tell you what happened at the start until the end. Crucial plot details are hidden in miss-able audio logs.
The way they told it sucks.
its like master chief is late to the party lol, what a joke this storytelling
I doubt telling it straight would have made this glorified fanfiction seem any better.
@@Spillow-C that would've been legit though. Having a game like ODST but with Chief. They could've taken inspiration from the short story called "Head Hunters" where, get this, a pair of Spartan 3's do guerilla warfare behind enemy lines with little hope for survival and even encounter elites.... _with red energy swords_ . Eh?
There's too much handwaving. "Oh the spartans are all dead, no you don't see, or experience this in anyway but we have crackly annoying audio logs instead"
"the infinity got fucked up by scrapyard trash wielding space monkeys despite surviving a forerunner dyson sphere and the didact, yeah makes total sense."
"remember the flood? one of gaming's most terrifying enemies that brought the forerunner to their demise and have the ability to warp space and time? yeah there's a new thing thats worse, how? just believe us.
20:00 ding ding
That’s one of my main issues of the campaign. It’s too afraid of having the player rely on level design and sandbox
I understand your dislikes with Halo Infinite. I love the campaign personally, but I can see why you don't feel the same. I have been a Halo fan for almost all of my life, and I can handle opinions against Halo. Respect to you, my guy.
+respect
Meanwhile, r/halo: “if you disagree with me about this game you’re subhuman”
Brainwashed fanboy
@@thatonemetalhead4176 bruh what
@@thatonemetalhead4176 What?
Trust me even if you had been a Halo nerd (like me) this game has no story whatsoever. Big green man shoots the aliens on a hoola hip is the game and the story was forgotten.
Agree 100%. I struggled to want to beat this game on legendary because it was so much of the same. When I reached that mission where you had to reconstruct the forerunner sequence FOUR times, I took a day break to mentally recharge. It was exhausting, and reminded me of other open world games from last generation (I guess this generation since it released on Xbox one). I'm not a Halo fan either, but I give each release (in reason) the benefit of the doubt. You're rewarded with basically nothing for completing this game, and my mind reflected that nothingness. A surprisingly shallow game that took 6 years to release, maybe another delay was needed? Game doesn't even have coop, let alone a mission select feature.
the open world feels very lonely and depressing. i feel like there should have been more on release than there actually are! Like why not add something like when we save the marines we get materials for the main base and it can be developed the pelican could pick up vehicles from the base instead of appearing out of thin air with a scorpion tank . maybe we could even have some raids with a big convoy of marines fucking over big bases etc! how awesome would that be? Surely it wouldn't be impossible considering how many squads we save in the game!
@Epic no it’s because the open world is lifeless
@Epic in the trailer it wasn't empty but in the game it is.
I was expecting Gmanlives level of shitting on the game just because it's not your cup of tea but damn you got some pretty solid points that i didn't even realise until you said them.
I love Halo, i grew up with it but Infinite really feels off.
Thank god for the weapons and gunplay because without them, it would be the first Halo game i didn't finish (and i finished 5).
Yeah his (Gman) video was kind of laughable
@@phant0mdummy It’s one thing to not like Isolation, it’s another to call one of the most acclaimed horror games “objectively bad”. The internet needs to stop beating a dead horse with the word objective.
@@phant0mdummy alien isolation is trash dude
@@phant0mdummy that's one thing I've noticed that kinda get on my nerves with mayo, not to sound like a broken record but judging by his video on how he'd "fix halo infinite" it seems like his criticisms can boil down to "it needs to be more like doom" personally I have no problem with him wanting more doom I love the game too but it seems like he wants other games to drop mechanics that's been a staple in the series just to make the game more fast pace and have more doom like mechanics, like he wants every game to appeal to his tastes rather then judge it as it is, as a normal person playing the game that's more then understandable but as a review it just seems wrong to me
@@Mr.Scott86 Exactly what i thought
You hit the nail on the head at 11:03. I realize that having the marines pilot vehicles may not have been possible in an open world setting, but I feel like they could have at least made it work in specific set pieces. This game never comes close to the epic multi-vehicle battles we saw in Halo 3.
That’s a fact. very disappointed that a marine couldn’t drive another in the rocket hog while I piloted the tank in the road mission
@@phant0mdummy driving in programmed “random” routes in a city or town isn’t the same as infinites terrain.
Memories of "I bet my Brute chopper can take out both if those wraiths." *Gets deleted on Legendary
@@MrRastawannabe Disappointing for sure! When that mission starts, the classic theme starts playing, then I'm handed a squad of Marines, a rocket hog, and Scorpion, getting me all geared up for a battle like the end of The Covenant.
I wouldn't be surprised if marine driven vehicles were still in the game when that mission was planned.
@@phant0mdummy you have no idea how game design works
My only problem with the campaign is that it needs more, it feels like they just put the bare minimum for an open world and called it a day. Also, every mainline entry switches things up with enemy types, the original trilogy has flood and 4 & 5 have prometheans. It’s not the worst thing since Reach and ODST have only one enemy faction, but it feels weird in a master chief game not to have an enemy mixup that makes you have to rethink your approach to enemies.
Yeah I thought the endless were going to be that wild card but they are actually just banished sniper drones
It isn’t bad that it lacks a third or fourth enemy faction, but that would make the game better.
@@user-ns4zm8qe9p I don’t think those were the endless, I think they were something else
tbf odst was a spinoff and reach had a lot more of different ranks for each species but i get your point
Halo Infinite was confirmed to be a 10 year project and we are getting campaign DLC and it was believed to be called Halo: The Endless but it hasn’t been fully confirmed.
i think the focus has shifted entirely to the multiplayer aspect of halo. The first one was a campaign then an added multiplayer mode. This one seems like multiplayer then they added a campaign later to tick the box
Ah well, Quake reboot when?
I mean sure but if thats the case than what did the they work on for the past 5 years ? The Multiplayer is so barebones that it doesnt even have seperate gamemode selection. To me it very much seems like they were developing single and multiplayer at the same time but neither made any real progress. Remember: They delayd this Game like 3 times, its very likely that microsoft just said :"Push it out the door cause we are bleeding money on this product and this needs to make atleast some kind of profit. Fix the rest later"
Gotta get that microtransaction/cosmetic storefront working Day 1.
No campaign co op or forge. Remember when you bought a game and actually came complete? 5 years man...
12:18 - 12.40
I read an article sometime ago that basically said open world games nowadays are designed less like Super Mario 64 and more like Donkey Kong 64. If that's the case, they sound empty and overly spacious.
Yeah isn’t that just the Ubisoft model
I agree with a lot of the points made in this video, but your criticisms of Halo's health system are pretty shortsighted. Acting like the game stops for 6 seconds when your shield pops is disingenuous, and all I need to point to is the Raleigh qualifier being streamed right now and how pro players squeeze every drop of game value out of every second in a match, even when on the verge of death. When the player's shield breaks and becomes headshot-vulnerable, the player is incentivised to modulate their play to be defensive. Note that doesn't mean the player is compelled to crouch behind a box and zone out for six seconds. Behind cover you can throw grenades, reposition using movement abilities to get flanks, you can peek cover rapidly to deal consistent but reduced damage while avoiding it yourself, grapple an adjacent coil and peek out to dink a brute that's pushing you, or just to reload your guns and plan your next move. The sandbox gives you tools to make effective use of your time regardless of whether or not your shields are up. It's up to the player to take advantage of those tools. Sorry for the soapbox, luv your content.
TLDR: Halo shields good
The halo shields is tricky between the bungie and 343 era...
Bungie's shield is stronger but sacrifice movement speed
While
343 shield is weak(also health) but pumped the mobility.
"TLDR: Halo shields good"
Slight caveat:
Halo shields are good...
...for console shooters.
What made Halo work so well was that it was designed from the ground up to be a console shooter; the aim assist stuff first implemented in Halo 1 was (and I say this as a PC snob) very well done, and to this day, Halo 1 is actually really fun to play... on a controller.
For a PC shooter player though, playing Halo with mouse and keyboard feels painfully slow, and the shield mechanic makes it feel even slower. Because Halo isn't about twitch reflexes and insane agility the way PC shooters are; it's about the strategy of positioning, weapon choice and movement more like playing a vehicle combat game.
Essentially, the shield mechanic works in Halo because Halo is about maintaining lock on a target and timing your survival window so that the target dies before you do, and using movement to ensure that your survival window happens at the right moment. It does not work from a PC shooter perspective, because PC shooters are about ACQUIRING target lock, and evading it, not necessarily maintaining it.
But, yeah, speaking as someone who tried playing the MCC with mouse and keyboard before realising how it's meant to be played... Halo feels depressingly, cripplingly slow compared to PC shooters, until you use a controller, at which point it all works wonderfully. And the shield mechanic accentuates this.
@@NicholasBrakespear Gotta agree, it almost gives the game a confusing pace to my pc shooter brain where I'm moving with the grappling hook and using the dash and scanning to peak corners efficiently and it all just... stops as soon as the enemies have a decent line of sight to me, especially if they're hitscan. The start stop pace is great for controller because a typical fight in PC oriented shooters is continuous and thus hard and exhausting to execute when you constantly need to be changing targets and moving erratically. It's better than it was in the past with the addition of the grappling hook, but Halo will always feel like a console shooter to me with this health system.
Higher difficulties exacerbate the problem as well, leading to difficulty being a measure of how slow and tedious you want the game to have to be played. You have some wiggle room on normal, a little on heroic, and no fun allowed on legendary.
