Halo 4 and Microsoft? Why blame?

I see a lot of people blame microsoft for halo 4’s current status.
Why? That’s a good question. WHY do people keep blaming microsoft?
Does anyone ACTUALLY think a super company like Microsoft would actually sit there and ponder “Hm, what do we do with Halo today?” or “We HAVE to ruin halo!”

It’s a pretty big company, and i’m pretty sure Halo 4 is not what they sit there and wonder all day long. Caring for Halo 4 is 343’s job. Microsoft does not sit there and say “Alright 343i, make Halo 4 as crappy as possible, because that’s what we want. We don’t care about our millions of other products such as computers. One of our biggest focuses is Halo 4, a video game.”
Microsoft just owns 343i, 343i is just a smaller company under Microsoft that MANAGES Halo.
Anybody else think different? I don’t know everything about Microsoft, but I do know that Halo 4 is under 343i’s care.

The main question i guess is: Why do you’s keep blaming Microsoft for trying to ruin Halo 4? Do you have ANY legitimate proof of that accusation? Or is this just something people scream up and down because they NEED something to blame for their buyer’s remorse with Halo 4? Because the last time I checked, 343 is responsible for Halo 4, not Microsoft. Microsoft is just releasing it and stuff. 343 actually makes the game.

In my opinion, it’s just foolish to just think how many people in the Halo community play a few Halo games, and then honestly think they know everything about how Microsoft and 343 runs, JUST from playing a couple games and spending a few hours in the waypoint forums.
I’m sorry if I’m offending anyone, but this is just ridiculous, and until yous can prove you work at Microsoft or 343 industries, then you shouldn’t be accusing these companies for anything so ridiculous.
I’m sorry but trying to call out huge companies and make accusations is a little over your head if you’re just some gamer.

Btw, for some reason people commenting think I don’t know that 343 is owned by Microsoft, which I do. THAT’S common sense, it says all over their games, and all over halo waypoint. So please don’t comment and say “OP YOU DIDN’T KNOW 343 WAS OWNED BY MICROSOFT??”

Microsoft funds 343i.

343i makes future Halo games.

Microsoft is in competition with Activision Blizzard (Call of Duty).

Microsoft wants to steal clients from CoD to bring them to Halo.

Microsoft tells 343i to make Halo 4 more like CoD.

EDIT: It’s all about money in the end.

> Microsoft funds 343i.
>
> 343i makes future Halo games.
>
> <mark>Microsoft is in competition with Activision Blizzard (Call of Duty).</mark>
>
> Microsoft wants to steal clients from CoD to bring them to Halo.
>
> <mark>Microsoft tells 343i to make Halo 4 more like CoD.</mark>
>
> EDIT: It’s all about money in the end.

Where’s your proof of this? Or is this just something you heard so you’re screaming it too? Something you’re ASSUMING?

Since Microsoft funds development and pays the developers, they have every right to shape the game into a supposed “CoD Killer”. With ordnance, perks, and sprint.

Also, 343 is Microsoft, so there is that.

Wikipedia

Note the subsidy part.

Asking for proof about Microsoft (Halo) and Activison Blizzard (Call of Duty) being in competition is silly, you’re silly.

Because at the end of the day the publishers are the ones who set up the schedule of development, release dates and apply pressure to the devs to release a game. All of those things can hit a games quality, though criticizing the devs is still a legitimate thing when done right.

> Since Microsoft funds development and pays the developers, they have every right to shape the game into a supposed “CoD Killer”. With ordnance, perks, and sprint.
>
> Also, 343 is Microsoft, so there is that.
>
> Wikipedia
>
> Note the subsidy part.
>
> Asking for proof about Microsoft (Halo) and Activison Blizzard (Call of Duty) being in competition is silly, you’re silly.

You didn’t answer my question in any way, all you did was give me a link to wikipedia about Microsoft and 343, which btw wikipedia is not the most legitimate source.

So basically this is something you’re assuming? Judging by the way my questions flew right over your head.

> > Since Microsoft funds development and pays the developers, they have every right to shape the game into a supposed “CoD Killer”. With ordnance, perks, and sprint.
> >
> > Also, 343 is Microsoft, so there is that.
> >
> > Wikipedia
> >
> > Note the subsidy part.
> >
> > Asking for proof about Microsoft (Halo) and Activison Blizzard (Call of Duty) being in competition is silly, you’re silly.
>
> You didn’t answer my question in any way, all you did was give me a link to wikipedia about Microsoft and 343, which btw wikipedia is not the most legitimate source.
>
> So basically this is something you’re assuming? Judging by the way my questions flew right over your head.

Not assuming anything, as I said, 343 is Microsoft, and Microsoft won’t even look at publishing the game until the game is at their standards/wants.

Saying Wikipedia isn’t legitimate is just what teachers in school want you to believe. Nearly everything is cited.

