Hate on 343 all you want

Think about this. Overwatch came out, great game. Only multiplayer, not only that 1/10 of the multiplayer content than Halo. Battlefront with DLC - 80$. Has 1/8 the content with the dlc than Halo at launch.

343 could have been -Yoinks!- and added in paid DLC. Could it have been at launch? Sure, but they didn’t have to. This company is probably one of the least money hungry turds out there. Shoot even Bungie charged more for DLC and the game isn’t even fun. Hats off to you 343, sorry you have so many haters at your front door, but I support you over any other company out there.

Let the hate flow through you

People fail to understand that games have moved onto to the SAAS model (software as a service). You buy a base and then it is supported throughout its life. 343 is doing this but it also added some great new game modes at launch which it wanted to promote - hence the lack of other game modes at launch.

> 2533274818084099;2:
> People fail to understand that games have moved onto to the SAAS model (software as a service). You buy a base and then it is supported throughout its life. 343 is doing this but it also added some great new game modes at launch which it wanted to promote - hence the lack of other game modes at launch.

Exactly, I bought overwatch and battlefront because all of my friends got it, but outside of the regular multiplayer you have no game. 60$ for a game that is basically giving out free DLC regardless of how people want to look at it, it is what it is.

> 2533274809217985;3:
> > 2533274818084099;2:
> > People fail to understand that games have moved onto to the SAAS model (software as a service). You buy a base and then it is supported throughout its life. 343 is doing this but it also added some great new game modes at launch which it wanted to promote - hence the lack of other game modes at launch.
>
>
> Exactly, I bought overwatch and battlefront because all of my friends got it, but outside of the regular multiplayer you have no game. 60$ for a game that is basically giving out free DLC regardless of how people want to look at it, it is what it is.

Battlefront isn’t really giving out free DLC at all. It’s $110 for a “full” game. One that you can only play online. It also (at least last I checked when I played it months ago) doesn’t have microtransactions like Halo 5 does.

And I think people do understand that games have moved into the SAAS model, but that doesn’t mean they have to like it. “Old school” gamers like me don’t like it at all, because it simply lacks the features that older games had. It’s quite sad when there’s more launch content with Star Wars Battlefront II in 2005 than DICE Battlefront in 2015. Which also means it’s a lot easier to burn out early on these games because there isn’t a whole lot to do on them. So by the time there is, I’ve moved on to do something else.

Maybe the current gaming industry model isn’t meant to cater to us older gamers. And if that’s the way it is, I guess so be it. It’s just disappointing to see.

> 2533274850493408;4:
> > 2533274809217985;3:
> > > 2533274818084099;2:
> > > People fail to understand that games have moved onto to the SAAS model (software as a service). You buy a base and then it is supported throughout its life. 343 is doing this but it also added some great new game modes at launch which it wanted to promote - hence the lack of other game modes at launch.
> >
> >
> > Exactly, I bought overwatch and battlefront because all of my friends got it, but outside of the regular multiplayer you have no game. 60$ for a game that is basically giving out free DLC regardless of how people want to look at it, it is what it is.
>
>
> Battlefront isn’t really giving out free DLC at all. It’s $110 for a “full” game. One that you can only play online. It also (at least last I checked when I played it months ago) doesn’t have microtransactions like Halo 5 does.
>
> And I think people do understand that games have moved into the SAAS model, but that doesn’t mean they have to like it. “Old school” gamers like me don’t like it at all, because it simply lacks the features that older games had. It’s quite sad when there’s more launch content with Star Wars Battlefront II in 2005 than DICE Battlefront in 2015. Which also means it’s a lot easier to burn out early on these games because there isn’t a whole lot to do on them. So by the time there is, I’ve moved on to do something else.
>
> Maybe the current gaming industry model isn’t meant to cater to us older gamers. And if that’s the way it is, I guess so be it. It’s just disappointing to see.

