Do You Believe 343i Botched Halo 4's Launch?

If memory serves, the two major releases in the past 5 years, Halo 3 and Halo Reach, had public betas.

I honestly believe it was because of these betas that we had a smoother experience at launch. To date, 343i has not justified nor given any reason whatsoever for excluding a public beta from Halo 4.

I believe it’s greatly due to a lack of a beta, is the reason we have seriously botched stat tracking, and have to wait on File Share functionality.

So the question is this: do you believe Halo 4’s launch could have been better? What could they have done differently to ensure a better experience?

They could have added more gametypes out of the gate to shut the community up.

Personally I don’t mind, but hot damn the number of complaints is irritating.

It’s the best multiplayer game I’ve ever played so I can’t say I agree with you.

> It’s the best multiplayer game I’ve ever played so I can’t say I agree with you.

Oh, I’m not questioning the quality of the multiplayer, which is fantastic.

I’m saying the features that are mostly reliant on Waypoint are struggling and showing stats that are absolutely incorrect.

The fact that the servers were messed up on the release day was ridiculous. Me and my friends had the hardest time even partying up to search and once we finally got a game it kicked us all back to the main menu and had to start all over trying to party up again. Very frustrating.

It depends on what you mean.

The game did extremely well financially, with it having the best launch week in franchise history. So, financially, it didn’t fail (so far, at least).

In terms of quality, then in my opinion, they did botch it. A month long public Beta would have done a lot of good. They could have used it to finalize any balancing issues, and tweaked any other components that people complained about. They could have used it to tweak the launch day playlists, and playlists they wanted to add in the future, and any bugs or netcode issues.

But, for some reason, they felt a Public Beta wasn’t worth the trouble.

> It depends on what you mean.
>
> The game did extremely well financially, with it having the best launch week in franchise history. So, financially, it didn’t fail (so far, at least).
>
> In terms of quality, then in my opinion, they did botch it. A month long public Beta would have done a lot of good. They could have used it to finalize any balancing issues, and tweaked any other components that people complained about. They could have used it to tweak the launch day playlists, and playlists they wanted to add in the future, and any bugs or netcode issues.
>
> <mark>But, for some reason, they felt a Public Beta wasn’t worth the trouble.</mark>

Yeah, and there a lot of players who would like to know why.

If they expect us to smile and nod at every single decision they make without justifying choices, then they are in for a rude awakening.

> > It depends on what you mean.
> >
> > The game did extremely well financially, with it having the best launch week in franchise history. So, financially, it didn’t fail (so far, at least).
> >
> > In terms of quality, then in my opinion, they did botch it. A month long public Beta would have done a lot of good. They could have used it to finalize any balancing issues, and tweaked any other components that people complained about. They could have used it to tweak the launch day playlists, and playlists they wanted to add in the future, and any bugs or netcode issues.
> >
> > <mark>But, for some reason, they felt a Public Beta wasn’t worth the trouble.</mark>
>
> Yeah, and there a lot of players who would like to know why.
>
> If they expect us to smile and nod at every single decision they make without justifying choices, then they are in for a rude awakening.

I agree. Because at this rate, im waiting post-launch for Halo 5 to see what the deal with it is.

A beta surely wouldn’t have hurt. There are already reports of exploits and wall glitches surfacing up. If we had a beta beforehand then maybe this wouldn’t be the case. Not sure why they didn’t have one to be honest. Maybe they made up some excuse to cover themselves but I’m unsure of that. They definitely could have at least done a bit more by letting us bug test it for them as a beta. I agree.

a beta would of made the game much better and we would probably have a better interface bc it truly is crap. horrible to navigate and a complete eye sore

There are always issues at launch. ways.
343i completely redid the engine, doing a lot of good stuff on a very old system. They had a lot of stuff planned for post launch and are planning to use TUs for more things. They had a day 1 TU planned. They knew there would be issues too.

The launch can always be better.

And to answer your question, about the beta.

A beta would take up too many resource sand too much time from everything else 343i was trying to do. 343i was polishing, polishing, and polishing… maintaining a beta would get in the way.
343i was doing a ton of internal testing. A lot of focused internal testing probably would have been more efficient than sending it out for the masses, especially with the state of the community. Around the time a beta would have been, the community would just bash and bash every little change, which would lead to very bad feedback and fake problems. Using a wide variety of internal testing and private betas would decrease the amount of hate and stuff, most likely more efficient feedback.
Besides, most people use a beta as an early demo. They don’t look for bugs or offer feedback, they just play. The amount of that is decreased when you have a more focused private beta.

So, in short, 343i didn’t use a public beta because it would have taken away their polishing time and it was as or more efficient to do a focused private beta along with lots of internal testing. The only thing the beta would have given them is time to stress test the servers… but even then its still fixed quickly at launch if there are issues.