: Wow, extra credits has been on a roll lately with good videos. This one is
: definitely applicable to 343. I hope they watch it and take something
: away.

So the main point of the EC episode is that developers of sequels shouldn't feel the need to include every feature from previous incarnations if they don't fit in the story being told. I guess I'm of two minds for whether this is practical advice for Halo. Personally, I'm completely open to new gameplay ideas, but the most common refrain from many fans these days seems to be "I hate it because it's not like the old games."

Bungie (and 343) have generally been pretty ruthless about cutting features from previous games that didn't fit in the sequels. Sometimes this went over well, and sometimes it didn't. Bungie cut the most iconic H1 weapons, the AR and pistol, from H2, and they dropped dual wielding and several of the more superfluous guns in Reach. Far as I know, most people were okay with these changes. But plenty of changes haven't been very popular. The slower, more methodical gameplay that Reach released with apparently resulted in way lower player populations than H3. The introduction of QT events in H4's campaign seem to be universally hated. 343's overhaul of multiplayer to work better with the uncooperative randoms that make up the majority of the population hasn't gone over well. Even the fact that Master Chief wasn't part of ODST and Reach apparently contributed to a sizable drop in sales compared to H3. Once H4 put the Chief back on the cover, sales picked up again.

Basically, I think 343 is in a damned if you do/damned if you don't situation. Keep the Halo formula the same and people complain that they're not innovating on an increasingly tired concept. Mix things up at all and the audience whines that they broke what didn't need to be fixed.