Why Halo 5 won't be broken

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

Edit: This is told from my own gaming experience from Halo MCC and Halo 5. As their nature is, the games could work differently to you, so you may have a different experience and therefore a different criteria.

I mean, perhaps you were left with a bittersweet taste after the beta, I get that. It certainly does feel different - but at the same time familiar, for the most part. It’s a huge step on the right direction after Halo 4. But why is everyone claiming that pre ordering the game is such a bad and game-killing strategy? Because a YouTuber said that you shouldn’t be manipulated by a big corporation, when you’re being manipulated by his sole words?

I’m not saying pre-order right now. I’m not even saying that you should pre order, I don’t usually pre order games because it’s nonsense. But if at one point you see something that you really like, why should you hold your horses? Because the MCC was so broken? And it certainly was. More, way more than I ever expected.

Except that H5 won’t be broken. Was the beta broke? Nope, as well as Halo 5 won’t (for the mast part - at least) The reason why MCC was broken is because it was such a copy-paste work. The games were made from Bungie, the remakes were handled by Sabre Interactive, the interface was created by United Front Games, the ports were made by Ruffian Games, and the Halo 2A Multiplayer and maps from Certain Affinity.

Basically 343 Industries just put their watermark in the project because its their franchise. And Halo 4, aside of their bad developer choices with muktiplayer, was amazing. Notice how they were bad developer choices, and not the game working properly. Sure it’ll have its down side, just as pretty much any Halo game up to date.

At the end of the day it is your choice to take, as well as mine. And I know I will be called a white knight, a fanboy, or whatever else, really. But I’m just pointing why I think Halo 5 won’t be the disappointment MCC was - I’m just stating why you shouldn’t blindly hate (or love) a company because their previous work.

TL;DR: i mde a thng

2

343 made the matchmaking system and that’s the part that’s broken.

And there’s still no excuse. They KNOW they were releasing a broken game. There is no possible way they didn’t know MCC was bug-ridden. Anyone who played it for an hour could tell. So either they have the worst playtesters in history or they knew they could take your money anyways.

MCC’s release in no remote way gives anyone a reason to expect a smooth launch from Halo 5. Anyone thinking that has very delusional “logic”.

3

> 2533274913936758;2:
> 343 made the matchmaking system and that’s the part that’s broken.
>
> And there’s still no excuse. They KNOW they were releasing a broken game. There is no possible way they didn’t know MCC was bug-ridden. Anyone who played it for an hour could tell. So either they have the worst playtesters in history or they knew they could take your money anyways.

Why would they want to entirely destroy their popularity after Halo 4? Probably they weren’t prepared for a next gen console and using dedis for the first time. Also Halo 5 runs one engine, whereas MCC runs more.

There’s so much you can playtest on a closed beta before you release the product worldwide.

4

Convinced by his words, not manipulated.

He’s right. What do you gain from pre-ordering? There haven’t even been any pre-order bonuses announced yet, and these days it’s not even hard to get a game on day one.

> Was the beta broke? Nope

Well yes actually, it was.

Long search times, being kicked to the main lobby, buggy UI, so on…

5

> 2533274819302824;4:
> Convinced by his words, not manipulated.
>
> He’s right. What do you gain from pre-ordering? There haven’t even been any pre-order bonuses announced yet, and these days it’s not even hard to get a game on day one.
>
>
>
> > Was the beta broke? Nope
>
>
> Well yes actually, it was.
>
> Long search times, being kicked to the main lobby, buggy UI, so on…

Weird, I just had issues the day it was launched on the preview progam. I’ll add to the OP, thanks.

6

MCC was and still is a disaster after more than 2 months. That guy in the video makes a valid point. I won’t be preordering Halo 5 (I wasn’t going to anyway), I’d rather wait until the feedback pours in on launch day before considering a purchase from 343 again. I let Halo 4 slide, but not this time.

You’re basically telling us that 343 had no role in MCC, which is completely false. 343 overlooked the development of MCC. You think all the studios handed in their work, and 343 said “Okay, thanks guys. Time for launch!” No, that’s not how outsourcing works. The fault falls on 343 for being incompetent and not having the cajones to talk to the higher ups about postponing MCC’s launch. It clearly wasn’t ready.