That’s exactly what I mean about Battlefront, i thought it was only 89$ though ouch, not only that they are coming out with a new battlefront in 2017. Halo 5 micro transactions are far from a big deal when comparing to other games, shoot mobile games are insane. Halo isn’t pay to win, but Clash of lords 2, castle clash, any mobile game now people spend thousands on and they don’t complain, I just don’t understand people’s logic sometimes.

I have less to complain about because I bought Halo 5 on black friday and they accidently put it in the 10$ bin, and haven’t spent a dime since then, but I bought Battlefront for 60 and got bored after a few weeks. Especially because all the weapons are pretty much the same.

> 2533274850493408;4:
> > 2533274809217985;3:
> > > 2533274818084099;2:
> > > People fail to understand that games have moved onto to the SAAS model (software as a service). You buy a base and then it is supported throughout its life. 343 is doing this but it also added some great new game modes at launch which it wanted to promote - hence the lack of other game modes at launch.
> >
> >
> > Exactly, I bought overwatch and battlefront because all of my friends got it, but outside of the regular multiplayer you have no game. 60$ for a game that is basically giving out free DLC regardless of how people want to look at it, it is what it is.
>
>
> Battlefront isn’t really giving out free DLC at all. It’s $110 for a “full” game. One that you can only play online. It also (at least last I checked when I played it months ago) doesn’t have microtransactions like Halo 5 does.
>
> And I think people do understand that games have moved into the SAAS model, but that doesn’t mean they have to like it. “Old school” gamers like me don’t like it at all, because it simply lacks the features that older games had. It’s quite sad when there’s more launch content with Star Wars Battlefront II in 2005 than DICE Battlefront in 2015. Which also means it’s a lot easier to burn out early on these games because there isn’t a whole lot to do on them. So by the time there is, I’ve moved on to do something else.
>
> Maybe the current gaming industry model isn’t meant to cater to us older gamers. And if that’s the way it is, I guess so be it. It’s just disappointing to see.

Yeah, I don’t really play Battlefront beyond the first few days I tried it out. It came as a free digital download with the PS4 I bought off of Amazon, so no loss there. Which is a shame because I have many fond memories of the original Battlefront games. Even the two free-to-play MMORPGs I have, which also have an expansion pack or two, have more content than 2015 Battlefront.

The only new trends of the gaming industry that I do appreciate is the focus on open-world games which more than pay for themselves in number of hours played.

Anyway, didn’t mean to go off-topic!

I guess it’s a little different when Halo has features it’s expected to launch with as opposed to new IPs that people have no expecations for in terms of content because it’s the first of its kind. Overwatch is a new IP that is meant to be MP only, but if they release a sequel with less content than the first game, it will still face backlash.

Sequels are supposed to add onto what was in the presvious installment, not take most of it away. I haven’t played any of the Battlefront’s, but I think I heard they did the same thing. That’s why people are mad about Halo 5’s lack of content. It’s about time people stop making excuses for a lack of content. “It could be worse” isn’t acceptable.

> 2533274819567236;7:
> I guess it’s a little different when Halo has features it’s expected to launch with as opposed to new IPs that people have no expecations for in terms of content because it’s the first of its kind. Overwatch is a new IP that is meant to be MP only, but if they release a sequel with less content than the first game, it will still face backlash.
>
> Sequels are supposed to add onto what was in the presvious installment, not take most of it away. I haven’t played any of the Battlefront’s, but I think I heard they did the same thing. That’s why people are mad about Halo 5’s lack of content. It’s about time people stop making excuses for a lack of content. “It could be worse” isn’t acceptable.

Battlefront is way worse of a criminal of this than Halo. Halo is pretty bad…but Battlefront is laughable.

That’s part of what I’m saying though, the fact that it could be worse doesn’t make it ok.

> 2533274819567236;9:
> That’s part of what I’m saying though, the fact that it could be worse doesn’t make it ok.