Also I think this system is fine in multiplayer because you're under pressure when you're recharging shields pretty often. It's a test of your skill, observation, and movement to recharge your shield in that context. There's lots of spots in this game's campaign (especially in the open world) where you can grab precision weapons and a shield stripping weapon of some kind and just absolutely mow down hordes of enemies without even moving or thinking other than clicking heads. Jackal snipers seem almost intentionally placed to slow you down and play this way. It's less of a problem in the boss fights because most of the bosses rush you straight out of cover so you are forced to move and use your equipment.
All of this is totally just my opinion though, it's fine if anyone disagrees.
@@BigBait12 One of the biggest obstacles I faced getting used to Halo multiplayer (and that's leaving aside the fact that I had to start using a controller, because aim assist favours controllers so heavily in multiplayer) was that in a PC shooter like Unreal Tournament... I could deliberately, knowingly leap into combat with 5 health, and rely solely upon my agility to kill at least one person before I die.
In fact, having played UT99 for years, my muscle memory and spatial awareness is such that I can toy with opponents and just dance around them, not getting hit.
In Halo multiplayer though, I would charge into combat with the same assumption - that I could gain an edge by clever dodging - and found that... it simply didn't work. Aim assist plus slow movement meant I could strafe all I liked; they'd track my movements easily.
So I had to mentally adjust to the notion of only attacking when I knew I had a weapon advantage, or an angle advantage.
It's a valid game design, and an interesting change of pace... but the Halo games really should have a "plays best with controller" warning on them, on PC.
@@NicholasBrakespear nope, halo 1 was made to be a computer shooter. Then the other releases were console focused.
Mayo just needs to put the black eye skull on and boom he gets his glory kill health regen!
Shh he mustn’t know
I love Halo Infinite's campaign. The freedom of the sandbox allowed me to choose a huge variety of interesting and challenging ways to take encounters, but I agree with your major points. Halo Infinite doesn't hold you accountable to play in the fun ways, and I do find myself wishing for more Halo 1 style large, semi-linear levels instead of one huge open world.
the writing is awful, like a 13 year old drama student wrote it. worst attempts in history of tugging at my heart strings and just making me die of cringe instead. my god i had to shower and gargle to wash away the writing.
@@SobeCrunkMonster to bad I actually liked it 🤷🏽♂️
I liked it too, they played it very safe tho. But it was more of a peace offering to CE fans and a way to unite the old Halo community. If you jumped into halo post H2-H3 this story will most likely go over your head, pretty much all dialogue had nods back the OG trilogy.
@@kingnothingvi2347 fr I think this is hands down the best halo game 343 has made
@@SobeCrunkMonster yeah the reviews that are saying it's good are full of shit as usual never trust and believe reviews like ign.
While I love the idea of FOB's, I agree that being able to spawn an infinite number of tanks and heat seeking rocket launchers really breaks the game. I think a much better system would be that everything you call in had to be found in the world and stored at the base. Once it's gone, it stays gone until you find another. It would be more balanced and more rewarding for exploration. Or they could have a simple currency/resource type thing too.
That or some sort of currency from kills or dematerializing vehicles.
I was confused why there would be so many spots with power weapons like snipers scattered throughout the map (which I find when getting all the collectables) when I can just spawn those snipers at a FOB.
@@PlainOlSoapBar Exactly. Halo has always been about finding unique or extra firepower by exploring the levels. This would make even more since for an open world, but the FOB system as it is implemented contradicts that by giving those rewards through a checklist of samey activities, but it could still be designed in a way that it doesn't have to.
Hell fucking no. I don't wanna waste time finding shit over and over again
I loved the campaign, it’s far better than the other two efforts from 343, probably my 4th favourite game behind 2,1 and 3. But it does have issues, I was disappointed there were no scarabs, a lack of different enemies. Banished are fun as hell to fight but we needed something else (flood) lack of set piece vehicle battles, the side missions had more of this than the actual campaign, the part towards the end was excellent and exactly what I wanted, but we needed more. Just a few negatives for me in an overall fantastic game. One which I can’t see how can be described as empty.
It's because he's a new potential fan. Not a diehard loyalist to the franchise. Us diehard fans can't see these issues because we are blinded by loyalty. All his points are valid, if you set aside your fanboyism. And no, I'm not bashing you. I'm literally just saying, take a step back, and walk in his shoes. His points make perfect sense. And I've been a fan of Halo since the OG days. As with you, I started with Halo CE. I have read every novel that has been released. But if I seperate myself from the franchise, his points make perfect sense.
Don't knock the new fans. They are doing more good for this franchise then we ever will. As they have absolutely no investment in the franchise. To compare it in a better way, come at him with Doom. You didn't play Doom since Doom 95. You started with 2016 or Eternal. You, can see all the criticisms and issues he may have missed because he's a loyal slayer fan. See where I'm going with this?
We got the endless now
@@xPreatorianx1 bro I am a new Halo fan thanks to Infinite. I agree with all the critics' points but I don't think it's fair to paint the game in such an overall bad light. The worst crimes of Infinite are a few stupid bosses (something a lot of great FPS games have done) and wasting development resources in a shallow and homogeneous open world that could have been invested in better level design (I think some levels are BAD, I'll acknowledge it). Even the harshest of critics praise the combat for how incredibly fun it is sometimes. That's why I don't mind the open world, neither I mind the repetitive missions, it is just an excuse to play more of such amazing combat. For me Halo Infinite's strengths outweight it's weaknesses, especially considering how much more fundamental good combat is to Halo (instead of a rich open world, something it doesn't even need).
Halo 2 was a terrible game level design wise.
@@allhailthewhale1423 not as bad as Infinite, or 4, or 5 tho
i only play halo infinite for its fantastic gameplay, ive played halos 1,2 and 3 and 4 eventho i hated 4 for its poor gameplay. Ive also played A LOT of doom games, doom 1, 2, a bit 3, all the way to the reboots. As a person who put a lot of his life in doom and halo, i love both franchises, but i can see where you're coming from, mayo.
I liked halo 5 better than 4 but still not a good game i'm a fan of both franchises but imo doom takes the crown these days.
10:21 As some one who has played all the games extensively and read a few of the books I can sefely say i felt the same.
The game felt like a JJ abrams movie like the force awakens all set up for later with next to no pay off
20:11 Littrally the first mission I found BR that BR has never left my inventory since I got it and I have done all the side missions I have all the skulls all audio logs spartan caches ect. Along with a fully completed campaign...no other Halo title would of aloud for that and they would been enough preasure in the sandbox to make me switch it which infinte didn't have I did my first run on heroic.
And I never felt hard pressed enough to switch it and the weapon itself with the easy ammo recovery through the kinetic ammo droppers mean I have a weapon which can clear 80% of enemies no problem with minimal shots fired and near infinte ammo
That's interesting. I figured only newcomers would feel that way.
Also played all halo games (though never finished 5) more of a multiplayer guy but this way also my experience- just loaded up a BR + Sword/Hammer every time- sure I swapped out the secondary when it ran out but there was enough ammo to always keep the BR
Using the Force Awakens to describe this story is pretty accurate. They played it a bit too safe.
@@underthemayo definitely not. I felt the same way. I’m a lifelong fan, specifically the original trilogy are my favorite games of all time. I also love halo reach a lot. I did not like 34 threes titles, and this new one doesn’t change that much…
I remember in a lot of the great missions from halos 1 through 3, the game wouldn't always give me whatever weapon I wanted. I had to pick from among the options available and figure out a strategy. Especially on legendary playing solo. Sounds like that isn't the case at all on infinite. 👎
Thats the problem, you cant play aggressive on legendary, they almost one shot you
I want to do legendary, but idk. The hunters are brutal af. The red ones I mean. They're absolutely overpowered.
@@infinitedeath1384 They're absolute fucking nutbusters on Heroic already. I can't even imagine fighting them on Legendary, holy shit.
@@bucket9486 I would need the glitched tank cannon to deal with those on legendary xD. If you dont know about it, look up "halo infinite tank cannon glitch."
As someone who only played the game on Legendary, this is very much wrong. Infinite is probably the only halo game where an aggressive playstyle is actually reliable on Legendary.
@@evrimenustun9548 All the halo games are arguably doable with an aggressive playstyle on legendary, if you use plasma pistol and pistol/dmr/br combo. Well except against forerunners.
So we will give you an energy hammer and then leave you in an open field with nothing to use it against and the enemies are far from and can snipe from a mile away. Btw the coolest guns are useless, so you have to stick to the boring ones. You know what just throw things at the enemy because the guns are just the same
I wish this game brought back the hybrid health and shield system from the first game. It gave you flexibility but you still had to watch your health and seek health packs
Thank you. Since the game came out, something about it felt off for me. I was disappointed even without playing it and I couldn't put my finger on exactly why.
Unfortunately, since the game came out, almost everyone's reviews are overwhelmingly positive. Everyone is constantly praising the open world and grappling hook and "it's just like the second mission of Halo but the whole game". No one is really talking about the issues with the game or pointing out ANYTHING negative, like they're afraid to be disappointed again because the last two games were crap and they've been waiting 6 years for this.
No is talking about how there is a complete lack of variety in environments. Previous games had mountains, snow, jungles, deserts, forerunner, covenant and human structures, whereas this game has one single tree and grass biome, which is extremely boring. You don't go to any amazing impressive locations cause the whole game takes place on one small piece of the ring. In previous games you would go to multiple places throughout the ring.
