Halo 5 will be amazing - read why

  • 343 admitted their mistakes with Halo 4
  • 343 did a lot of things to make Halo 4 better after release
  • Halo 5 will have a Multiplayer beta this december
  • 343 is trying to get as much feedback as possible from the beta to make sure Halo 5 will be good. Since it is in december they will have plenty of time to change things before release
  • It will be 60fps and probably 1080p

> 343 admitted their mistakes with Halo 4

The only mistakes they’ve admitted to are not providing enough in-game backstory to the campaign and not having the terminal videos on the the disc. For all we know, they believe that Personal/Random Ordnance and perks were good ideas and Halo 4’s connection matching system works great.

> 343 did a lot of things to make Halo 4 better after release

[/li]- Weapon Tuning Update

And that’s it.

I don’t count the Champions Bundle because they broke loadouts and Campaign progress (fixed after three months) and DLC achievements (still broken) in the process.

I don’t count the teammate death X because (1) it didn’t even work right the first time and (2) it should’ve been there at launch.

> 343 is trying to get as much feedback as possible from the beta to make sure Halo 5 will be good. Since it is in december they will have plenty of time to change things before release

They will probably not completely add or remove features. Any changes from the beta until launch will probably be not much different from Halo 4’s weapon tuning update: tuning and re-balancing of the existing sandbox.

> It will be 60fps and probably 1080p

Lots of games fail even though they look pretty (e.g. Halo 4’s multiplayer).

> - Halo 5 will have a Multiplayer beta this december

That is nice of them but what if it is just a disaster?

> > - Halo 5 will have a Multiplayer beta this december
>
> That is nice of them but what if it is just a disaster?

I don’t think it will be a disaster and if it is, 343 will have plenty of time to fix/change things

> > > - Halo 5 will have a Multiplayer beta this december
> >
> > That is nice of them but what if it is just a disaster?
>
> I don’t think it will be a disaster and if it is, 343 will have plenty of time to fix/change things

Not to be a buzzkill but,

> Beta is feature and asset complete version of the game, when only bugs are being fixed.[151][152] This version contains no bugs that prevent the game from being shippable.[151] No changes are made to the game features, assets, or code. Beta occurs two to three months before code release.

You’re looking at possible balance corrections and a few bug fixes. Not major overhaul of features, assets etc.

The beta we get is most likely not going to be the whole multiplayer experience, it’s going to be a small part of the whole “game”. Which means that they’ve spent time cutting the part we get out while the real version moved along.

As of that the version we get will most likely be out of date which means that bugs and glitches the community finds most likely have already been found and fixed in the original version.

This beta is most likely going to be a server stress test, a “demo”, a market trick to get the sales up for Halo: MCC and/or early access for those who want it.

> This beta is most likely going to be a server stress test, a “demo”, a market trick to get the sales up for Halo: MCC and/or early access for those who want it.

Again and again they have said this is not the case:

> The Halo 5: Guardians beta, O’Connor stressed, is much more than a simple test to make sure Microsoft’s servers won’t crumble on launch day. “We’re trying to mine it for all the data we can get,” he said. “Not just network data or performance data. It’s like, how are people playing? How are they adapting to the new features? How are they dealing with new weapons? There will be a huge amount of data for us to look at.”

> > This beta is most likely going to be a server stress test, a “demo”, a market trick to get the sales up for Halo: MCC and/or early access for those who want it.
>
> Again and again they have said this is not the case:
>
>
>
> > The Halo 5: Guardians beta, O’Connor stressed, is much more than a simple test to make sure Microsoft’s servers won’t crumble on launch day. “We’re trying to mine it for all the data we can get,” he said. “Not just network data or performance data. It’s like, how are people playing? How are they adapting to the new features? How are they dealing with new weapons? There will be a huge amount of data for us to look at.”

I find it hard to believe that this data would be of any use to the developers in a development point of view, especially if the game has already hit the Beta milestone. Well, perhaps in behind the scenes stuff, like skill calculation programs and other stuff like that.

Even more, they’re giving us three weeks. Three weeks in a limited environment, most likely, if it’s the whole experience it’s even less time to get to properly know the whole game since it’s in the holidays. Which is another point going towards the “boost sales” for Halo: MCC part. It’s a “perfect” christmas present, or other religious present giving festivity you might enjoy.

Sure, they might look how people “adapt” to new features, but that’s not going to make the developers put new features in for the full game, it’s not going to make the developers cut features. Perhaps they’ll remap some buttons, or rebalance some features or assets. They’re however not going to cut or add anything.

O’Connors says a lot of things, I specifically remember when he said that older players would not get an advantage over new players. We ended up with Spartan Points unlocking gameplay assets for your personal loadouts.

