Reach’s worst mistake, contrary to popular opinion, was not AA’s, or bloom, or any other vitriol.
Reach’s worst mistake was its Title Update.
Usually in Halo’s past, a Title Update, once enacted, was mandatory for all online play, and swept across the entire game, no matter what criticism it faced. Even if the Title Update’s changes faced opposition, the community remained united under the same playlists.
With Reach, however, not only did it have the tens of playlists that already fracture the community akin to other Halo titles, but now the community has been further splintered twice over into playlists that contain TU and playlists that don’t.
This must not happen with Halo 4. Even if the TU completely mauls all the game mechanics, it must be final, and it must sweep across the entire game, in order to keep the Halo community united under the same playlists.
Otherwise, Halo 4’s playlists will feel just as baren as some of Reach’s.
Even if we fight over changes or gameplay mechanics, even if we disagree to the point of flaming, we must remain united.
> Halo 4 will likely have the customisation for what Reach didn’t when it comes to the TU changes.
>
> I truly only expected bug fixes for Halo 4’s TU’s.
Halo 2’s TU drastically altered the melee system and the BR, with similar changes happening to all the other games.
I expect Halo 4’s TU to overhaul gameplay, and I hope, for the sake of the community, it is final across the entire game.
I loved the TU in Reach but the fact that it had different bloom settings (ZB, 100, 85) really says to me that the game could have used another year in development. It’s ridiculous when we have three settings instead of one setting that just “works”.
For Halo 4, we cannot afford to have this happen again. The settings need to work right out of the box.
I do agree that if the game is altered with a TU, that it needs to be across the board.
The problem is that Microsoft requires $40,000 for each update, regardless of how small it is. If that price was low we’d be seeing developers updating their game more often. I wouldn’t have a problem with Reachs TU if they were planning on another TU to address the problems from the previous one.
Fixing a game via patches is done with a chisel, not a hammer.
> The problem is that Microsoft requires $40,000 for each update, regardless of how small it is. If that price was low we’d be seeing developers updating their game more often. I wouldn’t have a problem with Reachs TU if they were planning on another TU to address the problems from the previous one.
>
> Fixing a game via patches is done with a chisel, not a hammer.
> The problem is that Microsoft requires $40,000 for each update, regardless of how small it is. If that price was low we’d be seeing developers updating their game more often. I wouldn’t have a problem with Reachs TU if they were planning on another TU to address the problems from the previous one.
>
> Fixing a game via patches is done with a chisel, not a hammer.
Oh dear God! Then by all means, make the update more worthwhile, and at least make it useful for 100% of the game rather than just 50%. Just think of the money wasted if the TU only applies to half of Halo 4’s playlists…
> > The problem is that Microsoft requires $40,000 for each update, regardless of how small it is. If that price was low we’d be seeing developers updating their game more often. I wouldn’t have a problem with Reachs TU if they were planning on another TU to address the problems from the previous one.
> >
> > Fixing a game via patches is done with a chisel, not a hammer.
>
> Why would Microsoft charge themselves?
Just because the company is a Microsoft branch doesn’t mean they have an unlimited budget, they have to pay for these things too.
> > > The problem is that Microsoft requires $40,000 for each update, regardless of how small it is. If that price was low we’d be seeing developers updating their game more often. I wouldn’t have a problem with Reachs TU if they were planning on another TU to address the problems from the previous one.
> > >
> > > Fixing a game via patches is done with a chisel, not a hammer.
> >
> > Why would Microsoft charge themselves?
>
> Just because the company is a Microsoft branch doesn’t mean they have an unlimited budget, they have to pay for these things too.
Well they of coarse will need to develop the update, but they aren’t making any money by charging them selfs to issue the update, that would be like me owning a tire store and charging tire making companies 10% but i also charge my self for my tires 10%, well that doesn’t actually mean anything since it was already mine.
> > > > The problem is that Microsoft requires $40,000 for each update, regardless of how small it is. If that price was low we’d be seeing developers updating their game more often. I wouldn’t have a problem with Reachs TU if they were planning on another TU to address the problems from the previous one.
> > > >
> > > > Fixing a game via patches is done with a chisel, not a hammer.
> > >
> > > Why would Microsoft charge themselves?
