For Halo 5, please have an open beta. That is all. Discuss.
Remember the Reach beta?
That -Yoink- was great. The majority of the players loved it. Then there were the few who asked for nerfs all around.
For some reason, Bungie listened to those few. In my opinion, they ruined Reach by responding to the obnoxious feedback.
Halo 4 has turned out great, and feels great.
I wouldn’t want a Halo 5 beta to end up ruining Halo 5 multiplayer due to the few who vocalize their minority opinion.
I believe the Beta should strictly be for server testing only as is originally stated before most Beta’s start… Devs now should be saying “If you don’t like the balancing of the weapons and want them to be buffed or nerfed… tough. Any alterations are our decision to make after time of release and constant complaints about the oppositions bogeys being OP will be ignored.”
Not open, but closed beta… For certain amount of people.
> Remember the Reach beta?
> That Yoink! was great. The majority of the players loved it. Then there were the few who asked for nerfs all around.
> For some reason, Bungie listened to those few. In my opinion, they ruined Reach by responding to the obnoxious feedback.
> Halo 4 has turned out great, and feels great.
> I wouldn’t want a Halo 5 beta to end up ruining Halo 5 multiplayer due to the few who vocalize their minority opinion.
Agreed
I for one don’t want a beta. I don’t want to see the campaign, or al the maps, WIP gametypes, etcetc.
You want a DEMO. NOT A BETA. You don’t know what a beta is, so your opinion is invalid.
Somebody has already typed OOOOBH U MAD
The people who don’t like something vocalise more than those who do, which usually means that things will probably get nerfed that shouldn’t. So, I think they should ignore most of the balance feedback and only test servers and other technical stuff.
> I for one don’t want a beta. I don’t want to see the campaign, or al the maps, WIP gametypes, etcetc.
>
> You want a DEMO. NOT A BETA. You don’t know what a beta is, so your opinion is invalid.
>
> Somebody has already typed OOOOBH U MAD
If you didn’t want to see the campaign you wouldn’t want a DEMO. Beta is for multiplayer.
343i is technically Microsoft and thus has far more resources than Bungie did, including more advanced automation, performance testing and evaluation and ways to model the software in real world scenarios. The need for an open beta isn’t really there other than to let people -Yoink- and moan.
And speaking of 5 uh… unless you’re going to have a dev kit for the nextbox you’re not going to get a beta.
> Remember the Reach beta?
> That Yoink! was great. The majority of the players loved it. Then there were the few who asked for nerfs all around.
> For some reason, Bungie listened to those few. In my opinion, they ruined Reach by responding to the obnoxious feedback.
> Halo 4 has turned out great, and feels great.
> I wouldn’t want a Halo 5 beta to end up ruining Halo 5 multiplayer due to the few who vocalize their minority opinion.
Wrong. Stuff was buffed. The DMR, AR, movement traits, etc…really only the pistol was nerfed.
But, that stuff didn’t need to happen anyway.
Public betas are always good, if just to fix bugs. No mater how you cut it, you can get the ‘best’ game testers but they won’t find bugs like a million players can.
I remember someone (maybe Frankie?) saying that they couldn’t have a beta for H4 due to time and financial reasons. It apparently costs a lot of money to run a beta on the order of the Reach beta.
So… don’t get your hopes up.
Halo 3 had a fantastic beta which made the game so much better. That was awesome. All the -Yoink!- that ruined it came at the end, and were the ones in the Halo Reach beta who Bungie listened to and ended up -Yoinking!- up the game.
Halo 4 is a much better version of Halo Reach because they improved everything they thought needed improving. A beta would’ve ruined it, yes there would be those who give great feedback but then a lot who give -Yoink- feedback.
343i have done a great job, this is a new Halo, people want Halo 2/3, it is the future; games have to adapt and evolve. All they need to do is improve the custom games options and get the ranking system in.
iT IS DEFINITELY TIME FOR CONSOLE GAME MAKERS TO LEARN FROM THE PC GAME MAKERS. cLOSED AND oPEN bETAS SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED. bUTTON ASSIGNMENT NEEDS TO BE ADDED (END THIS PRE-DEFINED CONFIG bs!). i ALWAYS FEEL CHEATED BY CONCOLE GAMES, BUT i CAN’T AFFORD TO CONTINUELY UPDATE MY pc EVERY FEW MONTHS TO KEEP UP WITH THE GAME. sIGH…
Sorry about the caps didn’t notice til I finished typing and I’m too lazy to retype it
> > I for one don’t want a beta. I don’t want to see the campaign, or al the maps, WIP gametypes, etcetc.
> >
> > You want a DEMO. NOT A BETA. You don’t know what a beta is, so your opinion is invalid.
> >
> > Somebody has already typed OOOOBH U MAD
>
> If you didn’t want to see the campaign you wouldn’t want a DEMO. Beta is for multiplayer.
Wow. The stupidity. It’s hilarious. Define a Beta please. Suppose a game has no multiplayer, can it have a beta?
I agree, a beta would seem a good idea.
> Wow. The stupidity. It’s hilarious. Define a Beta please. Suppose a game has no multiplayer, can it have a beta?
Before you start name calling i would suggest you get some info on how the previous Halo beta has been done because it’s not what you think it is.
Well… you sort already started with the name calling but i still suggest getting some info.
> Remember the Reach beta?
> That Yoink! was great. The majority of the players loved it. Then there were the few who asked for nerfs all around.
> For some reason, Bungie listened to those few. In my opinion, they ruined Reach by responding to the obnoxious feedback.
> Halo 4 has turned out great, and feels great.
> I wouldn’t want a Halo 5 beta to end up ruining Halo 5 multiplayer due to the few who vocalize their minority opinion.
What was nerfed? Who told Sage?
> Remember the Reach beta?
> That Yoink! was great. The majority of the players loved it. Then there were the few who asked for nerfs all around.
> For some reason, Bungie listened to those few. In my opinion, they ruined Reach by responding to the obnoxious feedback.
> Halo 4 has turned out great, and feels great.
> I wouldn’t want a Halo 5 beta to end up ruining Halo 5 multiplayer due to the few who vocalize their minority opinion.
I completely agree with you. I loved the beta for reach (could play invasion forever, not to mention generator defense). Then when the game actually came out I was disappointed and the playability fell. Had they left Reach like the beta I would have liked it (though there were a handful of aspects that were not so great).
> Remember the Reach beta?
> That Yoink! was great. The majority of the players loved it. Then there were the few who asked for nerfs all around.
> For some reason, Bungie listened to those few. In my opinion, they ruined Reach by responding to the obnoxious feedback.
> Halo 4 has turned out great, and feels great.
> I wouldn’t want a Halo 5 beta to end up ruining Halo 5 multiplayer due to the few who vocalize their minority opinion.
This, although it was the majority of people who called for nerfs all around. For some odd reason, they didn’t like the idea of the Focus Rifle actually acting like a Sniper Rifle.
Halo 5 should have a closed beta and nothing more. A good number of players will only want to use the BR and Sniper Rifle and would see to it that every other weapons besides them are useless.
I’m undecided, I think Halo 4 has been the strongest game of the franchise and there was no Beta, And I’d say Reach was the weakest (not bad, just weakest), and that did have a Beta.