Like I said, flip the roles.
player 2 could stay chief like they stay Arbiter in base Halo 3, while in single player, chief is relegated to an AI that only crosses paths on occasion just like Arbiter in base Halo 3, as he does (thanks to Reach) have generic NPC dialogue.
They didnât make Halo 3:A for the same reason Halo 5 wonât come to MCC. Redundancy. Halo CE:A was just a novelty. Re-use many Halo assets in the newer engine, release it as a remaster, and profit. MCC was mainly made because the Xbox One wasnât backwards compatible and the timeframe made sense for Halo 2 Anniversary. So just porting the games would have made Microsoft a quick buck along side the remaster, and it did. Even if it released poorly. I donât like the human faces in Halo 3 either, but it is an HD game already on and optimized for current consoles for the time, and still supported now. Thereâs no real reason to put the effort into a remaster like H2A. And now that current MCC has thrown new content into Halo 3âs multiplayer, there is even less chance of a H3A for the 20th. I doubt Saber would take the time to work on it because theyâre now doing their own thing.
I wouldnât complain if they surprise us, but logistically, Microsoft has no reason to do this, and I donât think anyone trust 343 enough anymore to be tied to anything Halo. At least until Halo Infinite is fixed and they release something that is up to full quality for once.
TL, DR At this point.
If they canât even handle Infinite alone and itâs what, going on 8 years? what makes you think things would have been any better producing an anniversary knowing they canât even add half the content a Halo game has?
This I doubt.
Halo Infinite didnât bring in profits as much as they had hoped.
How else could you bring in profits then?
They are already adding Microtransactions to MCC.
BUT Another way would be to add in two more $10 DLCs to give players Halo 3 Anniversary and Halo 3 ODST Anniversary.
Considering Halo 3 was THE BEST Halo game when it came to consistent return players, making an Anniversary remastered campaign for it and making a multiplayer derived from the MP we have for H2A would simply be a great way to guarantee more profits.
343 Industries did very little of the effort for Halo CE Anniversary and Halo 2 Anniversary. Literally 95% of the work was done by companies they contracted.
Saber Interactive did the Campaigns.
Blur Studios did the H2A Cutscenes.
Certain Affinity did the Anniversary Map Pack for Reach and the entire H2A Multiplayer.
343 had involvement mostly in the way of final approval of product and playtesting, ensuring that Saber and Certain met the requirements that 343i set in place.
Something similar would definitely be done for H3A since it is not a mainline game of the Reclaimer Saga, which were the only games that 343i did the most work in developing.
I understand what you are saying, and you would be correct. But, what engine are they using now that has been said has a lot of issues just to even get infinite going?
Iâm looking at what it will actually take in this situation.
Who said anything about using the Halo Infinite engine?
Halo 5 Gorbians, despite how much I despise that game, had a solid engine that ran well . . . eventually.
Needless to say, it would be something solid.
If not the H5Gorb, well then, SHOULD 343 choose to release something great for Haloâs 25th Anniversary; I am sure that by then the Halo Infinite Blam!6.0 Engine (Slipspace Engine if you really want to call it that) would be stable enough to at least run the campaign of Halo 3 and Halo 3 ODST.
It mostly runs the Infinite campaign smoothly . . . mostly . . . there is that ONE buggy Phantom I keep seeing videos about. It didnât even fully spawn on my playthroughs.
I doubt they would release each for just $10. $30 each seems more in the ball park.
Each game is only $10 now because it was a re-release when PC came around and you can buy each one piece-meal. They were only made this way because the product was already out. Not even Reach because everything is just ported content. This pricing wasnât always the case. At release the whole game was $60 not including ODST and later Reach. And again, those are just ports. Meanwhile H3:A is trying to run two simultaneous engines on top of one another with seamless switching, and if we expect it to come out like H2A, then that would mean many brand new assets and freshing up the older ones. Already it will cost more than a port because it is basically a ânewâ game. Especially when, like I said, they already have a fully functional and updated version of the game that is already out. It wouldnât just be something added on, it is a straight replacement of the campaign. Functionally it would be easier to just update the game and let people who own Halo 3 on MCC already get H3A for free, but we both know Microsoft would never let something like that happen. But if they do release H3A as a purchasable product, either as âDLCâ which already isnât easy, or as a standalone product, then they invalidate the resources they spent getting Halo 3 on MCC to function at its current state. Thatâs like me taking the time to renovate my house (or in this case hiring someone else to renovate for me), but then buying a new house and moving there anyway. I would have wasted my own money, and 343/Microsoft would be doing the same. The only ones who would profit would be the middle-men renovators/ developers like Saber because they just make it, it doesnât matter what happens theyâre already paid.