Then they show further incompetence by not being able to fix the game into a reasonable state. Some patches even cause more problems than they fix.

7

> 2533274875903884;1:
> Edit: This is told from my own gaming experience from Halo MCC and Halo 5. As their nature is, the games could work differently to you, so you may have a different experience and therefore a different criteria.
>
> I mean, perhaps you were left with a bittersweet taste after the beta, I get that. It certainly does feel different - but at the same time familiar, for the most part. It’s a huge step on the right direction after Halo 4. But why is everyone claiming that pre ordering the game is such a bad and game-killing strategy? Because a YouTuber said that you shouldn’t be manipulated by a big corporation, when you’re being manipulated by his sole words?
>
> I’m not saying pre-order right now. I’m not even saying that you should pre order, I don’t usually pre order games because it’s nonsense. But if at one point you see something that you really like, why should you hold your horses? Because the MCC was so broken? And it certainly was. More, way more than I ever expected.
>
> Except that H5 won’t be broken. Was the beta broke? Nope, as well as Halo 5 won’t (for the mast part - at least) The reason why MCC was broken is because it was such a copy-paste work. The games were made from Bungie, the remakes were handled by Sabre Interactive, the interface was created by United Front Games, the ports were made by Ruffian Games, and the Halo 2A Multiplayer and maps from Certain Affinity.
>
> Basically 343 Industries just put their watermark in the project because its their franchise. And Halo 4, aside of their bad developer choices with muktiplayer, was amazing. Notice how they were bad developer choices, and not the game working properly. Sure it’ll have its down side, just as pretty much any Halo game up to date.
>
> At the end of the day it is your choice to take, as well as mine. And I know I will be called a white knight, a fanboy, or whatever else, really. But I’m just pointing why I think Halo 5 won’t be the disappointment MCC was - I’m just stating why you shouldn’t blindly hate (or love) a company because their previous work.
>
> TL;DR: i mde a thng

Think what you wish. However, I have very little faith in this project. I guarantee it will not be 100% by release date.

8

> 2533274913936758;2:
> 343 made the matchmaking system and that’s the part that’s broken.
>
> And there’s still no excuse. They KNOW they were releasing a broken game. There is no possible way they didn’t know MCC was bug-ridden. Anyone who played it for an hour could tell. So either they have the worst playtesters in history or they knew they could take your money anyways.
>
> MCC’s release in no remote way gives anyone a reason to expect a smooth launch from Halo 5. Anyone thinking that has very delusional “logic”.

Well they had the strict deadline of the 10 year anniversary of halo 2, plus, halo 5 is a single game and halo 4 worked great day one.

9

> 2533274875903884;1:
> Was the beta broke? Nope

Oh it was for sure. But it’s a beta, it’s expected.
And just because some YouTuber says pre-ordering doesn’t mean it’s a bad thing not to pre-order. Personally, I don’t want to pre-order because I don’t want to pay for a game that isn’t released and has the risk of being broken to the core (like MCC) and the risk of never being fixed. Instead I wait a week or a month before buying it.
For the early years of gaming on the N64, SNES etc, the games did contain bugs, but they were coded more carefully and took much much more time to develope, therefore more time for bug testing. Games in the past weren’t as broken as they are now.

And Halo 5 will most likely be broken with the crazy things they’ve added in. Ever thought of how the Ground Pound will be against vehicles? From my data, it will be rather strong in a way which is not good. Imagine a whole team just mowing down a scorpion with it and the scorpion has no way of killing them.