No one is talking about how the switch to open world takes away a huge part of what made Halo so great. There's no epic skyboxes with battles going on making you feel like you're in an actual war. There's no scripted cinematic moments, no impressive set pieces, no moments where you join up with a whole squad of marines with vehicles and drive into battle like in Halo 2, 3 and Reach.
No is talking about how the game is extremely repetitive, has a complete lack of atmosphere, as you said the world is dead. Nothing is happening anywhere ever except for the bases.
I don't hate the game and I do plan on playing it and judging it for myself, but it's about time someone reviewed the game without nostalgia goggles.
They tried so hard to make the game look and feel like Combat Evolved, but for some reason they stuck to specifically and only the second mission where you drive around and help some marines. It's like they forgot the the mission after that had cliffs, and the control room has snow, and 343 guilty spark had jungles.
When I was a teenager I always wanted an open world halo exactly because of those amazing skyboxes and the feeling that there was so much going on outside the levels you were playing in. Unfortunately the general understanding of what an open world game is has changed quite a bit since then, as have the business models that fund development.
The open world aspect does feel tacked on. Like, if this were like MGS5 where you take on side quests to upgrade your bases, weapons, vehicles and manage the marines, then the open world could feel justified. Also, the ammo refill stations caused me to always carry a Battle Rifle to every Encounter. And who can deny the effectiveness of the Sentinel Beam Marine Razorback?
But overall, I still enjoyed Halo Infinite. Hopefully 343 can get there shit together and have a smoother development for the next Halo game.
This man speaks my mind. I could never really enjoy the game for the exact reasons mayo listed. But it’s still a great game, for again, the reasons he mentioned.
@coolasf1 if they put the same ui from 2016 in eternal, it would be perfect
Wait how dafuq did you comment this 8 years ago???
@coolasf1 no, only the ui.
@@Slavic_Snake Read again
@@Slavic_Snake "Samuel Hayden • 8 years ago" is his account's name 😅
As a Halo fan, I have to agree with this video.
Your comment on the FOBs going against the core of Halo was very poignant. Halo designs its challenges around the idea that you have to chose which 2 weapons you'll be carrying with from the selection that's left on the battlefield. You can't always have what you want. Sure the ability to chose out of every weapon gives self expression, but it comes at the cost of how the franchise is fundamentally designed.
Halo has never been a game where every weapon is desirable at all times. Sure a plasma pistol is great against shields, but it's terrible against cannon fodder. Whereas a rocket launcher is just good and is significantly more desirable than the plasma pistol. Even in situations where the plasma pistol does its job well. As such, if you can chose between a rocket launcher and a plasma pistol at any point, you'll pick the rockets.
But in previous games, the plasma pistol is super common whereas the rockets are only in a select few areas, so you're more inclined to save the rockets for when you need them and rely on the pistol in the meantime (as an example). Now it seems like you can just grab rockets whenever you want.
And then take those rockets into the same copy paste meaningless side missions over and over.
I'm torn on this point. On one hand i feel like the abilty to pick whatever weapon i want doesn't feel very much like Halo, while on the other hand i feel like, the game doesn't let me use my favorite weapons enough. I really enjoyed the Striker Sidekick Pistol, so once i unlocked it, i kept bringing it into all subsequent storymissions. But the game didn't really give me any means to keep it on me, despite giving me the option to bring it. During Story missions, ammo crates are few and far between and regular pistols don't restock the Striker's ammo, so i had to either drop it right at the beginning, after emptying it, never getting it back (because it's only obtainable at FOBs) or carry an empty gun around half the mission until i find a crate.
I feel like the game doesn't really know what it wants to do with the system.. either drop it completely or make it more viable, but the way it is now, it feels just as torn as i am.
doom ethernal is everything that halo game wants to be but fails from 2007 to today.
@Mister Majestic gameplay loop
🐢
@Mister Majestic your mom
These videos just aren’t the same without the like/dislike bar indicating how many people agree/disagree with your thoughts
With some of the points you've made, I would really like to see your opinion on Halo 3:ODST (since it is open world with linear missions but of course the world is smaller and I guess the campaign is shorter) comparing both games, but I can understand if you never do it, because all the problems you have with the franchise gameplaywise, also pretty sure you can only play it on PC by getting The Master Chief Collection. Still, I think it would be interesting to hear your opinion
Bro ive been playing halo since 2001. Ive read the books.
Youre review is spot on. I felt exactly the same way as you. The deeper i went into the game the more i realized it was soulless and wasnt going to improve
There's apparently going to be Story Expansions throughout the intended 10 year plan but if the Main Story feels like we are not only missing an entire game in between the last and the quality feeling already like a DLC then there is almost no hope to be discovered that they'll deliver
That's what happens with these so-called "10 year plans": They release a fraction of a full game now and take a long time to deliver content that could've already been in the game if they delayed the release while people spend money on skins for online multiplayer in between updates.
Oh boy… the irony after so many fans trashed Bungie for Destiny’s shortcomings.
@@revenant097 yeah this is literally destiny all over again
Is there any "10 year plan" that has actually come to fruition? I can't think of one, but I don't follow those kinds of games very closely.
The lack of imagination in level/environment design becomes so apparent even after a few hours in. There are two environments after the brute ship at the start; pacific northwest America, and chrome interiors. Hell, every single level in the forerunner areas follows the same formula of "go through corridors, find a switch without power, find the power seed, bring it over and plug it in, then activate the switch". One part even has you do it 4 or 5 times in the same mission.
It is legit halo CE level design and CE was the first halo game which came out 20 years ago xD
@@ciandelaney61 Even CE had more biome diversity than Infinite.
@@ciandelaney61 The game reminds me of that halo ce level where your driving in warthogs early game. Except just a really big consistent version of it.
True , it dose get quite repetitive after a wile in that aspect and become a bit of a grind . Sadly I expected that when I knew there was going to be one major biome only.
That's the issue usually with big open worlds, it can still be fun though , the sandbox of combat is great . Despite the repetitivenes of the environment, you can still make it fun for yourself , granted i preffer much more to have variety ofc .
@@Kspice9000 Yea that's what Infinity is so far , is those more non linear open sandboxes, where you could use vehicles as well but turn into one big sadbox for the hole game almost . Not necessarily a legit bad thing imo bc it is an evolution of that technically but it definitely needed more biome diversity at least .
Glad there will be dlc expansion that hopefully will add the needed variety .
The static nature of the open world is, I think, actually one of the game's biggest stumbling points. Because if they'd introduced more dynamic BIG events going on, even if they were temporary, a largely uniform map would feel very much alive, and all the game's other flaws would fade into irrelevance.
For example, in the remarkably solid Mad Max game, in addition to the static map objectives of things to capture and discover... there were convoys. Big convoys of trucks. They'd zoom around a large area, on a lengthy patrol route. They weren't hugely dynamic - they would run laps around their track forever if left alone. But they were large enough in scale that, like the threat of a freight train slamming into you, they represented a seemingly dynamic element that could interact and converge with other gameplay elements, and they created the illusion of life and activity in the world that was independent of your interactions with it.
In Halo Infinite, I see ships in the sky... doing nothing. I see a damaged ring world that looks like it should be in a precarious state of collapse, but is instead frozen in place. If the game featured armoured columns patrolling at random; if it featured huge ships occasionally launching attacks from the sky when the Master Chief escalated combat to a sufficient degree; if it featured marching armies that would attempt to recapture bases, or environmental effects like electrical storms triggered by failing forerunner technology, or earthquakes, or rogue weather suddenly covering the landscape in snow... if the world pulsed and writhed with activity, even if it didn't ever make permanent changes to the map (like, say, a Scarab flattening an entire FOB so that it no longer exists at all), just this animation of the existing world would surely make its uniformity irrelevant.
In Deep Rock Galactic, the mission selection map changes on a regular basis - with different biomes, different regions, cycling their availability. What if parts of Halo Infinite's map became dangerously hostile at certain times - what if the presence of a huge warship directly overhead meant that any hostile activity below would be punished harshly?
It wouldn't take much to truly "finish" this game. But sadly it bears all the hallmarks of being remarkably polished... for something that deserved another year of heavy development.
The thing with the health issue is that Halo has already solved that problem, THREE TIMES.
In the first Halo, you have shield and health, shielding regenerates on its own, but you needed to find health packs to refill your actual health. This was changed from Halo 2 onward, this was changed so that both health and shields regenerate, although independently of each other, if you start regenerating shield and health and you take a single bullet, your shield stops recharging but your health continues to regen since it didn't take damage.
Halo 3: ODST & Halo Reach both reverted the health system back to the Halo CE style, re-strengthening the old dynamic between weapons that deal better damage to shields vs health. That being, if you're health has already taken a hit throughout your fights, then you're better off searching for a health pack than waiting around for someone with a plasma weapon to come around and tear down you shields, leaving your 2 points of health as easy pickings.
Of course, this has consequences in the multiplayer, having both shields and health regenerate is far healthier for Halo than needing to have health packs in the map. Health packs become inevitable choke points that draw in players, distracting from the gamemode objective and slowing down gameplay, worst case scenerio: the players good at camping out health spawns make going for them entirely pointless and everyone ignores them anyway.
And it's not like hiding behind cover works all the time in multiplayer either, your opponents are fully capable of running up on you and gunning you down while you're weakened, the smartest thing to do while trying to regen health to to continuously move throughout available safe points on the map, keeping distance from where you know or can assume enemies will be, and moving in right as your health is at a safe level again. All this avoids having the player track down a health kit everytime they're badly hurt and inevitably being gunned down by the stream of other players doing the same thing, in a situation where the first one who sees an enemy is the one who wins.