> >
> > Just because the company is a Microsoft branch doesn’t mean they have an unlimited budget, they have to pay for these things too.
>
> Well they of coarse will need to develop the update, but they aren’t making any money by charging them selfs to issue the update, that would be like me owning a tire store and charging tire making companies 10% but i also charge my self for my tires 10%, well that doesn’t actually mean anything since it was already mine.
Microsoft and 343i must have independent bank accounts. Microsoft’s bank account is charged the money for the update. Therefore, Microsoft demands compensation for said charge.
TU’s were final for Halo 2 and 3, in Reach’s case was a disaster. I agree that Halo 4 will no doubtfully be as flexible as Reach, but when there’s fixin needed, things better be fixed across the board, that includes gauss cannon firing through forge objects and juggernaut actually playable with custom settings…
oh wait those didn’t get fixed and settled on dividing the communities into 1/3’s (ZB, 100, 85)… huh…
> TU’s were final for Halo 2 and 3, in Reach’s case was a disaster. I agree that Halo 4 will no doubtfully be as flexible as Reach, but when there’s fixin needed, things better be fixed across the board, that includes gauss cannon firing through forge objects and juggernaut actually playable with custom settings…
>
> oh wait those didn’t get fixed and settled on dividing the communities into 1/3’s <mark>(ZB, 100, 85)</mark>… huh…
If you’re any good, you can play with any of those settings.
> Actually, Reach’s TU made it a lot better. I’m really not sure where you’re coming from on this one.
Did you not read my post? I clearly said that it was Bungie’s execution of Reach’s TU that further fractured Halo’s community, which must not be done to Halo 4’s playlists, and that Halo 4’s playlists must remain united even after the TU.
The reason Reach’s TU ruined it is because unlike the other Halo TUs, Reach’s changed the way the game was played. With most games, TUs usually just fix bugs and glitches and other minor (some major) problems. The Reach TU completely changed the mechanics for the game, which most people didn’t like. I also don’t believe that Halo: Reach was made to support “classic” Halo mechanics. Which is why many people complained about bleedthrough and zero bloom. Bungie didn’t make the game with “classic” Halo in mind. 343 tried to make Reach mimic “classic” Halo, but failed.
> The reason Reach’s TU ruined it is because unlike the other Halo TUs, Reach’s changed the way the game was played. With most games, TUs usually just fix bugs and glitches and other minor (some major) problems. The Reach TU completely changed the mechanics for the game, which most people didn’t like. I also don’t believe that Halo: Reach was made to support “classic” Halo mechanics. Which is why many people complained about bleedthrough and zero bloom. Bungie didn’t make the game with “classic” Halo in mind. 343 tried to make Reach mimic “classic” Halo, but failed.
Okay, Halo 2’s TU drastically changed both the Melee and the BR, and that’s just the changes that I can think of off the top of my head.
Halo’s TU’s have always made drastic changes to gameplay, and Reach’s TU didn’t work because it gave people the option not to utilize it, which splintered the community even further, making some playlists even more baren than before.
> > TU’s were final for Halo 2 and 3, in Reach’s case was a disaster. I agree that Halo 4 will no doubtfully be as flexible as Reach, but when there’s fixin needed, things better be fixed across the board, that includes gauss cannon firing through forge objects and juggernaut actually playable with custom settings…
> >
> > oh wait those didn’t get fixed and settled on dividing the communities into 1/3’s <mark>(ZB, 100, 85)</mark>… huh…
>
> If you’re any good, you can play with any of those settings.
I know I can play in those settings either way, but the fact remains that having 3 different variable settings for a mechanic which is supposed to work at all levels of the game is silly to have, and other things that were neglected are still neglected.
That’s like trying to have the melee in one playlist indicate you beat him down first and rewarded while the other one is -blam- off, and in the other playlist both melees are accounted for in a pummeled match, no one is mad, everyone wins.
No, things need to have a fix that’s final across, and MAYBE then have some alterations but available for customs only…
I don’t think they will have a reach style TU but instead they will have an update fixing bugs and what not. I think 343 looked at reach as somewhat of a prototype for all the new ideas implemented in the game (AA’s for example) and is trying to improve/balance them before they release the game.