Halo 5 will probably sell good because of all the oblivious children that buy a new FPS game because the majority of FPS games are so alike, which Halo shouldn’t be because it has always been this different approach of a FPS game and should stay that way so it doesn’t get a bad reputation like “It’s just a copycat game and is bad because of that” or “It used to be good but now it’s just copying CoD or Battlefield just to be a succesfull moneydispencer”

The Halo community is the only thing keeping Halo up and the majority of it doesn’t like the way it’s turning. If Halo 5 get’s released like it was during the beta (not including the bugs or glitches) it will most likely me even more empty than Halo 4 was during it’s last days.
The majority of the Halo fans want a Halo 2.5/3.5 with thruster packs, and it’s nothing wrong with wanting that. Nor is it wrong wanting how Halo 4/5 is but if Halo needs to “evolve” and “survive” it needs to take baby steps with changes (Like only adding in ONE new thing then just mess a bit with weapons and movement to balance it out more), 343 should also be listening more to what the MAJORITY of the community wants, not the focus groups which don’t even care for Halo if it fails or not.

TL;DR: Halo 5 will probably be broken and will not save Halo unless major changes.

10

Why am I the only person who thinks that MCC failure was a great experience for 343i?? 343i will be even MORE careful with Halo 5… decreasing the chance of it being broken like MCC.

343i hasn’t even been around for 10 years. Naughty Dog has been around for 30 years… their FIRST few games were extremely low on rating. And now look what they’ve been making. It’s the mistakes that make them such an amazing developer.

The exact same goes to 343i… since 343 is just starting it’s journey.

11

> 2533274949216347;10:
> Why am I the only person who thinks that MCC failure was a great experience for 343i?? 343i will be even MORE careful with Halo 5… decreasing the chance of it being broken like MCC.
>
> 343i hasn’t even been around for 10 years. Naughty Dog has been around for 30 years… their FIRST few games were extremely low on rating. And now look what they’ve been making. It’s the mistakes that make them such an amazing developer.
>
> The exact same goes to 343i… since 343 is just starting it’s journey.

It might have been a good thing for their experience but it gives them a really bad reputation and it makes it even harder to trust them compared to the failure of Halo 4. But the fun thing with 343i is that the majority of the leading employees are former member of the old Bungie staff that have worked with Halo since early years. Doesn’t it sound a bit weird? Alot of employees that have worked with Halo since it’s early years, and have the controll to change the upcoming ones, manage to fail to simply bump up graphics and framerates. Sounds a bit suspicious to me.

12

> 2533274843463464;11:
> > 2533274949216347;10:
> > Why am I the only person who thinks that MCC failure was a great experience for 343i?? 343i will be even MORE careful with Halo 5… decreasing the chance of it being broken like MCC.
> >
> > 343i hasn’t even been around for 10 years. Naughty Dog has been around for 30 years… their FIRST few games were extremely low on rating. And now look what they’ve been making. It’s the mistakes that make them such an amazing developer.
> >
> > The exact same goes to 343i… since 343 is just starting it’s journey.
>
>
>
> It might have been a good thing for their experience but it gives them a really bad reputation and it makes it even harder to trust them compared to the failure of Halo 4. But the fun thing with 343i is that the majority of the leading employees are former member of the old Bungie staff that have worked with Halo since early years. Doesn’t it sound a bit weird? Alot of employees that have worked with Halo since it’s early years, and have the controll to change the upcoming ones, manage to fail to simply bump up graphics and framerates. Sounds a bit suspicious to me.

Ok… There are times where I heard MOST of 343i employees are former Bungie. And there are times where I heard 343i has VERY few members that are former Bungie… Idk what the deal is there.

Bad reputation??? GOOD… It’s HOW we REACT to PAIN that defines us as a person. It’s these kinds of pain that will CHANGE us. No matter if 343i is comprised mostly of former Bungie employees or not, it doesn’t change the fact that they are trying to regain the trust by working hard on Halo 5, releasing the beta a year early, trying to stick to the original formula of Halo while adding new stuff, inviting pros to help them test stuff, spending hours upon hours… making sacrifices to make a game they love.

13

> 2533274913936758;2:
> 343 made the matchmaking system and that’s the part that’s broken.
>
> And there’s still no excuse. They KNOW they were releasing a broken game. There is no possible way they didn’t know MCC was bug-ridden. Anyone who played it for an hour could tell. So either they have the worst playtesters in history or they knew they could take your money anyways.
>
> MCC’s release in no remote way gives anyone a reason to expect a smooth launch from Halo 5. Anyone thinking that has very delusional “logic”.