I think healthpacks are good because they draw away from the objective. TF2 and overwatch just do it way better than halo did.
@@keilafleischbein59 Health packs are annoying and pointless. They come from a bygone era of arena shooters where that was the norm. You might like it and that's fine, but the vast majority of people (especially younger audiences) hate it.
@@Lrg3Topping health packs are not annoying and pointless, nor are they bygone.
TF2
Overwatch
DOOM Eternal
Sea of Thieves
Fortnite
All those modern and POPULAR games have health packs and use them well. And it's not just an older audience. Kids love healthpacks and shield potions in Fortnite.
You just want to pretend they're bygone because you want to make excuses for 343. Even bungie's last two halo games returned to health packs. 343 just doesn't know what to do with them.
@@Lrg3Topping healthpacks need to be reinvented as an equipment drop. You can hold onto a health pack at full health and save it for later. That would be how infinite could evolve health in halo instead of stagnating to the bygone era of halo 2 and 3 where healthpacks just don't exist.
@@keilafleischbein59 I still think the dominant strategy would be to hang back and pick everything off in that scenario, Doom is brilliant because your ability to regain health is directly tied to your ability to keep moving and getting up close. In CE you were encouraged to get aggressive on higher difficulties because there were very few long range weapons that could pop elite shields(the sniper is actually the only one) efficiently. The Magnum was not an effective shield stripper and was better used as a finishing weapon, the most effective shield strippers in the game were actually only viable at medium to close range so a lot of times hanging back would actually just stagnate combat encounters especially when you factor in how Elites had very strong AI that was constantly moving around making it difficult to kill them from afar and the fact that Halo CE had very low magnetism/tracking compared to later installments.
I still think health packs work because they actually forced you to strategically mange your health and take calculated risks which only enhanced CEs more aggressive play style but i think infinites problems are much deeper when it comes to encouraging aggressive play. Nearly every weapon is long range capable and weapons like the pulse carbine allow you to strip shields at a distance. So realistically there's never a reason to get aggressive which is why infinite may feel like a duck and cover shooter
I respect your opinion here, personally this is my favourite game this year, but your points did get me thinking about how this Halo compares to others
Your delusional, halo infinite is reflection on the current state of AA games and how they lost touch with their audience. There just any soul to the game it feels bland all the way through
@@ganggang2537 I've played every Halo game 20 times over, Halo 5 didn't feel like Halo, this did
@@bazzer360 worst halo ever.
@@manz7860 and that's your opinion
I think you went a bit easy on the bosses in Infinite, they all just boil down to being bullet sponges with 1 or 2 gimmicks that are countered by spamming your ever-present equipment abilities rather than through engaging with the wider sandbox.
Take the mainline Elite bosses for example, all you do to beat them is spam the threat sensor and grappleshot to reveal them when they are invisible and to get out of their melee range, what if instead you had to use the limited supplies in the arena to deal with them in varied ways;
You run out of threat sensor and grappleshot charges so you have to use other strategies like hitting them with the disruptor when they uncloak for an attack to make them take DOT thus sparking their shields even when they are invisible, or you could carpet their last known location in fire by utilising fusion coils or the ravager's alt fire to reveal them, or there could be specific environmental elements like tesla coils that you could shoot with a shock rifle to charge them up and create defensive areas within the arena that you can catch your breath and take stock in.
I feel that, with how much Halo Infinite has returned to Halo's identity as a sandbox interaction driven FPS, all the bosses throughout the campaign are massively missed opportunities to have some really unique and engaging gameplay.
I may be going too easy on them, that's fair. But it's one of the only times where I felt like using multiple things at once was being asked of me in some way. Using threat sensor AND grapple hook, with throwable explosives, that's not bad. Good starting point at least.
They aren’t just bullet sponges.
Overall problem is the game is too character driven instead of setting driven. Halo 1 is the perfect example of a setting driven story -- the Halo world is the story. Characters are largely irrelevant. A level like 343 Guilty Spark is the perfect example of story telling without characters.
Gameplay is great though. Beat it on legendary, which was a good challenge but never unfair.
The turrets is lethal as hell and the hunters are no joke.
Very nice video.
Pretty much everyone who's played Infinite has said that they like the implementation of the grappling hook and how it expands the player's options within the weapon sandbox, and I agree. The new updates to the Halo sandbox were much appreciated.
Your boss analysis also resonates with me, about how they're designed to push players to gain more understanding of the sandbox mechanics, especially at higher difficulties. Aside from the Monitor boss, of course.
As a Halo veteran who's played all main games except Halo 5 (watched the cutscenes online and understood the community reaction), I completely understand and agree with your thoughts on the story's implementation. The developers stated that the story was meant to be a mystery appealing to both veterans and newcomers... and that resulted in a mildly frustrating experience for veterans who were wondering what exactly happened with Cortana and Atriox after everything that happened in the Halo universe post Halo 5 (there was a lot of extended reading and it was very dubious), and I can definitely see how newcomers would be scratching their heads at all of the lore dumps.
The emotional beats between Chief, the Weapon and the pilot were enough to keep me invested, but the overarching conflict with the Banished, Endless and the Harbinger wasn't very impressive as not much was explained about them, other that they're dangerous and they need to be stopped. The current development plan is to use Halo Infinite as a stepping stone for 10 years' worth of Halo developments, which basically means a lot of story-related DLC, which I am not sure how to feel about.
'Huh, what, who?' was similar to what I felt at the end of the campaign. It was easy for to empathize with the main trio, but other than that, not much was accomplished because of all the blatant sequel hooks.
No, it's not you. The story was pretty dry compared to previous Halo titles with properly explained stakes and epic setpieces. Halo Infinite had a lot of rocky cliffs and long grey halls of Forerunner architecture. Pretty to look at, but not much biome variety.
I agree with you on the bland and lifeless state of the open world. Not as bad as what most people expect from Far Cry, but it doesn't offer much aside from giving players more reasons to play Halo Infinite.
The developers stated the side missions are completely optional, and it does show.
Your side quest idea actually sounded pretty exciting, and... from what I can tell, the developers structured the campaign the way they did because they were expected to revolutionize the Halo formula... and this was the result. They didn't have much faith in creating a linear campaign. Unfortunate, but it is what it is.
What I like about the Valor system is that it's simple to understand. I liked being able to unlock the Scorpion tank and the Wasp aerial vehicle. But once you unlock the Rocket Warthog, that's that and there's nothing else to do when the campaign is over.
Your statement about breaking Halo's design philosophy might be considered controversial... but I do understand the sentiment. The developers said they wanted the players to create their own awesome gameplay moments... when the actual implementation of the system lacked grounded context and meaning compared to the older setpieces of the past Halo titles. Using the weapons, you find on the battlefield instead of loading up everything you and your Marine squad need at the start of every side mission. Reclaiming UNSC territory on Installation 007 from the Banished doesn't have much meaning, and it shows.
The earlier Halo titles didn't have ammo crates, aside from one Halo: Combat Evolved set piece where there was a bunch of spare Rocket Launcher ammo for blowing up the reactors.
I didn't hear about two-thirds of the game being cut, but that feels accurate given the inevitable delays that occurred after the 'Craig' incident.
'1/3 of the map isn't even accessible outside the main mission': I noticed this, and so did a bunch of other people who wanted more out of the campaign. Kill walls have been in Halo since Halo Reach and Halo 4, and they tend to discourage exploration in a way that Halo: Combat Evolved never did.
There are a bunch of lore-related easter eggs for the lore enthusiasts, such as hints of what happened to the previously established characters, but looking back, what I loved most about Halo: Combat Evolved was fun, robust sandbox gameplay that went hand-in-hand with a grounded sense of exploration... in that there were different biomes and locations that were all given proper weight and context in-universe. I remember being amazed at the mission variety between the corridors of the Pillar of Autumn, the lush green hills of the mysterious ring world of Halo, the foreign, violet architect of the Truth and Reconciliation, the snowy canyons of the Control Room, and the murky swamp that surrounded the facility that housed the Flood.
So, Halo Infinite had fun gameplay, but everything else was so-so.
Thanks for a well thought out comment. A breeze to read. So far fans have been pretty understanding of where I'm coming from. We'll see as the days go on, if this gets any traction.
I'm literally a Halo fan, but even I noticed this game had the poor level design of a Far Cry game
As someone who really enjoys far cry games i don't think this style of level design fits halo.
This was exactly what I was thinking while playing the game. Halo infinite is just a far cry game set in the future with less stuff to do. That being said im still enjoying my time with infinite and i still find the far cry games entertaining
Yeah, the weapons and grapple are great. It's just the missions and levels aren't on par.
@@Aries0098 Exactly
I do really like the combat in Halo Infinite. 343 really did improve it from Halo 4 and 5 but the whole time playing this game I started calling it Far Cry: Combat Evolved. The world and the FOB points just felt really boring.
If I see another mention of bloody far cry...
It's like there's NO other open world games other than Far Cry. Jeezus.
I haven't played Any Far Cry and already I feel like I'm sick of it
@@RantRadio if you played Halo Infinite, you kinda played Far Cry.
I had a visceral emotional reaction to the title, but the worst part is that I agree with everything you say the more I think about it. After a while I just decided to ignore all the side stuff and blaze to the end, and that was a lot more enjoyable. It's frustrating that they spent so long on this game and the open world content is this bare bones. Makes my little halo heart sad:(
"I ignored everything intentionally"
"Man this is barebones" literally your fault and mayos fault. But I expect it from mayo, he enjoys mortalkombat and you have to be literally mental to like that trash
Finally someone who shares my thoughts.