Battlefront is also from known gaming criminal EA - the creator of the “Online Pass”. You expect better things from the makers of Halo.

I’ve been expecting better since Halo 4 as I’m sure many others have. At this point, I don’t know if people should be expecting better from the makers of Halo. You should hope for the best, but you shouldn’t don’t expect better from them.

> 2533274850493408;10:
> > 2533274819567236;9:
> > That’s part of what I’m saying though, the fact that it could be worse doesn’t make it ok.
>
>
> Battlefront is also from known gaming criminal EA - the creator of the “Online Pass”. You expect better things from the makers of Halo.

Although, the first two Battlefronts were great. It’s this new one that is spitting on the memory of the originals and turned into a cash-grab. Trying to remember if a different company made the original games…

> 2533274887950450;12:
> > 2533274850493408;10:
> > > 2533274819567236;9:
> > > That’s part of what I’m saying though, the fact that it could be worse doesn’t make it ok.
> >
> >
> > Battlefront is also from known gaming criminal EA - the creator of the “Online Pass”. You expect better things from the makers of Halo.
>
>
> Although, the first two Battlefronts were great. It’s this new one that is spitting on the memory of the originals and turned into a cash-grab. Trying to remember if a different company made the original games…

They did. LucasArts paired with Pandemic Studios. EA Ran Pandemic into the ground with LOTR: Conquest, where they bought the studio then asked them to make a Lord of the Rings Battlefront game which failed miserably.

> 2533274850493408;4:
> > 2533274809217985;3:
> > > 2533274818084099;2:
> > > And I think people do understand that games have moved into the SAAS model, but that doesn’t mean they have to like it. “Old school” gamers like me don’t like it at all, because it simply lacks the features that older games had. It’s quite sad when there’s more launch content with Star Wars Battlefront II in 2005 than DICE Battlefront in 2015. Which also means it’s a lot easier to burn out early on these games because there isn’t a whole lot to do on them. So by the time there is, I’ve moved on to do something else.
> > >
> > > Maybe the current gaming industry model isn’t meant to cater to us older gamers. And if that’s the way it is, I guess so be it. It’s just disappointing to see.

We don’t have to like it, but we have to acknowledge that industry overheads go up and up and up every single year while pricing for titles at launch has remained exactly the same since Halo 2. That’s twelve years of zero inflation and the only avenues open to a developer to bring in revenue outside of a new title is paid DLC, microtransactions, liscensing, and t-shirt sales at E3. And I’m pretty sure they give away the t-shirts.

> 2533274873843883;14:
> > 2533274850493408;4:
> > > 2533274809217985;3:
> > > > 2533274818084099;2:
> > > > And I think people do understand that games have moved into the SAAS model, but that doesn’t mean they have to like it. “Old school” gamers like me don’t like it at all, because it simply lacks the features that older games had. It’s quite sad when there’s more launch content with Star Wars Battlefront II in 2005 than DICE Battlefront in 2015. Which also means it’s a lot easier to burn out early on these games because there isn’t a whole lot to do on them. So by the time there is, I’ve moved on to do something else.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe the current gaming industry model isn’t meant to cater to us older gamers. And if that’s the way it is, I guess so be it. It’s just disappointing to see.
>
>
> We don’t have to like it, but we have to acknowledge that industry overheads go up and up and up every single year while pricing for titles at launch has remained exactly the same since Halo 2. That’s twelve years of zero inflation and the only avenues open to a developer to bring in revenue outside of a new title is paid DLC, microtransactions, liscensing, and t-shirt sales at E3. And I’m pretty sure they give away the t-shirts.

Which is why I’d be a lot more forgiving if it was a game’s initial launch. But 343 has been given the reigns literally from big daddy -Yoink!- so they shouldn’t lack for funding. If anything, they should be selling copies of games that are selling even MORE copies than previous installments, which will make up for investment cost.

