Paradigm Shift for "Should have been in at launch"

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

TL;DR**-** Halo 5: Guardians should have been an Xbox Preview title and then “launched” fall 2016.

Figured it would be handy if I put that at the top, seeing as I tend to get kind of wall-of-texty when on Waypoint, and the human attention span just aint what it used to be. Now, before we begin in earnest, there are a few things this post is just going to have to assume, and if these assumptions don’t apply, you might just be better off finding a different thread to complain about the lack of Falcons.

Assumptions:

  • You enjoy the core gameplay of Halo 5 - You think Halo 5 was lacking content at launch - You’ve got a relatively decent connection to the servers (and there goes the international Waypoint crowd)Alright, let’s begin. So, Halo 5 has a solid CORE game, but it was missing so much. People have made lists, so I won’t, you get the picture. Even though a lot of what is missing has slowly been added over the course of the updates, even when a heavily requested feature is added (looking at you Assault, Infection, Post-game medals, Forge, Fiesta, Objective Fiesta) a common retort from the Waypoint community is that it “should have been in at launch”.

But, imagine for a moment that October 27, 2015 wasn’t the launch of Halo 5? What if instead, it had been announced that Halo 5 was releasing fall 2016, but for fans who couldn’t wait to get into the game, it would be available through Xbox preview program? Fans would have a chance to buy the game early and dive into the multiplayer, stress test the servers, give feedback and make feature requests through the preview period?

Because if you look at the amount of features Halo 5 had on release to the public, that’s about what it had. The core game was finished and nailed down, but there were still plenty of maps and modes to be added. But if you look at what Halo 5 will be by the time all of the updates are out? It’s a respectable Halo game. That’s why, for a while now, I’ve stopped looking at Halo 5 as a full fledged release and started looking at it as a paid beta/xbox preview/early access/whatever you want to call releasing and selling a game before it’s actually done.

Now, had Microsoft and 343 actually had just come out and said they were releasing the core as an early preview with the rest on the way, there’s a whole mess of interesting financial variables to take in that could either make the move either great or terrible for them, but that’s probably a whole seperate post, or at least something to be hashed out in the rest of the thread.

But looking purely at audience perception of the amount of content available, I think looking at/calling Halo 5 early access/xbox preview casts Halo 5 in a much better, more acceptable light. Which is why I’ve been doing it for a while now.

Thoughts?

2

If microsoft had done it I’d say fine, but just saying that it was early access is just covering up a mistake that they made.

3

> 2533274856909864;2:
> If microsoft had done it I’d say fine, but just saying that it was early access is just covering up a mistake that they made.

Oh yoink I forgot to talk about how Halo 5 was clearly shoved out the door before it was finished, and that was a huge mistake. Yoink.

4

It would be competing with some serious competition in 2016 with Battlefield 1 (which I know is going to kill Halo for me when it drops) and COD 4 remastered.

I imagine stuff will start to come out about Halo 5 development and why so many things didn’t work. They had the time. They presumably had the funds. So it can only be an internal or structural failing or something to do with the technology they have.

5

> 2533274803587475;4:
> It would be competing with some serious competition in 2016 with Battlefield 1 (which I know is going to kill Halo for me when it drops) and COD 4 remastered.
>
> I imagine stuff will start to come out about Halo 5 development and why so many things didn’t work. They had the time. They presumably had the funds. So it can only be an internal or structural failing or something to do with the technology they have.

Totally didn’t realize the amount of competition that was dropping in 2016. Starting to see why it was pushed out when it was.

6

Doesnt matter whether there is 1, 2 or 10 games coming out in 2016 it would have to compete with, they shouldnt have released an unfinished game at full price. Either compete with CoD (like Halo used to successfully) or release it later. People would much prefer waiting instead of playing an unpolished turd. Im looking at you especially MCC.

7

My thought cycle:

  • I get angry for the lack of content
  • then I think: hey maybe it would have been too much to ask right at release.
  • then I remeber the withcer 3 and get angry again
  • then I think: hey at least we get everything as a dlc
  • then i see the amount of content you get with blood and wine
  • now i’m angry again
8

I agree with you whole-heartedly OP.

Some will argue that if MS/343 had simply called it an early access game (or whatever) that it wouldn’t change anything and you’d still be mad at the lack of content. But it’s hard to tell because we all tend to look at things from our current frame of reference, where you’re annoyed at the game now. Would you have been in another scenario? who knows, really.

Some will argue that simply choosing to ignore the fact that all the content wasn’t there at first, and just being glad it’s being added over time at no extra cost is foolish and is lying to myself. But in the end, I paid $60, you paid $60. I’m happy, and you’re not. Am I lying to myself? or am I simply finding a better way to look at things to improve my quality of life?

In the end it’s a freaking game we’re talking about. I understand this franchise is incredibly important to a lot of people, myself included, but it’s still just a game. So at the end of the day, when some have spent their money, been disappointed, spent the last 6 or so months unhappy with the product, and can’t forgive 343. I’m sitting here happy, enjoying a game that I felt was worth the $60 investment, even if not immediately. Who’s really the fool?

9

This would’ve been the best thing to do in my opinion, or just to delay it 6 months. But it’s too late to change that now

10

I feel that there is a way to redeem themselves and get many people to come back to the game. They need to announce a Free expansion! This would include campaign fixes and new missions. Basically make campaign good again, include scoring, bandana skull, unlockable armor for legendary solo and weapon skins for legendary, bring back campaign theater mode, coop matchmaking, etc. Make Halo 5 have a truly massive campaign with more missions than it has currently.

Then can market this as whatever they want, but people seeing the campaign expansion as well as all that has been done for the game in the months since launch would show people that this isn’t the same game they played 6 months ago, but a much more complete Halo.

11

I’m not particularly concerned about 2016’s fiscal lineup. battlefield players will play battlefield, CoD players will still play CoD, and Halo players will still be divisive and play halo anyway.

12

> 2533274874021557;7:
> My thought cycle:
> - I get angry for the lack of content
> - then I think: hey maybe it would have been too much to ask right at release.
> - then I remeber the withcer 3 and get angry again
> - then I think: hey at least we get everything as a dlc
> - then i see the amount of content you get with blood and wine
> - now i’m angry again

CD Projekt Red is a prime example of a game developer who wants to make millions of dollars by putting time effort and love into their games.

They got that CoD like dollar because they actually worked for it and didn’t mislead their consumers, and actually took risks and put content in their game.