> Because at the end of the day the publishers are the ones who set up the schedule of development, release dates and apply pressure to the devs to release a game. All of those things can hit a games quality, though criticizing the devs is still a legitimate thing when done right.

I assume you’re one of the people thinking Halo 4 was rushed?

> > > Since Microsoft funds development and pays the developers, they have every right to shape the game into a supposed “CoD Killer”. With ordnance, perks, and sprint.
> > >
> > > Also, 343 is Microsoft, so there is that.
> > >
> > > Wikipedia
> > >
> > > Note the subsidy part.
> > >
> > > Asking for proof about Microsoft (Halo) and Activison Blizzard (Call of Duty) being in competition is silly, you’re silly.
> >
> > You didn’t answer my question in any way, all you did was give me a link to wikipedia about Microsoft and 343, which btw wikipedia is not the most legitimate source.
> >
> > So basically this is something you’re assuming? Judging by the way my questions flew right over your head.
>
> Not assuming anything, as I said, 343 is Microsoft, <mark>and Microsoft won’t even look at publishing the game until the game is at their standards/wants.</mark>
>
> Saying Wikipedia isn’t legitimate is just what teachers in school want you to believe. Nearly everything is cited.

Where are you getting your information? How do you even know this?

> > > > Since Microsoft funds development and pays the developers, they have every right to shape the game into a supposed “CoD Killer”. With ordnance, perks, and sprint.
> > > >
> > > > Also, 343 is Microsoft, so there is that.
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > >
> > > > Note the subsidy part.
> > > >
> > > > Asking for proof about Microsoft (Halo) and Activison Blizzard (Call of Duty) being in competition is silly, you’re silly.
> > >
> > > You didn’t answer my question in any way, all you did was give me a link to wikipedia about Microsoft and 343, which btw wikipedia is not the most legitimate source.
> > >
> > > So basically this is something you’re assuming? Judging by the way my questions flew right over your head.
> >
> > Not assuming anything, as I said, 343 is Microsoft, <mark>and Microsoft won’t even look at publishing the game until the game is at their standards/wants.</mark>
> >
> > Saying Wikipedia isn’t legitimate is just what teachers in school want you to believe. Nearly everything is cited.
>
> Where are you getting your information? How do you even know this?

Because it’s common knowledge in manufacturing industries. Why would someone release something that isn’t up to their standards? It’s just common knowledge.

Let’s say I make a new chocolate bar, and it’s too salty for my standards. I wouldn’t release it to the public until it’s to my satisfaction.

Or if I worked for Nestle, and the CEO didn’t like it until he did, what choice do I have but to fix it or lose my job?

> > > > Since Microsoft funds development and pays the developers, they have every right to shape the game into a supposed “CoD Killer”. With ordnance, perks, and sprint.
> > > >
> > > > Also, 343 is Microsoft, so there is that.
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > >
> > > > Note the subsidy part.
> > > >
> > > > Asking for proof about Microsoft (Halo) and Activison Blizzard (Call of Duty) being in competition is silly, you’re silly.
> > >
> > > You didn’t answer my question in any way, all you did was give me a link to wikipedia about Microsoft and 343, which btw wikipedia is not the most legitimate source.
> > >
> > > So basically this is something you’re assuming? Judging by the way my questions flew right over your head.
> >
> > Not assuming anything, as I said, 343 is Microsoft, <mark>and Microsoft won’t even look at publishing the game until the game is at their standards/wants.</mark>
> >
> > Saying Wikipedia isn’t legitimate is just what teachers in school want you to believe. Nearly everything is cited.
>
> Where are you getting your information? How do you even know this?

Microsoft wouldn’t allow Halo 4 on the market since they own the rights to it.
If 343 didn’t have what Microsoft wants.

Simple as that.

Bungie wouldn’t have made Halo 1,2,3, my favorite games ever, if it weren’t for Microsoft buying them and keeping them on task.

> > > > > Since Microsoft funds development and pays the developers, they have every right to shape the game into a supposed “CoD Killer”. With ordnance, perks, and sprint.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, 343 is Microsoft, so there is that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia
> > > > >
> > > > > Note the subsidy part.
> > > > >
> > > > > Asking for proof about Microsoft (Halo) and Activison Blizzard (Call of Duty) being in competition is silly, you’re silly.
> > > >
> > > > You didn’t answer my question in any way, all you did was give me a link to wikipedia about Microsoft and 343, which btw wikipedia is not the most legitimate source.
> > > >
> > > > So basically this is something you’re assuming? Judging by the way my questions flew right over your head.
> > >
> > > Not assuming anything, as I said, 343 is Microsoft, <mark>and Microsoft won’t even look at publishing the game until the game is at their standards/wants.</mark>
> > >
> > > Saying Wikipedia isn’t legitimate is just what teachers in school want you to believe. Nearly everything is cited.
> >
> > Where are you getting your information? How do you even know this?
>
> Because it’s common knowledge in manufacturing industries. Why would someone release something that isn’t up to their standards? It’s just common knowledge.
>
> Let’s say I make a new chocolate bar, and it’s too salty for my standards. I wouldn’t release it to the public until it’s to my satisfaction.
>
> Or if I worked for Nestle, and the CEO didn’t like it until he did, what choice do I have but to fix it or lose my job?