Agreed
Basically, if you like Halo, you'll like Infinite. If you don't like Halo, this won't change your mind. It has the same sandbox cover shooter feel to it which is definitely the safest approach to get fans back in after 6 years. I did wish it innovated a bit more in its design. Eternal wasn't afraid to take risks in its design philosophy. Infinite definitely feels like it played the safest approach while adding some cool new stuff.
And I don't think it HAS to be that way. If this game had had 2 years more time to actually do what they wanted, even a non-fan like myself could have found a lot more here to enjoy.
@@underthemayo I think they could do this in the future but I think this safe approach was best for this game because if this game fell flat halo would be dead
@@underthemayo although I entirely understand your complaints with the story it is not friendly to non halo fans at all and the delivery isn’t the best but personally I love the setup it does feel like a jj Abrams movie where it just sets up for later movies but I’m fairly fine with that I’m just excited to get halo content with fun gameplay with a story that is not actively bad and harming the franchise
What if you love Halo and find Infinite to be a bit shit? The campaign is underwhelming for me and, bar 5, I've really enjoyed all the previous instalments.
I didn't like Halo and I enjoyed the shit out of Infinite's campaign, maybe because there are more movement options like the grapple shot, which is my favorite thing of the entire game
I had fun and enjoyed it. Feeling free to play doing whatever I wanted was very nice and I actually liked the way they designed their open world because I find very tedious how other games of that genre are made. It's pretty simple and to the point, just combat. Sure, as an experience it's not a better campaign than Halo 2 or 3, but the story was interesting to me and gave closure to Cortana's story. I understand your complaints tho, sorry to hear that
Halo is what it is.
I'm just surprised how poorly it runs on PC despite the graphical quality not being particularly outstanding.
I am a mega Halo fan and I had the exact same experience you did. I was expecting something on the level of Halo 3 again, nut what we got was another Halo 5 but ironically with some parts that are the anti thesis to H5.
It's a huge disappointment and I'm surprised most Halo fans actually liked it.
Mayo, you're completely right here.
I've been a diehard halo fan for as long as I've played video games, and as happy I am that this is by far the best halo campaign 343 has ever made, it's not really up to snuff for a halo campaign. This is by far the least replayable Halo game to date, it doesn't even offer much in terms of replayability. You need to start the campaign over to play against the bosses, which is by far one of the greatest strengths this game has (in most cases, some bosses are pretty weak in terms of gameplay and fun), and this game lacks so much of what made a Halo game such a fun experience.
The scenery never changes. The first Halo game had too much damn backtracking and even it had more environment variety, and what environments we have aren't even remotely alien aside from the giant metal columns protruding out of the ground. To even attempt that level of variety in an open world game would require either having a gigantic map, or taking advantage of the plot needing a broken apart halo ring. Why couldnt a chunk of the island be a desert and another snowy?
While the gameplay of this Halo is certainly some of the best, even it suffers from some of the decisions made by the game's format. There aren't any handcrafted encounters that intentionally let certain sandbox elements shine. Halo 3's first scarab fight gave the players rocket launchers, mongooses (geese?), and marines. The marines can't even drive in this game, you'd likely spawn a Razorback instead, and there's nothing even remotely similar to the Scarab fight in this game. It's been 14 years since the last scarab fight using AI instead of scripting. One of the most iconic and replayable parts of the Halo series has been missing for over a DECADE.
I did have fun with this game, I enjoyed the interactivity between the grapple and the rest of the sandbox, but this game lost so much of what made Halo campaigns so damn fun for the sake of a open world which they couldn't even properly deliver on. In six years Halo 2 released, Halo 3 released, and Halo reach released. In the exact same span of time. I know there were severe development issues, but the same people have been in charge of 343 since they inherited the franchise and it REALLY makes you want to ask why nothing has changed. Every single entry done by 343i has had some dramatic change of focus from the rest of the franchise. Some dramatic reinvention of the game's style/format. While Halo infinite's multiplayer is a wonderful return to form, something many have wanted for so long, the campaign totally fails to deliver in the same regard.
I’m 100% with you. Also a lifelong halo fan here. The original trilogy are my favorite games of all time, I also love halo reach a lot. Then 343 took over and I really have not enjoyed anything they’ve done (it hurts my heart to see Mayo play Halo 1 on the terrible anniversary graphics).
Halo infinite I think was a good game but it just lacks SO much of what makes the Bungie titles such a beloved series.
18:28 that's basically the whole lore of Halo in a nut shell. Whenever marines tagged along with Chief on missions, they would always get clapped left and right no matter the situation you found your self in. Those NPCs were all just a little suicidal on the field too LUL.
For me, the open-world reminded me of ReCore... without the puzzles and interactivity of ReCore. And I know Armature's title has some problems. It's funny how we accuse ReCore to be empty yet Halo Infinite is even more barebone.
Sure it can be fun to grapple but I never felt the necessity to use the other items because they were just there. If the grapple was its dedicated button instead and you still had the ability to use the rest, why not...
The red-armored Hunters were incredibly annoying. In fact, the Hunters were just painful as a whole.
I think I only liked a 1/4 of this game's progression and I loved Halo 3... as I do respect the original and the second episode.
The series is now limited by its own roots, Infinite serves as an accentuation of those limits. Sure some people will break the boundaries and show how hilarious the physics are. If you have to cheese a game to make it fun or playable, it just shows the flaws in the core design. And yes, even on Normal, I got frustrated due to hitscan and pinpoint accurate snipers.
The final boss was lame, the penultimate one was great. The Spartan Killer? Now THAT was pretty cool. But yeah, I can't help but feel like this game wasn't ready for launch at all. I won't be surprised if people get a second opinion on it and reconsider... much like Halo 4 in the past.
I completely disagree, the snipers accuracy has never had any issues for me and on heroic and legendary the bosses all felt amazing to me, never played it on normal and I’m sure that’d make some of the harder bosses a little less rewarding but infinite is probably the first halo game I feel properly showcased a villain.. they finally created an amazing set of enemies with the battle types consistently changing on each boss encounter and the progression had me on the edge of my seat most of the time
@@macpenry5691 Each enemy has appeared in the first game with the exception of the Brutes (Halo 2) and the drones (Halo 4). The charging Brute is now its own thing instead of a last-resort method from the Halo 2 and 3 Covenant Brutes. They're just braindead Hell Knights with the armor of a Dread Knight. Infinite has created no new enemies.
The Elites were at least fun because they had the camouflage and energy swords. That's it.
You don't have to agree, but trust me when I say the Jackal snipers were annoying: they were! You barely can react to the shots because of hitscan and the overall sound design makes it even more annoying. Just a shame that the dash ability isn't its own button like a certain shooter...
Oh and the Red-Armored Hunters? Emptying entire ammo magazines to expose their backs since they can, on Normal, pivot without issue while you grapple is on cooldown and can still aim you without issue... isn't satisfying. I was honestly expecting them to replicate the issue of the Magnum. Since they didn't, they were just annoying and dreadful to fight.
That's what I experienced. Even Halo 3 on Normal has less bullcrap. Again, you don't have to agree with me.
After just finishing a doom eternal run before infinite the two weapon systems was a surreal experience
I agree, I can't stand 2 weapon limits after DE. What bothers me more is recharging health. I keep looking for something to actively pick up mid fight and instead I'm forced to hide behind cover and wait when my health is low. It feels like I'm doing nothing for half the fight even though the recharge times are relatively quick.
@@doomer604 In Doom, you want the enemy to surround you. In Halo, you want to surround the enemy. You have to consider your ideal positioning. Stand somewhere that has good sightlines for you, and bad sightlines for the enemy. Stand where you can dodge the shots that come at you. You won't have to wait for your shields to recharge if you don't get hit.
If you try to run in like the Doom Slayer, you're gonna get clapped. Master Chief is a supersoldier, not a demigod.
You should play Metro: Exodus. You'd probably hate it because the gameplay is generally really really slow most of the time, but it has a great take on (semi) open world design that's way more focused than most games. It gives you a concise list of like 12 things to do and then moves on to a new area and a new list, instead of pretending it's fun to clear 500 bandit camps over and over again.
Metro Exodus is probably the only fps that feels good to take slow. The open world is just a really immersive vehicle for the story missions and it shepherds you very naturally around the whole thing
@@pootispencer9765 Nah, Hunt: Showdown is great to take slow too. I think the secret is all about using the slow pace to naturally build tension.
The biggest Issue with infinite is what all Modern Openworlds suffer from: Its world is nothing more than a selling point on the back of the box. Everything besides the critical path is just a waste of time. Sidequests gives you either useless collectibles or Vehicles and NPC Helpers. Wich wouldnt be so bad expect that the Main missions are gated off linear levels where you cant bring in any of the vehicles or groundtroops you liberated in the openworld. So how about this: You crash land like normally, have a couple fun fights but then you get a message from the main bad guy: Zeta Halo is actually functioning and almost ready to fire.
Now your like: Oh shit there are actual stakes in the game, better get going. The problem is that the control room with the main badguy is really high up somewhere in a heavily secured base. You can of course book it to the end right away but you will certainly get your ass kicked. The prupose of the openworld would then be to build up enough strenght by liberating enemie camps, unlocking weapons and saving marines to launch a full on assault on the main base. If you feel extra fancy you could even implemant a Dead Rising still timer where you got 72 hours in game, wich equates to 10 real time hours, before Zeta Halo is fired. Voila now the game has tension, unlocking stuff has purpose and you could even have mutiple endings based on how well you playd.