How would they know exactly, when they can’t run a global test? They knew there would be issue but not to this extent. And besides, 343i didn’t release it, Microsoft did. None of your money went to 343i, it went to MS; 343i got screwed as badly as you did in this.

14

> 2533274949216347;12:
> > 2533274843463464;11:
> > It might have been a good thing for their experience but it gives them a really bad reputation and it makes it even harder to trust them compared to the failure of Halo 4. But the fun thing with 343i is that the majority of the leading employees are former member of the old Bungie staff that have worked with Halo since early years. Doesn’t it sound a bit weird? Alot of employees that have worked with Halo since it’s early years, and have the controll to change the upcoming ones, manage to fail to simply bump up graphics and framerates. Sounds a bit suspicious to me.
>
>
> Ok… There are times where I heard MOST of 343i employees are former Bungie. And there are times where I heard 343i has VERY few members that are former Bungie… Idk what the deal is there.
>
> Bad reputation??? GOOD… It’s HOW we REACT to PAIN that defines us as a person. It’s these kinds of pain that will CHANGE us. No matter if 343i is comprised mostly of former Bungie employees or not, it doesn’t change the fact that they are trying to regain the trust by working hard on Halo 5, releasing the beta a year early, trying to stick to the original formula of Halo while adding new stuff, inviting pros to help them test stuff, spending hours upon hours… making sacrifices to make a game they love.

It’s very hard for them to regain our trust, and by our I mean those who want to change Halo for the best no matter how much of a hater we sound like, with Halo 5. They went the good way by removing loadouts and the spree rewards but making the kill times twice as fast, quicker respawns, small maps and abilities which makes everything fast is just as bad as loadouts and spree rewards.
And the pro’s they’ve hired aren’t more than just personal testing dummies. They can’t decide if sprint should be there or not. They just say “this should be added to the map” “Maybe add a bit more damage to this” etc. They try to stick with the original formula but they’re also bringing in aspects of other formulas from moderns shooters like Battlefield or CoD (Not saying that Halo 5 is CoD, just saying some aspects are very alike from that franchise) and that’s bad. It’s bad because Halo is not a modern shooter and shouldn’t become one, 343i doesn’t get that. Yet. They don’t listen to the majority of the community which know how a real /Halo/ game is suppose to be built, they listen to focus groups that think every shooter works the same.

So why should we regain trust in those who have failed to properly port games and ignore the vast, loud majority of the community which is literally the only one’s giving playlist some type of player count?

Second chances are not to be taken for granted, they must be earned, 343i didn’t earn a second chance nor do they deserve a third one.

15

> 2533274843463464;14:
> > 2533274949216347;12:
> > > 2533274843463464;11:
> > > It might have been a good thing for their experience but it gives them a really bad reputation and it makes it even harder to trust them compared to the failure of Halo 4. But the fun thing with 343i is that the majority of the leading employees are former member of the old Bungie staff that have worked with Halo since early years. Doesn’t it sound a bit weird? Alot of employees that have worked with Halo since it’s early years, and have the controll to change the upcoming ones, manage to fail to simply bump up graphics and framerates. Sounds a bit suspicious to me.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ok… There are times where I heard MOST of 343i employees are former Bungie. And there are times where I heard 343i has VERY few members that are former Bungie… Idk what the deal is there.
> >
> > Bad reputation??? GOOD… It’s HOW we REACT to PAIN that defines us as a person. It’s these kinds of pain that will CHANGE us. No matter if 343i is comprised mostly of former Bungie employees or not, it doesn’t change the fact that they are trying to regain the trust by working hard on Halo 5, releasing the beta a year early, trying to stick to the original formula of Halo while adding new stuff, inviting pros to help them test stuff, spending hours upon hours… making sacrifices to make a game they love.
>
>
>
>
> It’s very hard for them to regain our trust, and by our I mean those who want to change Halo for the best no matter how much of a hater we sound like, with Halo 5. They went the good way by removing loadouts and the spree rewards but making the kill times twice as fast, quicker respawns, small maps and abilities which makes everything fast is just as bad as loadouts and spree rewards.
> And the pro’s they’ve hired aren’t more than just personal testing dummies. They can’t decide if sprint should be there or not. They just say “this should be added to the map” “Maybe add a bit more damage to this” etc. They try to stick with the original formula but they’re also bringing in aspects of other formulas from moderns shooters like Battlefield or CoD (Not saying that Halo 5 is CoD, just saying some aspects are very alike from that franchise) and that’s bad. It’s bad because Halo is not a modern shooter and shouldn’t become one, 343i doesn’t get that. Yet. They don’t listen to the majority of the community which know how a real /Halo/ game is suppose to be built, they listen to focus groups that think every shooter works the same.
>
> So why should we regain trust in those who have failed to properly port games and ignore the vast, loud majority of the community which is literally the only one’s giving playlist some type of player count?
>
> Second chances are not to be taken for granted, they must be earned, 343i didn’t earn a second chance nor do they deserve a third one.

