I personally think the decision made to allow Game Informer exclusive coverage of Halo 5 has been a tremendous mistake for a couple reasons:
(1) Game Informer is largely irrelevant and has very few subscribers in comparison to the total gaming community
(2) Game Informer details pretty much spoiled E3 surprises, making Halo 5’s showing completely lackluster (squad-based combat, graphics, story, etc)
(3) Spoilers in Game Informer’s coverage of Halo 5 (cortana’s ghost, etc.) that we could use to piece together more plot details with bits released at E3’s trailer, the Sprint season 2, and elsewhere.
(4) Nobody has any idea when we are getting new information, and apparently more is coming all month long(?) from Game Informer
Going to a dead third-party media outlet seems like a really strange way to hype your game.
I’m sure game informer paid a hefty sum for that exclusivity. I can’t say that I blame them; traditional media is all but obsolete in the face of the ability to spread information nearly instantaneously and to anyone with an internet connection, they and every other print publication are probably desperate to one-up everyone else for a sale.
> 2533274823519895;4:
> I’m sure game informer paid a hefty sum for that exclusivity. I can’t say that I blame them; traditional media is all but obsolete in the face of the ability to spread information nearly instantaneously and to anyone with an internet connection, they and every other print publication are probably desperate to one-up everyone else for a sale.
No doubt. I don’t blame Game Informer, but I thought it kind of a strange decision by 343, even if money was involved. Why couldn’t they have held off their coverage until at least after E3 so that we knew that other Spartans were going to be in the game in our squads during gameplay footage rather than reading about it from some guy’s play test? That way, any questions that had arisen from the gameplay reveal could be clarified after by reading the articles? Obviously I don’t expect anyone to know the answer, but it was a pretty poor decision nonetheless.
I remember buying a game informer mag when they covered Halo 4. In it, frankie had a message saying that he used to work for them. So I imagine it’s because of the good history between frankie and game informer. And it’s not like they are a bad outlet. I agree, it did spoil some of the surprises for the e3 conference, but perhaps June was the only month they could cover Halo 5.
> 2533274856204101;7:
> I remember buying a game informer mag when they covered Halo 4. In it, frankie had a message saying that he used to work for them. So I imagine it’s because of the good history between frankie and game informer. And it’s not like they are a bad outlet. I agree, it did spoil some of the surprises for the e3 conference, but perhaps June was the only month they could cover Halo 5.
I agree. I almost subscribed to Game Informer when I heard that they got exclusive coverage for Halo 5. Makes sense about Connor and Game Informer.
> 2533274856204101;7:
> I remember buying a game informer mag when they covered Halo 4. In it, frankie had a message saying that he used to work for them. So I imagine it’s because of the good history between frankie and game informer. And it’s not like they are a bad outlet. I agree, it did spoil some of the surprises for the e3 conference, but perhaps June was the only month they could cover Halo 5.
When did he he work for them? Before he joined bungie he worked for the official xbox magazine. They covered h4, though made the infamous flub that marked Jul’s faction as the ‘storm’ covenant.
> (1) Game Informer is largely irrelevant and has very few subscribers in comparison to the total gaming community
It is the fourth largest magazine in circulation in the United States with 6.7 million issues sold each month since December of 2014. Definitely not chump change.
> (2) Game Informer details pretty much spoiled E3 surprises, making Halo 5’s showing completely lackluster (squad-based combat, graphics, story, etc)
I was still pretty excited to see that stuff in action rather than in my head.
> (3) Spoilers in Game Informer’s coverage of Halo 5 (cortana’s ghost, etc.) that we could use to piece together more plot details with bits released at E3’s trailer, the Sprint season 2, and elsewhere.
Sure we know details, but I can hardly tell where exactly the game is going and people were making pretty good guesses before the Game Informer issue as stated by Frank O’Connor saying he has about two good summations of the plot.
> (4) Nobody has any idea when we are getting new information, and apparently more is coming all month long(?) from Game Informer
>
> Going to a dead third-party media outlet seems like a really strange way to hype your game.