That’s unfortunate especially as Halo already has such an unique world and setting and 343 is not using it to its full protential. An halo open world could have been a great idea If executed better
I think your example at the end sounds really cool, and reminds me of Shadows of Mordor/War. The whole point of completing things and leveling up was to attack heavily defended, high level targets, and you had troops you could deploy, allies to call in.
I actually thought to myself several times how great something like the nemesis system would have been, especially during the high value target side missions.
So Basically the same game but with a timer
And now no one can dislike, checkmate TH-cam
At least some good people can get their opinion online without hate.
That's a good thing, thank god delusional muppets like you won't ruin a video by blindly leaving dislikes
All of your points are valid to an almost flawless degree. The reason I say almost, is because there will be nit picking fanboys who will cherry pick your points like there being no “history” on the ring when there is. It’s those ring statues. Maybe more. Either way, not enough. I’m I’m surprised you didn’t mention the fact that there are audio logs that are just such a cheap story telling method.
They aren’t cheap lol
Why I'm happy with this game, as a long time die hard fan, is because it gives a solid foundation. That's all the halo community needs. A good sandbox with sound combat and a decent game engine. Give the reigns to the community, release forge, and this game will live on for 10 years I guarantee it.
Yeah no I don't see this game lasting 10 years at all, I'm guaranteeing another halo game will be made before the 10 year mark
@@Ibrahim-wr5fs people still play halo 3 custom games because of all the creative maps. Go on MCC there's still tons of groups for that specifically. I didn't say another game wouldn't come out, I said the forge would allow for a community to thrive. Especially if they implement AI spawn points.
THIS is why i think they should bring back the health packs from CE and Reach. It's a lot more dynamic than hiding behind cover, and rewards map knowledge and strategic play.
My first FPS grind was reach, I was so spoiled without even realizing it.
Um, regenerating health is what creates the dynamic play. It allows you to take risks
@@badgasaurus4211 I always thought having both regenerating health /and/ shields just kinda defeats the point of both of them existing. It's just one big health bar. If they brought back the health packs back, it would add an extra layer of strategy to combat.
If you're full on health and shields, you might as well push enemy lines with close quarters combat. However if you're low on health, you would have to either be really good at dodging enemy fire or try a different approach.
Then the game could award you for clearing a FOB or freeing some marines with some health.
(this is strictly regarding the campaign ofc, multiplayer is a whole different thing)
@@loaduscoolclipz5505 that's an awful idea, healthpacks were terrible
Use black eye skull
The one thing I wanted from this game, was a reason to play it over the MCC. And I don't see a reason to play it over the MCC, other than grapple gameplay. I've never been a Halo fan either, but Forge was a blast to play when I was younger and it's super disappointing to be missing that. I think it's a pretty bad Halo game and it is extremely barebones for 6 years of development.
I agree that the explorable world of this game really feels lifeless. Personally, I wish the map was more of like an archipelago with each island having it's own unique environment; one being a desert, the other being a tropical jungle, the next being a redwood forest - you get the idea.
The segments where you fight nothing but Sentinels were sooooooooooooo boring. Easily my biggest complaint. In previous games, they appeared along with The Flood, as more of an "environmental" threat that only focused you if there were no zombies or Covenant around. Why would 343 have you fight nothing *but* Sentinels for entire segments of a mission? Left a bad taste in my mouth.
It's like 5 minutes bruh
Coming from an OG Halo fan I felt the same way. 6 years and this is what we got, idk man 343 … I think a new studio needs to take over and reboot the franchise.
An opinion?? An opinion?!?!?!
Never!
I feel like 75% of the campaign goes like this..
go to point X
kill all the banished at point X
find a power core or destroy X
repeat
and all of the points/bases looked very similar
it just felt like a grind to play with Escharum just taunting you slowly with no sense of urgency the whole time
like let me just go around and slowly destroy all the bases
I agree that I wish there was an active health recovery option. Like draining Jackal/elite shields... picking up a jackal shield. Or maybe weapon interactions. Like some guns turn grunts into a cryobomb, or forcing brutes to attack allies... maybe I'm overthinking it.
Seriously, how the FUCK can you play Halo Combat Evolved in remastered graphics?!?? That shit is TERRIBLE!!! All the charm is lost!!! I’d argue the original graphics are superior in both pleasantness on the eyes and just looking better overall as an art style and fitting the look the game was going for!!! I don’t respect anyone who prefers the remastered graphics and their opinion on Halo loses MASSIVE credibility!!! Halo Combat Evolved DESERVES to be ONLY PLAYED in original graphics WITH original sound effects AND original music!!! Anything other than that is an abomination and should be avoided at ALL COSTS!!! 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Surprisingly, ammo refills left a very sour taste in my mouth in the first mission, I realistically never ran out of kinetic ammo for my pistol and AR, I prefer unsc weapons over covenant but I enjoy the mix and match dynamic of battlefield scavenging. After the first mission I completely ignored all ammo crates and weapons at the FoB, I had to force depth into my playthrough but it worked
People try so hard to basically not say you have really bad takes on games sometimes. You have really polite fans i give you that
What bad takes does he have on games?
You forget to mention the music.
Part of the reason I felt Halo Infinite was so lacking was because the music was mostly ambient this time around. Ambient music works with open world games such as Skyrim so the gameplay doesn’t become repetitive, but for a halo game, this is kind of a crime.
Even Halo 5 had more memorable music. I don’t even remember hearing Set a Fire in your Heart or Through the Trees as I played Halo Infinite. What a shame.
I had a section of the video about the music, because I feel like there's a real lack of it. But it was too harsh in its tone so I cut it.
@@underthemayo in my opinion, it’s not a super big issue due to the things I said above, plus it’s probably a good thing you cut it as the songs that did come out are really good.
It baffles me that some people gave this campaign a 10/10
Money changes everything
Halo infinite reviews were so obviously paid, they're not even trying to hide it
Halo infinite for me is a 7.5/10
God damn, I wish I could see more TH-cam comments that achieved this level of respect and maturity.
It's been quite nice. Twitter much worse.
I can agree with this largely. I started off having a blast, but then I started to trail off. now I look at the map probably about halfway into the game and it just looks daunting. also, it feels like the enemy types are just so very limited. it feels like I'm playing an MMO, just running from group to group that are waiting for me to kill them, but with much larger downtime spots. map bosses so far have been recolors, and the story missions start to feel more detatched. I went from a steady flow to "wow, I gotta go really far for each of these" in the next part.
Funny, I liked the open world for its sparseness at times, how there isn't a structured mission everywhere, just randomized patrols. Feels organic. Some specialized missions like you mentioned would be nice, but any timers would just be a drag. There's certainly a lot of Easter eggs and small collectibles throughout, which is what I'd expect from an old ps2 era open world game, and I appreciate it.
Sniping being the best option has always been something of a thing for Halo. In this game usually the brutes and elites will hide from your sniper rifle, while you pick off the grunts and jackals from afar, and then go in. Which is fine. You can def cheese the open world stuff with marines, but there are a lot of people who enjoyed doing that with marines back to Halo 1, so I can't blame 343 much for including that. You can always choose not to bring the marines along, which is what I did after the novelty wore off. I do wish you could revisit past assassination targets or something. Oh, and I 100% agree about the drones, they were an annoying grind. Not horrible but it was a rather dull 30 mins of fighting them.
Story wise this game is cleaning up the mess of turning Cortana evil and other things from Halo 5, so it wisely chooses to focus on smaller issues, and push the poor story decisions that can't be entirely retconed to the end of the game. I really liked the pilot, he reminded me of a less malicious version of "the ugly" in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Him overcoming his cowardice, and the weapon and chief learning to trust eachother makes for good, low scale drama, and it's surprisingly well written. A lot of the rest of the story is more Conan like "You're a great warrior, I'm a great warrior, let's fight", or just the Harbinger doing shit and explaining nothing. Compared to the average Halo story, which aside from Halo 2 are always a bit barebones or have issues, I thought it was above par.
Overall, I think you just have higher/different standards when it comes to gameplay, and you didn't like a lot of the dryer, talkie non-setpieces used to tell the story. Which is fine, but I do find that kind of an odd complaint, when that's basically how both recent Doom games have told their stories.
gotta disagree on your last point. most of the exposition you're exposed to is while you're on the move/in combat, and is usually skipabble entirely. story cutscenes are short as very little actually happens through cutscene.
Doom 16 did have a fair amount of holograms but it's emphasized pretty emphatically in both games by his actions that the Slayer doesn't care about the lore or story in any way, and the player isn't really explicitly made to care either. It's not necessary to understand the threat, the stakes, the player motivation. If anything a majority of the "lore" is all diary/codex entries.
All power to you
There should’ve been Enforcer Sentinels throughout the Forunner areas.
Defending a pointlessly included, sparse open world for no reason. Halo simps everyone.
@@shanecoyle8053 It's called shilling or just people being delusional. Basically it's Far Cry Infinite clear the outposts yay
As someone who is a big fan of far cry and halo I really enjoyed this game, however, I can see how you didn’t. Also agree that the environment got old fast and that the story was dumb. After 5 I’m pretty much done with halo’s story line.
Well tbf the Banished storyline is good or was till 343 got a hold of it, people forget that 343 didnt come up with the Banished story(that was the studio that made halo wars 2).
343 are not good at making Halo.
Well not that the story is great as it stands rn, it's much much better than we got in halo 5. Tho the story as a whole do shines a bit, there are many plot holes and gaps that needs to filled, questions needed to be answered. And I am hopeful for the future dlcs. The ending has me pumped up
@@jethrodark2372 that's really stupid. The blur studios made the cutscenes. The game was still made under the hood of 343. The story is written by 343
@@mayanksharma5006 ok but when they ruin the story of the Banished like they did with the original Halo lore, i hope u keep defending them.