Posting something I said from a similar thread:

> Not trying to rain on your parade OP, but I would be exceedingly cautious not to let my optimism blind me if I were you. Halo 4 was possibly the worst Halo game in the entire franchise, as well as the worst designed overall. It had outsourced everything (cutscenes, multiplayer, Spartan Ops, development, lore, etc.), the worst multiplayer in the series that they admitted themselves, tons of cut features from previous games, a poorly written and melodramatic campaign that was about as relatable as a Mexican soap opera, as well as borrowing the Reach engine itself, which caused tons of problems when trying to understand the code which then led to poor creative decisions such as keeping AA’s and Reach’s texture loading issues. Not only did all of that happen, but it also had no support at launch with many bugs and missing features, a lot of which are still here today. Not only that, but due to 343’s “innovations,” Halo 4 had the fastest amount of population drop of for online play for any Halo game, with the total online population dropping below 300,000 players 8 days after release.
>
> Halo 4 was a decent game, but a terrible Halo game. Spartan Assault was even more forgettable. With the announcement of Halo 5, the majority of the fanbase is honestly quite terrified. Halo 5 is either going to go one of two ways: 1) 343 will some how miraculously find Bungie’s secret formula to make a good Halo game and it will be a great title, or 2) Halo 5 will perform just as bad, if not worse, than Halo 4 in terms of scale and perfection and it will sink faster than a greased-up Titanic and the Xbone will sink right with it. Place your faith wherever you wish, but at least consider a healthy dose of reality with it.
>
> Also, I’m very surprised you had no clue the Halo Collection was coming out. It was leaked on Google News a month before E3, plus after Halo: CEA was released everybody was begging for a H2: A. It was kind of obvious.

Tread carefully, and don’t let false hope blind you. As much as I like the series, it’s standing at a forked road right now.

Halo 4 will be amazing guys. 343 are the ones who gave us the zero bloom Reach update. They get it.

> > 343 admitted their mistakes with Halo 4
>
> The only mistakes they’ve admitted to are not providing enough in-game backstory to the campaign and not having the terminal videos on the the disc. For all we know, they believe that Personal/Random Ordnance and perks were good ideas and Halo 4’s connection matching system works great.
>
>
>
> > 343 did a lot of things to make Halo 4 better after release
>
> [/li]1. Weapon Tuning Update
>
> And that’s it.
>
> I don’t count the Champions Bundle because they broke loadouts and Campaign progress (fixed after three months) and DLC achievements (still broken) in the process.
>
> I don’t count the teammate death X because (1) it didn’t even work right the first time and (2) it should’ve been there at launch.
>
>
>
> > 343 is trying to get as much feedback as possible from the beta to make sure Halo 5 will be good. Since it is in december they will have plenty of time to change things before release
>
> They will probably not completely add or remove features. Any changes from the beta until launch will probably be not much different from Halo 4’s weapon tuning update: tuning and re-balancing of the existing sandbox.
>
>
>
> > It will be 60fps and probably 1080p
>
> Lots of games fail even though they look pretty (e.g. Halo 4’s multiplayer).
[/quote]
Did you completely miss the Bulletin where Frankie came out and said that they know they made a lot of mistakes, and have learned/are learning a lot from Halo 4?
>
> Oh, sure. They’ve only done one thing to improve Halo 4. Forget numerous title updates, playlist additions, tweaks, gametypes, etc.
> Just because things ideally should have been there at launch doesn’t mean working to add them later isn’t a sign of dedication and desire to improve it for the community.
>
> Uhh… that’s the entire point of the beta, to tweak weapons and gameplay so they’re more solid at launch. In addition to that, it allows them to stress-test the servers and get to know how the game will be played, so they can act accordingly as they continue to polish and tweak.
> Of course they won’t completely remodel the game. But they’re also putting the beta a year before launch so they can really use the feedback meaningfully.

Nothing they’ve done or said will fix the problem some people have with 343i taking the franchise in a direction they don’t agree with.

inb4 Halo 5 is terrible

Everyone said the same about reach, and what do you know? It turned out to be a joke not even worthy to have “Halo” in its title. Everyone said the same about Halo 4, and what do you know? It turned out terrible as well. Don’t assume anything until the details have been released and thoroughly processed, because otherwise you might as well be digging your own grave.

It’s pretty funny how short term everybody’s memories are. I made a thread way back when saying that Halo 4 is copying cod, and everybody at the time put their blindfolds on and defended 343. Flash forward a month after H4 has been released, and the game has record low population peak, and everybody on the forums were saying the same thing I did months before. As far as I know, history loves to repeat itself.

Not saying I think Halo 5 will be bad; on the contrary, I know 343 is smart enough not to screw themselves over twice and will definitely learn from H4. But it is much, much too early to start reassuring yourself. You look downright foolish making this blind statement, and if Halo 5 turns out to be a joke, I will be ecstatic to revisit this thread and laugh at how blind this community is. Because if there’s one thing I’ve learned from being on the Bungie and 343 forums, it’s that history loves to repeat itself.

OP, if I were you, I would be cautious. We literally know next to nothing about Halo 5’s multiplayer; anything can happen.