> 2533274892061674;1:
> I personally think the decision made to allow Game Informer exclusive coverage of Halo 5 has been a tremendous mistake for a couple reasons:
>
> (1) Game Informer is largely irrelevant and has very few subscribers in comparison to the total gaming community
> (2) Game Informer details pretty much spoiled E3 surprises, making Halo 5’s showing completely lackluster (squad-based combat, graphics, story, etc)
> (3) Spoilers in Game Informer’s coverage of Halo 5 (cortana’s ghost, etc.) that we could use to piece together more plot details with bits released at E3’s trailer, the Sprint season 2, and elsewhere.
> (4) Nobody has any idea when we are getting new information, and apparently more is coming all month long(?) from Game Informer
>
> Going to a dead third-party media outlet seems like a really strange way to hype your game.
Says who? Where are these numbers you allude to at?
There wasn’t that much information at E3 to begin with. Sure, the squad controls were new, but they were not used very much in the demo compared to other squad-based games, and seemed fairly scripted when they were used.
You THINK you’ve pieced together plot device, and you may have- but who knows if it is correct or not. 343 has shown it can handle surprise very well with the Hunt The Truth campaign.
The problem here is?
And yet, despite going to this ‘dead third-party media outlet’, people seem to know everything.
> 2533274812652989;11:
> > (1) Game Informer is largely irrelevant and has very few subscribers in comparison to the total gaming community
>
>
> It is the fourth largest magazine in circulation in the United States with 6.7 million issues sold each month since December of 2014. Definitely not chump change.
>
>
>
>
> > (2) Game Informer details pretty much spoiled E3 surprises, making Halo 5’s showing completely lackluster (squad-based combat, graphics, story, etc)
>
>
> I was still pretty excited to see that stuff in action rather than in my head.
>
>
>
>
> > (3) Spoilers in Game Informer’s coverage of Halo 5 (cortana’s ghost, etc.) that we could use to piece together more plot details with bits released at E3’s trailer, the Sprint season 2, and elsewhere.
>
>
> Sure we know details, but I can hardly tell where exactly the game is going and people were making pretty good guesses before the Game Informer issue as stated by Frank O’Connor saying he has about two good summations of the plot.
>
>
>
>
> > (4) Nobody has any idea when we are getting new information, and apparently more is coming all month long(?) from Game Informer
> >
> > Going to a dead third-party media outlet seems like a really strange way to hype your game.
>
>
> I don’t think you know what dead means.
Oh, but if it’s not IGN or Gamespot it must surely be a dead outlet! Right?
> 2533274964189700;10:
> > 2533274856204101;7:
> > I remember buying a game informer mag when they covered Halo 4. In it, frankie had a message saying that he used to work for them. So I imagine it’s because of the good history between frankie and game informer. And it’s not like they are a bad outlet. I agree, it did spoil some of the surprises for the e3 conference, but perhaps June was the only month they could cover Halo 5.
>
>
> When did he he work for them? Before he joined bungie he worked for the official xbox magazine. They covered h4, though made the infamous flub that marked Jul’s faction as the ‘storm’ covenant.
To be honest I kind of like the name “Storm Covenant” it gives their faction its own identity that doesn’t confuse them with the original Covenant.
> 2535436352478403;14:
> To be honest I kind of like the name “Storm Covenant” it gives their faction its own identity that doesn’t confuse them with the original Covenant.
I’m actually surprised in all this time 343 did not provide another name. Though they dont seem to be lasting long in h5 at all.
> 2535436352478403;14:
> > 2533274964189700;10:
> > > 2533274856204101;7:
> > > I remember buying a game informer mag when they covered Halo 4. In it, frankie had a message saying that he used to work for them. So I imagine it’s because of the good history between frankie and game informer. And it’s not like they are a bad outlet. I agree, it did spoil some of the surprises for the e3 conference, but perhaps June was the only month they could cover Halo 5.
> >
> >
> > When did he he work for them? Before he joined bungie he worked for the official xbox magazine. They covered h4, though made the infamous flub that marked Jul’s faction as the ‘storm’ covenant.
>
>
> To be honest I kind of like the name “Storm Covenant” it gives their faction its own identity that doesn’t confuse them with the original Covenant.
Have you ever encountered someone who almost religiously believe that their name is “Storm Covenant”? I have. Quite a few times actually and I hope that name is forever erased from history