@@mayanksharma5006 also its easy to write from existing work that sombody else wrote coming up with ur own is harder, its even harder to keep a story good that someone else wrote because most writers dont like playing with other writers toys.
I loved this game. The open world definitely makes things easier to cheese. But I love fighting the banished. Definitely my favorite gameplay of the franchise.
YOU NEVER UNDERSTOOD HALO IN THE FIRST PLACE
Why?
@@fwamable394 he says that Halo is like a cover shooter but when its not, along with another misunderstandings.
Alot of the problems is that Mayo wants all games to be like Doom Eternal when that would ruin a game.
@@mememindmind1010 it kinda is. most of the time when you take damage you have to sit in cover to heal.
@@fwamable394 Not when you play the game well
Then the game should make playing it well necessary for success if you wanna judge people's opinion on it based on how well they play the game. When the viable most effective option for new players is to hide behind cover and they don't actually need to learn to be aggressive, don't get upset when people call your game a cover shooter.
I would love to have a discussion with you about this game, I agree with a lot of your points and some aren't really applicable but you still have a solid argument. At the very least, I can understand your issues with its world and map. Especially the 4 beacons, good lord what a way to pad time.
Damn great video Mayo
343 managed to make the first Halo campaign i didn't finish. Stopped caring. Should have stayed linear with cool set pieces.
it sounds like you want the games combat to be like doom
Halo infinite isnt really an open world game. Looking to games like RDR or GTA is a bit of an unfair comparison because these worlds are trying to achieve different things
Halos "open world" is a lot closer in design to a single elongated level in mario 64/mario odyssey.
I definitely agree that there should be more biomes and there's nothing lore-wise stopping that from happening, but you arent going to experience anything remotely similar a GTA style open world
If its not a RDR/GTA like game I prefer a game that has an open world to allow for either a different gameplay approach or to take a different angle or entrance to an objective and to allow the mechanics, systems and AI to shine like say MGSV. I think RDR and GTA need to allow for less set peice driven missions at this point. Ones that allow for player expression and creative solutions or at least share more of the qualties prior games have had when you were not in a story mission. I think gameplay wise where Halo Infinite is at it's worse is when you are forced indoors. I hope next time or in a DLC they have something than grass, trees,rocks and metal to look at and find a way to remove or improve the boring indoor sections that throw out the refreshing freedom of the combat outdoors.
@@GuyOnAChair I disagree halo is at worst when you outside the indoors make the combat much better. GTA and Red dead have some of the best open world Red dead 2 is Living breathing world with some the best NPC interaction its really about living in the world and the sense of discovery is some the best out their even after 5 playthroughs i still find new things. The open world random encounter missions are great some Are like mini RPG missions which have branching paths then you have the side missions which are more scripted but allow for allot variety and theres allot of side activites to take part in along with great story. Witcher 3 has scripted quests but they have some really good writing. GTA5 and skyrim have tons to do in the open world. Games like halo dont need an open world maybe open missions but unlike Dishonored or hitman taking diffetnt paths does not add to the experience.
@@John-996 The original Halo's big moment was when you went outdoors the first time. A console shooter not stuck in tiny corridors for performance reasons. Its best levels have all been outdoors and ironically the levels considered worst are all seemingly indoors.
@@GuyOnAChair yeah but we many games like that now. That was the time were a game like GTA3 was amazing as you could go anywhere.
Review Wolfenstein: The New Order next!
he doesn't click with Nu Wolf
if you can find the the black eye skull, it forces you to play more aggressive because you only recharge shields if you melee an enemy. So playing from a far and just sniping is more likely to get you killed
I'm aware of the black skull. But I don't think looking for a secret skull on a repeat playthrough is really a solution to my personal gripes. I'm already done with the campaign and didn't enjoy it enough to want to go back through it. Also, I don't want to completely remove the regenerating shield mechanic from Halo. I just want to add active health options to it.
@@underthemayo yea I know what you mean, after I beat the campaign as much as I wanted to explore and find the skulls after, I found 2 I got bored because of how desolate the world is
Not every shooter needs to be doom and have an ultra agressive playstyle every shooter has its place
Why?
Yes. Many shooters do have their place. In the trash.
And yup. Not every shooter needs to be aggressive.
Did you watch the video? He literally mentioned Fear. Fear is not an ultra aggressive fast shooter its a tactical one.
@@fuckso2342 he also criticised it for making you hide behind cover to recover shields rather than making you gain shields some other way.
You're not wrong on the design. Halo kinda needs the linear level design otherwise there needs to be some strong incentive to want to traverse back to different parts of the map. Elder scrolls design requires that as has proper side missions but this didn't seem right for Halo.
Mayo I think you hit the nail on the head with the whole "the game punishes you for going aggressive and rewards you for playing it safe"
Not to compare everything to new Doom, but if you want me to play aggressive and use my tools, don't incentivize me to hide in a corner with a scoped weapon.
In a weird way I enjoy COD/Titanfall 2 more than Halo. Those are military style shooters that create cinematic moments out of popping around cover for quick kills. Halo is more on the Doom side of the spectrum, but doesn't have the toolset to incentivize aggressive/FUN play.
I think most of what could be said has, but hopefully this is a small addition you’ll like. In Halo, there’s a collectible called skulls, which can be applied to a new campaign to modify gameplay elements or increase difficulty in interesting ways.
One of the them is called the Black Eye Skull. Meleeing enemies is the only way to refill your shields with that applied, and I really think you’d enjoy playing the game with that twist on the gameplay loop. Enforces a more active, confrontational playstyle.
Maybe look for it in the open world and try a Black Eye run sometime - helps remedy the “hiding is the safest/best option” type of gameplay loop in Halo.
I know of the black skull, but looking for a secret skull to change combat AFTER I've already finished a campaign that I didn't really like.. It's not really a solution.
@@underthemayo You could have gotten it right after mission 2, though. You didn't have to beat the game first.
@@zeldosan5138 a secret Skull is not a solution to this. Plenty of new players aren't even gonna know about Skulls or how to get them. Am I supposed to play this game on day 1 and look up a guide telling me where to find a secret Skull that i may not even know about? To change the game in a way I don't even want?
Honestly I loved the game despite the open world feeling a bit lackluster.
I agree with your points about the open world. As a halo fan, one of my favorite things was all the different locations I was able to go to and kill aliens in. In every previous title, even odst, I could tell levels apart at a glance because there was always a unique visual to them, even if it was just the time of day. 343 sacrificed this to give us a bland and empty open world, and it honestly killed my excitement for the game. It kills a lot of the variety that could have been offered. I mean sure there are different bases but it's always the same terrain and area. Halo campaigns used to feel like an epic taking place on a grand scale across multiple theaters of war, but this just feels like they took 1 level and stretched it into an entire campaign.
This game SUCKS!!!!
The final boss fight is ridiculously stupid!
You’re stuck in an open room where you have an overwhelming amount of enemies who constantly rush you, while other enemies are also constantly sniping you, with absolutely NOWHERE to take cover! They might as well call it Halo Track because you spend 99% of your time just running and hoping you don’t get sniped or cornered.
On top of that, you have weapons that do an underwhelming amount of damage, have an abysmally slow firing rate, are slow to reload, and are just as likely to kill you as the enemy AI.
When you finally do get to fight the boss, she can teleport virtually ANYWHERE and is doing so non-stop. She has a weapon that fires some kind of lighting projectile that is almost impossible to avoid. Again, the only way to fight her is to constantly run. It’s just fucking stupid and I don’t understand why this has become a regular occurrence in games today. Why do designers think that constantly running from the enemy with very little time to stop, aim and actually shoot equates to “fun”? When the fuck did this become the norm?!!!! It’s NOT “fun”, NOT “challenging”, it’s just plain fucking STUPID!!!!!
I really loved Infinite but at least for me it resides in that little vault in my brain like the rest of the Halo series does which would be the “it’s a good game, but it could’ve been even better if they were allowed all the time necessary with no issues stopping them” vault. I don’t blame them with taking it safe in terms of overall level and environment design since we now know the development cycle was very messy with the engine being difficult to work with. They clearly wanted to be more ambitious with the open world because recently some files were dug up from the game and a model of a mongoose designed with treads to travel in a snowy biome were discovered still in the game. Here’s hoping that those rumored DLCs will help Infinite finalize itself as that product it originally advertised itself as
Yeah. Honestly I see this campaign more as a good starting point for what's to come. It was obvious that open world halo would have its issues, seeing as it was the first time it was done. But even with its flaws the potential is there and the future is open.
Despite playing all the numbered releases, this is the first Halo game I've actively enjoyed in single player. Really love the combat in this game. I'm hoping they can flesh the game out more over time - you can see the troubled development this game had, but the fun I'm having with this game has kept me engaged well past the credits.
So u admit, its unfinished?
@@splinterborn Sure. That’s what I was saying. But even so, it’s still my favourite Halo.
Could you explain what exactly was so drastically different that made you enjoy this game and not enjoy any of the others? I suspect the answer will be very funny.
@@shanecoyle8053 It's a good question. Possibly a combination of the increased mobility and expanded variety of combat options that switching between the equipment allows. The greater range of mobility is probably a key factor, as it's a big reason why, like with Mayo here, the Doom/Quake series has always been my preference.
