The game was incomplete at launch, whether intentional or not, the game feels and looks rushed overall, and 343 makes it seem like they are stressed, along with half the forum here who claims they are doing everything they can and everyone is complaining unreasonably, if it is so much for them to do, then maybe this game should’ve had 2 more years to cook into something better, halo 5 was rushed to be an xbox one title launcher, they really should have put more time into this, many great games on xbox 360 are superior to this still, as quite a few from company’s such as Bethesda, had 6 years put into their games, halo 5 campaign and multiplayer are under the budget that they should have, the campaign doesn’t even have a bandanna skull, what replay value is there in campaign without it? the only replay value this game imposes is it’s warzone which feels like a scam, the skins and weapons aren’t included in forge, so yes it feels like a scam.
halo reach will mop the floor with this game if it ever receives the forbidden halo remake, but 343 will most likely screw that multiplayer up too.
Yes it did, and I think its because of Microsoft, not 343.
Given the fact 343i had 3 years to complete this I would say no way. However, considering the games condition at launch, yes, H5 needed to be delayed for at least another 6 months (in order to have a proper amount of maps/game modes, and some more time to fine tune the campaign would never hurt)
The campaign was absolute -Yoink-. Im not just saying this because of the 3(!) Chief levels. It had NOTHING to do with any of the advertising. They hyped up this huge campaign where chief goes mad but nope… instead we get repetitive boss battles, a crap twist that was ruined in the 2nd mission, filler missions, MAIN ANTAGONISTS geeting KILLED IN A CUTSCENE, no legendary completion armor, and so on… I honeslty wouldve prefered no campaign and have them release it later than this.
Why not you look on the bright side. We get early access and influence how the final game will become.
Dont get me wrong, I love to play Halo 5. Its just that the campagin was so incredibly -Yoink-. Atleast 4 had a nice ending
> 2533274891841289;5:
> Why not you look on the bright side. We get early access and influence how the final game will become.
i would rather have an enjoyable experience rather than play an early release, but i know…
> 2535441488042067;3:
> Given the fact 343i had 3 years to complete this I would say no way. However, considering the games condition at launch, yes, H5 needed to be delayed for at least another 6 months (in order to have a proper amount of maps/game modes, and some more time to fine tune the campaign would never hurt)
At the time when Halo 4 came out didnt 343 say they were already started on Halo 5?
Also i have been seeing a lot of people post lately that Microsoft is to blame. Why is that?