I understand that it costs more to make a product that retails for the same, but it’s not a good long term business strategy to cut content, which leads to a decrease in sales just because it costs more to make. 343 it seems hasn’t found the winning formula.

> 2533274819567236;7:
> I guess it’s a little different when Halo has features it’s expected to launch with as opposed to new IPs that people have no expecations for in terms of content because it’s the first of its kind. Overwatch is a new IP that is meant to be MP only, but if they release a sequel with less content than the first game, it will still face backlash.
>
> Sequels are supposed to add onto what was in the previous installment, not take most of it away. I haven’t played any of the Battlefront’s, but I think I heard they did the same thing. That’s why people are mad about Halo 5’s lack of content. It’s about time people stop making excuses for a lack of content. “It could be worse” isn’t acceptable.

Very true, but in this day in age. It’s not that it could be worse. 343 is at the top of the food chain compared to any other games. Shoot, the reason split-screen is gone is because of the xbone can’t support 60fps for split-screen, so who is really to blame? If they added all the content, we would have a 150GB game. If they did everything we want, our pitiful 500GB hard drives wouldn’t be able to allow us any other games. So they are -Yoink!- if they do or -Yoink!- if they don’t.

So in retrospect people are gonna pitch a fit regardless of the route they took. If the game devs lowed the res on the game, people would complain about the graphics being crappy. Now Microsoft is coming out with Scorpio which is supposed to be 4 times more powerful, but they sure did that at the wrong time. To me, the excuse “it could be worse” is plenty good enough, mainly because I have way more to complain about given: call of duty, battlefront, or overwatch couldn’t come close to what 343 has come up with. Games like Fallout, Gears of war don’t need that. It doesn’t take the kind of power and storage for games like that because it is an open world. Matchmaking takes a lot, as well as dedicated servers. So be grateful I guess is what I am trying to say, or go spend all your hard earned money on a half–Yoinked!-, poorly made game.

> 2533274850493408;15:
> > 2533274873843883;14:
> > > 2533274850493408;4:
> > >
>
>
> Which is why I’d be a lot more forgiving if it was a game’s initial launch. But 343 has been given the reigns literally from big daddy -Yoink!- so they shouldn’t lack for funding. If anything, they should be selling copies of games that are selling even MORE copies than previous installments, which will make up for investment cost.
>
> I understand that it costs more to make a product that retails for the same, but it’s not a good long term business strategy to cut content, which leads to a decrease in sales just because it costs more to make. 343 it seems hasn’t found the winning formula.

It cost way more to make, not only that. 343 has made how many games? 7 is your answer, and all of them built around Halo, they are killing themselves for ungrateful people to make Halo wars, a mobile game. Do you think 343 really wants to make that crap? Heck no, it’s a FPS genre and should be treated as such. Even though Microsoft built it, there faith isn’t completely committed to 343, they were given the reigns to make a game. Microsoft owns them, so put some of that hatred towards 343 and put it good use at MS’s front door. You’re hating the wrong people. I would hate to work for 343, no respect considering this is the first halo on xbone, it’s MS’s fault for not making it have enough storage on launch, or having the power to make the games MS support.

> 2533274809217985;17:
> > 2533274850493408;15:
> > > 2533274873843883;14:
> > > > 2533274850493408;4:
> > > >
> >
> >
> > Which is why I’d be a lot more forgiving if it was a game’s initial launch. But 343 has been given the reigns literally from big daddy -Yoink!- so they shouldn’t lack for funding. If anything, they should be selling copies of games that are selling even MORE copies than previous installments, which will make up for investment cost.
> >
> > I understand that it costs more to make a product that retails for the same, but it’s not a good long term business strategy to cut content, which leads to a decrease in sales just because it costs more to make. 343 it seems hasn’t found the winning formula.
>
>
> It cost way more to make, not only that. 343 has made how many games? 7 is your answer, and all of them built around Halo, they are killing themselves for ungrateful people to make Halo wars, a mobile game. Do you think 343 really wants to make that crap? Heck no, it’s a FPS genre and should be treated as such. Even though Microsoft built it, there faith isn’t completely committed to 343, they were given the reigns to make a game. Microsoft owns them, so put some of that hatred towards 343 and put it good use at MS’s front door. You’re hating the wrong people. I would hate to work for 343, no respect considering this is the first halo on xbone, it’s MS’s fault for not making it have enough storage on launch, or having the power to make the games MS support.