The open nature of the world helps with this too. The whole game is bookended by two long(ish) more corridor-based missions and I felt these were less enjoyable in general, the more open levels were always the more interesting part of the original game for me. Even so, the enhanced traversal and the more dynamic gameplay this encourages still makes it that bit more satisfying for me. I always fell off the earlier games by the half--way point (it was only thanks to co-op the first three held my interest to completion) but I was engaged with this one right to the end and continued to play after the credits. It's probably a game I'll return to from time to time as well, which isn't something I could say for the previous entries in the series.
The great part about infinite is that the sky isn’t even the limit for what you can do. Your imagination and drive is. You said that once you could, you entered every mission with a sniper and battle rifle. That was YOUR choice. YOU decided thats how you wanted to play. That’s what’s so fun about this! Due to the more open ended nature, it’s your choice on how you want to tackle situations. The devs designed this game to be able to answer “yes, you can do that” to any stupid way you want to attack the enemy.
Plenty of games do that though, what made halo special was that the devs limited your options just enough to where you actually had to get creative to overcome various encounters. Sometimes endless amounts of options isnt actually a good thing when it comes to creating a rewarding gameplay experience.
"Just turn it into a linear game"
That, or an open-ended adventure game as a metroidvania, with more specifically, upgrade-based progression with inter-connected area akin to Metroid Prime. Feels like it would have worked well.
16:37 your theoretical side quest is genuinely far more interesting than anything I got to do in game
Yeah Mayo you're right about all of this. As a long-time Halo fan, I was still confused at exactly wtf was happening in Infinite. It felt like I woke up with more amnesia than a Bioshock game & had zero context of what was going on, especially after Halo 5.
In addition, the campaign definitely felt bare bones. Nothing really *happened* throughout it. The best way I can describe it is that the campaign felt like the prologue or first few opening chapters to a much larger & longer game.
The environments were very lackluster. Like in CE, we went from a ship to a forest, to a desert, to an alien ship, to a snowy forest, to a swamp, to a forerunner facility. Halo 2 went from a space station, to a city, to a forerunner facility, to a grassland & lake, to a snowy wasteland, etc. Halo 3 went from a jungle, to a base, to a grassland, to an industrial facility, to a desert, to a forest, etc.
Infinite is just a Pacific Northwest forest & that's it. *BOOOOOOOORRRRRRIIINNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGG!*
Just finished the video- you hit the nail on the head. Speaking from a Halo vet's POV, the game really feels unfinished and limited in scope. One of my biggest issues was the lack of unique areas. Halo CE had the forest areas at the start, both UNSC and Covenant ships (the Banished ships look like recolored UNSC ships :/), the snow in Assault on the Control Room/Two Betrayals, and the Iconic swamp in 343 Guilty Spark. Halo Infinite just has "Halo CE mission 2", Banished ship (which as mentioned above, looks like a recolored UNSC ship), and the forerunner structures, which, giving credit where credit is due, look absolutely beautiful. Infinite's Forerunner architecture is the *perfect* evolution of Halo 3's art style.
Not only that, you CONSTANTLY have someone talking in your ear, whether it's the Weapon or the pilot. One of my favorite memories of Halo comes from 343 Guilty Spark- in the previous mission, Cortana is left behind in the control room, and Chief goes it alone to find Keyes. For 5 missions, you have had a companion with you, talking you through objectives and commenting on the situation. Now you're all alone, in an unknown and hostile environment, all leading up to the reveal of the Flood.
And thats something that I feel has been missing in Halo- actual tension. Unless you're playing on the highest difficulty with skulls on, there's very little tension (without bullshit *cough cough* H2 sniper jackals *cough cough* H4's pitiful ammo economy *cough cough*). Halo Infinite really tries to show that humanity has lost, but we can't tell at all. Worst we've seen is the Infinity getting destroyed by the Banished. Yeah we've seen spartan IV's die, but spartans have been dying, the only remaining spartan II's that are still alive are Blue Team.
343 really needs to *SHOW* that humanity is losing, and not *TELL* us over and over again. And I don't blame the devs, or the writers. They really have something here. If Microsoft didn't keep cycling out contractors after 18 months each, maybe the game would've been complete at release. :/
And speaking of complete at release, what's the deal with the Harbinger? If I'm not mistaken, there is *zero* explanation as to who they are or what their motivations are. Why were they imprisioned, who were they trying to release, why are they against humanity if humanity and the forerunners were waging war (lore)? I shouldn't want to ask questions out of confusion, I should be asking out of curiosity.
All that aside, I love playing this game and once I get all of the collectables, I'm planning a legendary playthrough.
I love this game but honestly I’ve been waiting for a review like this. Infinite isn’t a bad game whatsoever, it is in my opinion underwhelming. Thank you for making this video Mayo, your honesty is always appreciated.
Yeah I’m pretty sure like 2/3rds of the campaign were cut from the final game and that gameplay loop like how you have to hide behind cover to regain your health there’s skulls that can change that like “black eye” you have to melee and enemy to regain your shields. But a pain you have to go and find them in the open world
As someone who's played every single Halo game and even read 4 of the books, I have to agree.
The main issue with the gameplay is that nobody - not Bungie, not 343 - had the balls to make useful changes to the gameplay.
- Melee damage and hit rate hasn't changed since Halo 1, even tho it makes the multiplayer worse for it;
- The gameplay suffers due to the health/shield regen mechanic which kills the pacing.
As for the storytelling, 343 has this idiotic obsession with "tell, don't show."
This basically translates to a lot of events that happened/are happening off-screen.
The main antagonist from the first cutscene is allegedly killed sometime before you actually start playing.
So instead of fighting Atriox, we're pitted against another big dumb gorilla villain who quite frankly kills any tension.
It's like your video on the Matrix sequels: as the player, we know Master Chief is an unstoppable badass that eats big dumb gorillas for breakfast, so not once does this villain make you feel threatened. It's just a bunch of chest-beating and howling. Who gives a shit?
Honestly, the little recording devices we pick up during the campaign tell a far more interesting story than the repetitive missions we play.
The open world is indeed a barren and boring pile of boredom. There's zero biome diversity with no weather effects. Even the tiny critters (that are moving at 30 FPS) are dumb as rocks - they literally jump in front of a moving Scorpion tank. Hell, the vegetation is barely there. Compare this world to that of The Witcher 3, a game that came out in 2015. The side missions remind me of Assassin's Creed 1 where you have 2-3 side missions that repeat ad nauseam.
Naturally, all the neckbeard fanboys are calling this shit show "the best Halo game ever" and will lunge at your jugular if you dare criticise their god.
But what really left me bewildered is how so many gaming journalists have the gall to give this game scores of 9 and 10.
So here we are, a game that spent 6 years in development only to deliver an extremely mediocre and repetitive experience in singleplayer. It's a good thing the multiplayer is solid because that's its only saving grace.
P.S. this game's performance is abysmally bad. I get 80-100 FPS indoors and 40-60 FPS outdoors on medium-high settings @1440p. Meanwhile, I can run Doom Eternal with everything maxed the fuck out at the same resolution and I get 140-220 FPS.
A large part of that is thanks to Microsoft trying to save money, instead of dedicated and commited devs, Microsoft forced contractors, people with highly varying creativity, commitment, investment and familiarity with the franchise were cycled in and out in by the hundreds adding up to thousands by the end in total. Microsoft in their attempt to save money, lost more money than they could have known by screwing the development.
I wouldn't say that's a fair comparison with matrix. For one, you're the one playing, not masterchief, and it's easy to die even on heroic. I definitely don't feel powerful in the game, and maybe a bit too weak sometimes. So everything in general feels threatening, especially those red hunters. The regular hunters are ok, but the red hunters are just unfair. As for the health regen mechanic, it's been in halo since the first game, and it suits the game more. Idk how they could change it without the player base having a massive outcry about it. It's a big change to make to the combat of the game. At most, maybe it would be alright to let shield start regenerating after you kill something, so you don't have to sit in cover waiting for it. Wouldn't be OP, especially for legendary difficulty, and I don't think it would be too far of a leap that halo fans, including myself, would hate it. I think halo infinite is good to play once, and then play a different game. Replayability definitely isn't there, unless you're a 100% completionist. The combat is very fun, but again it's not worth doing once you've done the campaign. Doom eternal is the main game to play nowadays for good combat. Agree with all the issues with open world, but I expected them to be there, because it's the only open world halo game, and halo games aren't about open world exploration. As a first person shooter I would give infinite a solid 8. It's good, but it does have issues that can't be ignored. I automatically give battlefield and cod games a 1, since they're just copy paste games. As a halo game it's a 6, which is better than halo 5, which I gave a 4. The only good thing in halo 5 is combat, and that's it xD. Definitely the worst halo game. I think halo infinite is a step above that, which is good. It shows 343 is willing to improve on their games. But infinite doesn't even touch a game like halo reach, or the first 2 halo games. Lastly, as for your performance, your pc might just not have good hardware. I run everything in halo infinite on high, and texture details on ultra, and it's smooth 60fps, outdoors or indoors. I do use vsync. Sometimes it might drop to the mid 50's if there are too many explosions around, but so far I have no complaints about how the game runs.
as a tryhard halo fan i agree with almost all of your points, the gameplay is a lot of fun although not a whole lot of variety to mix things up, but i wished they didn't stick with a single "biome", every other Halo title had plenty of variety in set pieces from deserts, swamps and snowy environments.
I even wished wildlife to be a thing aside from rodents and avian, passive or not. Reach introduced Moa and Guta and while they didn't do much for gameplay it was still nice to encounter them during missions.