Yeah Halo 3 was the most popular Halo, until Infinite came along and then that ruined 343âs reputation even more. H3A would already cost more than the profits they would hope for. And most people now are wary and are going to wait until reviews are out for this hypothetical game. Thatâs what alot of people did with COD and Battlefield this year and those were worse messes than Infinite. But again, that is only if 343 doesnât salvage their reputation and get a successful release under their belt. And thatâs if they can even release H3A on time because anniversaries present hard deadlines just like H2A and just like Infinite. Microsoft will make sure these games come out on time, working or not. And we donât want H3A to get botched like them.
And adding MTX to MCC is not the same as making a whole remaster. Adding content that works within the system that is already in place is easier than:
Running two systems in sync with each other (campaign)
Wasting time to add another system that works in parallel with its still supported parent (H3 and H3A Multiplayer).
Now, Halo 2 and Halo 2 Anniversary are running parallel, but only one of them is consistently getting new content while the other is left as is. Halo 3 has new content, why would you take the time to make a whole new variant of that multiplayer and make new content for that, when you can just use the same time and effort toward the one that already has that system in place?
Heck, it already looks like 343 is using MCC to supplement Infiniteâs content drought. It isnât a good idea to throw 3 Halo games into a cycle and juggle them. Current MCC and Infinite both continuing support is enough.
A key part of business is understanding that your target audience will try to pay the lowest amount possible for a product.
Considering that unlike Reach and ODST, this would be a game that requires further development than just a simple porting job, it would make sense that $10 might be too low of a price, but $30 would very much be declared too high by the fans.
I could see $20 be the middle-ground we could settle for.
ODST Campaign was always $10 since it was added to MCC back in 2015.
Just figured I should point that out.
I was merely pointing out that the reason why they are adding MTX to MCC is likely due to the fact that Halo Infinite is not pulling as much profits as they had desired to counterbalance the literal $500 Million budget they had put to the project.
More income-per-quarter would be the result of adding MTX to MCC.
Adding in another full-fledged DLC that most players would desire would be another item that could guarantee a profit increase.
But ODST, just like Reach, was released post-launch. ODST wasnât meant to be included, but was added for free as a âsorryâ to fans for the rocky launch until the holiday season where it was sold for $5. And ODST got the worst of the glitches since it was just taped on. And again. It is a port.
Adding a DLC to MCC would do that, I agree, but H3A is too much work for a DLC. It would have to be considered its own game. If we ever got MCC DLC it would look closer to something like what some modders are currently working on. Part of my original point is that H3A wouldnât fit with how Xbox operates and would conflict with MCC, either within MCC on a code-base, or as a stand-alone product on the Xbox store. Thatâs why I brought up Halo 5 in the first place. Many people want it added to MCC, but that would require fixing many things within Halo 5, and it would conflict with store listings because Xbox would be selling two versions of the same game. Unless support for MCC ends, which I donât see them doing for a long time, they would have the Halo 5 dilemma but with Halo 3. Halo 5 might get a PC port because its lifecycle is over. Just drop it on PC standalone, make sure it works, and profit. H3A wouldnât have that luxury until Halo 3 on MCC is out of the picture.
This I doubt.
Considering that there is a LOT of DLC that was for MCC, most of it was made freely included far after launch with ODST and Reach now being the only DLC content.
For example of the DLC that was paid DLC but no longer is
How do you figure?
How would H3A not operate within the Xbox system?