> Did you completely miss the Bulletin where Frankie came out and said that they know they made a lot of mistakes, and have learned/are learning a lot from Halo 4?

Frankie never specified what those mistakes were.

> Forget numerous title updates, playlist additions, tweaks, gametypes, etc.

Bug fixes and playlist updates are part of normal post-launch support.

> Just because things ideally should have been there at launch doesn’t mean working to add them later isn’t a sign of dedication and desire to improve it for the community.

Does that mean that missing custom game options, missing Forge options, lack of Campaign Theater, broken alert carry, broken achievements, unobtainable unlocks, broken stat-tracking, poor skill and connection matchmaking, imbalanced/OP loadout options, etc. are an example of a lack of dedication? I’m not implying anything; I’m just asking.

> Uhh… that’s the entire point of the beta, to tweak weapons and gameplay so they’re more solid at launch.
> …
> Of course they won’t completely remodel the game. But they’re also putting the beta a year before launch so they can really use the feedback meaningfully.

Halo 4 needed a complete remodel. So all I’m saying is that if Halo 5 is as broken as Halo 4 was, a public demo a year in advance is still too late to rectify huge game-breaking problems.

It’s possible that the reason 343i hired pros wasn’t to provide feedback for Halo 5, but for the MCC. So honestly, I will wait to see if 343i keeps employing the pros past the MCC’s launch. That will give me a better idea as to if they’re interested in providing a balanced, competitive, quality multiplayer experience.

> > > > - Halo 5 will have a Multiplayer beta this december
> > >
> > > That is nice of them but what if it is just a disaster?
> >
> > I don’t think it will be a disaster and if it is, 343 will have plenty of time to fix/change things
>
> Not to be a buzzkill but,
>
>
>
> > Beta is feature and asset complete version of the game, when only bugs are being fixed.[151][152] This version contains no bugs that prevent the game from being shippable.[151] No changes are made to the game features, assets, or code. Beta occurs two to three months before code release.
>
> You’re looking at possible balance corrections and a few bug fixes. Not major overhaul of features, assets etc.
>
> The beta we get is most likely not going to be the whole multiplayer experience, it’s going to be a small part of the whole “game”. Which means that they’ve spent time cutting the part we get out while the real version moved along.
>
> As of that the version we get will most likely be out of date which means that bugs and glitches the community finds most likely have already been found and fixed in the original version.
>
> This beta is most likely going to be a server stress test, a “demo”, a market trick to get the sales up for Halo: MCC and/or early access for those who want it.

Nobody uses Wikipedias definition of what a beta is. Look at the battlefield 4 beta lol. It certainly needed more work than just big fixes and it was called a beta regardless. It does truly seen as though the h5 beta will be very meaningful, more so even than halo 3s. For the rest, I can only HOPE 343 learned from h4, it seems like they have considering the announcements they made, but… Fool me once u know?

> Nobody uses Wikipedias definition of what a beta is. Look at the battlefield 4 beta lol. It certainly needed more work than just big fixes and it was called a beta regardless. It does truly seen as though the h5 beta will be very meaningful, more so even than halo 3s. For the rest, I can only HOPE 343 learned from h4, it seems like they have considering the announcements they made, but… Fool me once u know?

There’s no “true” definition of what a Beta really is, but they usually follow the same guidelines. It is a “complete” game, the only issues are glitches, you’ll never see a beta with placeholders, missing textures or game crashes that prevent the game from being playable, and by that I don’t mean the game is unbalanced or that it has some gameplay issues, I mean game crashing bugs that can happen frequently.

I didn’t play the BF4 beta, neither have I played the retail game, but I’m pretty sure assets and features weren’t added post-beta. Like them not having sprint at all coded in the beta and then suddenly implementing it inbetween.

I want proof, soon, that 343i are actually listening to the user-base about Halo 5.

343i has stressed that they’ve made mistakes, and while excuses shouldn’t be made for all the features that were lacking from Halo 4, they were relatively new to the franchise. They cannot pull that card anymore, and I don’t think they will have to. They’ve already eradicated AAs, which was something the community wanted done since Reach launched. 343i has learned a lot. I think they mean well (The Masterchief Collection solidified this), so I expect not to be screwed over. Only time will tell however.

They said they’ve learned from their mistakes. I only hope they didn’t make the fans a promise…
If they know they can’t keep it. WABAM!

AAs were taken out. That’s enough for me as oif right now.

> It’s possible that the reason 343i hired pros wasn’t to provide feedback for Halo 5, but for the MCC. So honestly, <mark>I will wait to see if 343i keeps employing the pros past the MCC’s launch.</mark> That will give me a better idea as to if they’re interested in providing a balanced, competitive, quality multiplayer experience.

So your saying that they hired community pros, only to fire them when the Collection launches? That makes no sense to me. They may have hired them for that reason, but it would be much more sensible to keep them on board for the future.