So you have NO legitimate source, you’re just saying this is COMMON KNOWLEDGE?

> > Microsoft funds 343i.
> >
> > 343i makes future Halo games.
> >
> > <mark>Microsoft is in competition with Activision Blizzard (Call of Duty).</mark>
> >
> > Microsoft wants to steal clients from CoD to bring them to Halo.
> >
> > <mark>Microsoft tells 343i to make Halo 4 more like CoD.</mark>
> >
> > EDIT: It’s all about money in the end.
>
> Where’s your proof of this? Or is this just something you heard so you’re screaming it too? Something you’re ASSUMING?

Really? You need proof for something like that?

It’s not asumming something. It’s, simply, pointing out the obvious.

> > > > > > Since Microsoft funds development and pays the developers, they have every right to shape the game into a supposed “CoD Killer”. With ordnance, perks, and sprint.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also, 343 is Microsoft, so there is that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Note the subsidy part.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Asking for proof about Microsoft (Halo) and Activison Blizzard (Call of Duty) being in competition is silly, you’re silly.
> > > > >
> > > > > You didn’t answer my question in any way, all you did was give me a link to wikipedia about Microsoft and 343, which btw wikipedia is not the most legitimate source.
> > > > >
> > > > > So basically this is something you’re assuming? Judging by the way my questions flew right over your head.
> > > >
> > > > Not assuming anything, as I said, 343 is Microsoft, <mark>and Microsoft won’t even look at publishing the game until the game is at their standards/wants.</mark>
> > > >
> > > > Saying Wikipedia isn’t legitimate is just what teachers in school want you to believe. Nearly everything is cited.
> > >
> > > Where are you getting your information? How do you even know this?
> >
> > Because it’s common knowledge in manufacturing industries. Why would someone release something that isn’t up to their standards? It’s just common knowledge.
> >
> > Let’s say I make a new chocolate bar, and it’s too salty for my standards. I wouldn’t release it to the public until it’s to my satisfaction.
> >
> > Or if I worked for Nestle, and the CEO didn’t like it until he did, what choice do I have but to fix it or lose my job?
>
> So you have NO legitimate source, you’re just saying this is COMMON KNOWLEDGE?

Obviously it isn’t common knowledge as your showing me right now. This is how EVERY major company works, there is no source, it’s just how they work and have for a while.

Microsoft wanted Halo 4 out for the holiday season and to beat Black Ops 2 to release. This deadline is clearly reflected in the quality and features in Halo4, or lack thereof.

> > Microsoft funds 343i.
> >
> > 343i makes future Halo games.
> >
> > <mark>Microsoft is in competition with Activision Blizzard (Call of Duty).</mark>
> >
> > Microsoft wants to steal clients from CoD to bring them to Halo.
> >
> > <mark>Microsoft tells 343i to make Halo 4 more like CoD.</mark>
> > <mark>EDIT: It’s all about money in the end.
[/quote]
Where’s your proof of this? Or is this just something you heard so you’re screaming it too? Something you’re ASSUMING?
[/quote]
are you a bloody 12 year old? why do you need proof Microsoft is in competition with Activision or EA or what have you? it’s common -Yoinking!- knowledge.</mark>

> Bungie wouldn’t have made Halo 1,2,3, my favorite games ever, if it weren’t for Microsoft buying them and keeping them on task.

yes, but they also bought rare, and i think we all know where that went.

> > Microsoft funds 343i.
> >
> > 343i makes future Halo games.
> >
> > <mark>Microsoft is in competition with Activision Blizzard (Call of Duty).</mark>
> >
> > Microsoft wants to steal clients from CoD to bring them to Halo.
> >
> > <mark>Microsoft tells 343i to make Halo 4 more like CoD.</mark>
> >
> > EDIT: It’s all about money in the end.
>
> Where’s your proof of this? Or is this just something you heard so you’re screaming it too? Something you’re ASSUMING?

MICROSOFT owns 343. Hell, MICROSOFT created 343 for the sole propose to create Halo. Also H4 was released a week before BlOps2 in an attempt to take sales numbers from Treyarch/Activision. Pretty sure if you’re not blind, then this is all the proof you need.

Blops2 had over 250k players when I played it the first time a week ago… while h4 was under 50…

Made me sad.

If this was an attempt to be like cod, it has clearly failed. And halo shouldn’t strive to be like that mess. It should be the direct opposite.