Well only time will tell… as of now, we can all hope 343i will regain our trust. We can all hope in time that 343i produces a Halo game that MOST people like in terms of MULTIPLAYER. Everything that is happening atm… is a learning process. If Halo 5 flops in MULAIPLAYER, then who knows… maybe they’ll make changes… maybe they won’t. They DID make changes from Halo 4 multiplayer due to its low population… GOOD changes. But like you said, they also added in elements from various modern shooters. So… can’t tell for sure as of right now.

Plus when I said learn from MCC, I meant delivering a non broken game… Hence the thread title. Halo 4 wasn’t broken and MCC was OUTSOURCED. I don’t mean delivering a game that as a multiplayer that millions loved during Halo 2 and 3.

Plus it’s not just about the multiplayer… 343i isn’t the same as Bungie in terms of multiplayer, but in terms of campaign/storytelling, they are FAR superior… for many reasons. And that’s part of the reason why I prefer 343i over Bungie. 343i relies heavily on the novels and are willing to expand the universe in a way Bungie has never done. You can call me a campaign fanatic… I love the universe of Halo and I buy Halo MOSTLY (98%) for the campaign. The multiplayer is just a nice bonus for me that I RARELY play.

I have played Halo 2, Halo 3, and Halo 4 multiplayer. And I got BORED within a FEW matches… Campaign is a MUCH different story. This is just my own personal taste in video games.

But I do respect your opinion… I just hope others will end up liking Halo 5 as well in ANY way shape or form. If one person doesn’t like Halo 5 multplayer, then hopefully they will for the campaign… and vice versa. After all, many people loved Halo 4 for the campaign but hated it for the multiplayer.

I don’t want Halo 5 to be criticized in BOTH campaign and multiplayer. I want it to be praised in BOTH aspects. But seeing as how Halo 5 may not have an amazing multiplayer, we can only hope the campaign will be amazing. And that I have no doubt, 343i has some great storytellers.

16

> 2533274949216347;15:
> Halo 4 wasn’t broken

Are you kidding me? Really now? I respect all you’ve said and I agree that Halo 4 had a pretty good and fun campaign but saying that it isn’t broken is just oblivious.

The intense bullet magnetism, oneshot snipers with super fast reload and big magazine, oneshot handguns which were instantly reloaded by a glitch which was removed after 7 months, broken map design (You could faze through walls on some maps), bad gun balancing which wasn’t changed till after 7 months (again).
they might have fixed some major things but they can’t change how some abilities worked which totally broke the game to the core, like the jet-pack or invis.

17

> 2533274819302824;4:
> Convinced by his words, not manipulated.
>
> He’s right. What do you gain from pre-ordering? There haven’t even been any pre-order bonuses announced yet, and these days it’s not even hard to get a game on day one.
>
>
>
> > Was the beta broke? Nope
>
>
> Well yes actually, it was.
>
> Long search times, being kicked to the main lobby, buggy UI, so on…

Oh, wasn’t it a beta I must of been mistaken. I guess it was the final release *cough *cough