I thought the main reason they didnât want Halo 5 added to MCC was because its massive size would inflate the MCC greatly so that many would consider it to be bloatware and the fact that the majority of fans donât consider it to be a Master Chief game since you only play as the series protagonist for 3-out-of-15 missions.
But wouldnât that annoy fans further because if MCC is out of the picture, then we would just be sold Halo 3 Anniversary and not have the majority of the franchise being given active servers and support?
Most people would likely view that as a downgrade and that can hurt sales.
Halo 3 Anniversary could most definitely BE a thing in Halo MCC.
I see demand.
Therefore there is a need to fulfill.
Dang, I like your ideas as always but man, maybe 343 should just hand over the reigns to certain affinity or someone else. Looks like these other companies are listening and putting in work. I never realized all of this.
hands you a clipboard
âWould you like to support Studio-117?â
(Also, fun fact, Certain Affinity was founded and still led by a few ex-Bungie developers who had finished making Halo 2 and made their own company. First project? Multiplayer Map Packs for Halo 2.)
With their recent need to monetize MCC, who knows?
Maybe we might get a H3 Remaster DLC in the next year or so to come ÂŻ\ _(ă) _/ÂŻ
Again, if we were to receive something as a âgiftâ for the 25th Anniversary of Halo, what better way than of course giving the players what they have wanted since Halo 2 Anniversary was announced :
or alternatively
EDIT -
Or if not a DLC to Halo MCC, perhaps a DLC Campaign to Halo Infinite?
Add in the Campaign and maybe a bundle of Halo 3âs best maps for multiplayer?
And as a reward for the purchase of this DLC, we get access to the Mark VI Gen-3 Armor Core?
Those were not made for MCC. Those were made for their own original games. Might as well include all the DLC Halo 3 maps and the Halo 4 armors. They are not DLC for a whole collection. Reach and ODST are not DLC, they are whole games. You just buy them under the âDLCâ section because that is how all the marketplaces work. MCC is just a big inter-connected launcher.
I told you. It would make Halo 3 within MCC redundant no matter how they implement it. They either have to take down Halo 3 MCC from Gamepass, Windows Store, Xbox Store, and Steam and replace the downloadable with H3A, or they have to sell H3A as its own separate product from MCC. They can only do it one way or the other. If it it added to MCC then the campaign would have to be 100% replaced for it to function. Or they could have a Halo 3 campaign that doesnât have the graphics switch button, and one that does. Why would you have 2 of the same game in one collection? People didnât like the new content touching their classic Halo 3 stuff so they added a toggle. How do you think these people would react if Halo 3 was replaced, even if the graphics would be toggleable too?
And ODST doesnât have any Chief yet it is in MCC. And Chief is in literally an easter egg in Reach and a voice in firefight. Also in MCC. Its almost like MCC is just an excuse to re-sell the Halo games on new platforms. The storage size is one of the many reasons I didnât get into the whole Halo 5 rant. Like how I also didnât get into the stupid lootbox system would need to be gutted for Warzone and armors to work on MCC. I donât like Halo 5 either, but regardless of how any of us feel, a product is a product.
Yes! It would annoy the fans! Thatâs why they wonât do it! I reiterated that point multiple times and now you understand! That would hurt sales! And thatâs why they wonât do it! When the Xbox servers shut down, players hunkered down in Halo 2. When the 360 servers shut down, people were annoyed and vocal, even though MCC was where everyone is. They werenât made to be sustainable into future console generations. They had an expiration date. Now the trend is to keep games alive and running for as long as possible through live service, which MCC is one. It looks like MCC will be around for the foreseeable future too. So why would they put effort into making H3A at the same time as Halo 3 MCC. Just today we got the fallguys backpack. MCC isnât dead yet.
Yes, there is a demand for H3A, but there is no reason for anyone to put any work into H3A because H3MCC is still supported. You can have one, but not the other. Thatâs why all the seasons and upcoming series for MCC is always focused on one or two games. If you throw too many things at the fanbase at once, youâll spread everyone too thin. Thatâs why Halo 2 hasnât received a season (among many other off-topic reasons), but Halo 2 anniversary got stuff for the 20th anniversary and having the upcoming series dedicated to it. It wouldnât make sense to do both at once, both for the people working on it, and for the players, on top of handling Infinite.