We really cannot assume what 343 implements or what Microsoft implements, so we should throw out any sort of bias questioning what they “really want to make” or what they don’t want to make. As such, I’m going to blame 343 and Microsoft equally for the embarrassing failures of the MCC, two completely average mobile games, and two very okay installments in the Halo franchise. And I’m definitely going to blame the actual creating studio and the one answering the questions about “their” game, above the production company.

> 2533274809217985;16:
> > 2533274819567236;7:
> > I guess it’s a little different when Halo has features it’s expected to launch with as opposed to new IPs that people have no expecations for in terms of content because it’s the first of its kind. Overwatch is a new IP that is meant to be MP only, but if they release a sequel with less content than the first game, it will still face backlash.
> >
> > Sequels are supposed to add onto what was in the previous installment, not take most of it away. I haven’t played any of the Battlefront’s, but I think I heard they did the same thing. That’s why people are mad about Halo 5’s lack of content. It’s about time people stop making excuses for a lack of content. “It could be worse” isn’t acceptable.
>
>
> Very true, but in this day in age. It’s not that it could be worse. 343 is at the top of the food chain compared to any other games. Shoot, the reason split-screen is gone is because of the xbone can’t support 60fps for split-screen, so who is really to blame? If they added all the content, we would have a 150GB game. If they did everything we want, our pitiful 500GB hard drives wouldn’t be able to allow us any other games. So they are -Yoink!- if they do or -Yoink!- if they don’t.
>
> So in retrospect people are gonna pitch a fit regardless of the route they took. If the game devs lowed the res on the game, people would complain about the graphics being crappy. Now Microsoft is coming out with Scorpio which is supposed to be 4 times more powerful, but they sure did that at the wrong time. To me, the excuse “it could be worse” is plenty good enough, mainly because I have way more to complain about given: call of duty, battlefront, or overwatch couldn’t come close to what 343 has come up with. Games like Fallout, Gears of war don’t need that. It doesn’t take the kind of power and storage for games like that because it is an open world. Matchmaking takes a lot, as well as dedicated servers. So be grateful I guess is what I am trying to say, or go spend all your hard earned money on a half–Yoinked!-, poorly made game.

All I need to look at is Black Ops 3 to know that Xbox One can handle more than 343 put into Halo 5. Halo 5’s development likely suffered from very poor management. Somebody decide that the inclusion of Breakout and Warzone should be included at the expense of half of what people expect from a Halo game. I can gaurantee you the complaints of lacking content would not exist if Halo 5 launched with every expected gametype, BTB, and a full Fileshare with an announcement that Warzone would be DLC. Warzone wasn’t necessary, everything else was. People would rather have a lot of variety than little to no variety with one huge, new mode that they may not even like.

343 is only on top of the food chain in terms of funding. They’re part of MS, so they should have access to more resources than most devs could hope for. In terms of quality and decision making, they are on the low end of the food chain. If Halo 5 has as much fun, broad appeal as people make it out to, it would be a whole lot more popular. Modern Warfare showed us that even in a franchise with almost no recognition outside the gaming community, if you make a stand out game, people will take notice. People aren’t taking notice of Halo 5.

If you enjoy Halo 5, that’s fine, but almost every complaint about 343 I’ve seen is certainly justified considering their horrid track record.

And yet this genius free DLC model has pretty much resulted in 343 playing catch-up with past Halo games and consistently recycling content. New stuff gets made, sure, but even that gets recycled by the next update or two.