Yet making H3A in the current Halo environment (which seems set for the foresaable future) would mean players juggle:
Halo MCC (which is already 6 multiplayer games, but usually only 1 focused on)
Halo infinite (which itself is split into seasons, not counting possible campaign DLC)
And Halo 3 Anniversary (Which has a remastered campaign and multiplayer, not even counting ODST)
That would split the fanbase into a minimum of 3 camps which would make MCC and Infiniteâs player population even smaller than it already is. If Infinite sticks to 6 month seasons, then yeah players will have time. Thatâs why the upcoming H2A series is going to be toward the end of Season 2, most players will be finished by then and would be ready to jump onto Halo MCC. But ideally, Infinite would finally be on track with 3 month seasons, which leaves less time to focus on a whole other game when you already have 2 others still churning away content.
And maybe they might just make H3A an entirely content complete game at launch and they wonât make it live-service. Just drop it and be done. Maybe. But MCC was turned live service. Halo 5 dabbled in it. So did Halo Wars 2. Halo Infinite is trying to be one. I have doubts H3A would not be a live service game of some sort. Chances are, it would be live service. Thatâs where the trends are.
Iâm glad you can be optimistic, and Halo 3 Anniversary would be awesome, but there is too much going on with Halo right now for it to make sense and I doubt that will change in the next 5 years.
Um . . . yeah they were.
The following skulls were Pre-Order DLC bonus for Halo 2 Anniversary, and Grunt Funeral was a Pre-Order bonus in 2011 for Halo CE Anniversary.
And the Remnant Map of Halo 2 Anniversary, which was Relic remastered, started off as a Pre-Order bonus before being added to all players of Halo MCC in May of 2015.
Basically if you Pre-Ordered Halo MCC for the bonus content, you got clowned on because a year later it was made available to everyone.
Not really. It would simply allow players to swap between Anniversary and Legacy Halo 3 at the press of a button, for a small fee.
Similar to how you can play Halo 3 ODST and Halo Reach multiplayer for free, but the Campaigns are locked behind a paywall.
If fans want to indulge and have Halo 3 Anniversary, this would be how to do it.
Not replaced.
Classic Halo CE and Classic Halo 2 exist.
Halo 2 Classic multiplayer exists while we also have a Anniversary Halo 2 multiplayer.
Where do you get this notion that adding something that DOESNâT change the original values will somehow replace it?
ODST has Master Chief in Halo 3 ODST.
During the ODST Drop, he takes up a pixel on my screen as the UNSC In Amber Clad follows Regretâs Carrier through Slipspace.
Just like with Reach, he is technically in the game.
I am beyond optimistic.
I am also opportunistic and dedicated.
H2A didnât do this. In fact H2A had ALL the OG Halo 2 weapons there with no additions other than the infected energy sword. H2A uses H4âs engine this is true, but it still plays like H2C.
to add: the only new content an H3A would likely have is whatever Halo Online has, since they would likely use Halo Online as the base for an H3A Multiplayer, and most of Halo Onlineâs content is content Halo 3 players have been begging for, which is content not too far off from what was already added to Halo 3 with MCC thusfar.
Halo Online was built directly from the Halo 3 Blam Engine, which is why the MJOLNIR Gen-2 armor models do not have the same level of quality when it comes to polygons and texturing as the ones seen in Halo 4, Halo 2 Anniversary, and Halo 5 Gorbians.
It would be nice to have them finish porting things to Halo 3 MCC. And with the fact that they are adding MTX to MCC, I think that would incentivize them in adding the remaining 118 Armor Sets and 6 maps from Halo Onlineâs build.
Remnant was added as a content update for everyone, it never was a pre-order bonus. The skulls were advertised as exclusive until 12/12/14. The only people who were clowned on were anyone who paid full price, but so it goes with any game going on sale.
ODST was given out free of charge for launch period players, but otherwise you would have to spend a crisp $5 for access.