Im ginger bush Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 An honest question here. We're all well aware 343i decided to take Halo in a new direction from its predecossors with this new installment. And no one can argue the quality marketing and hype surrounding this game was through the roof, and furthermore was well reflected through its impressive sales. But that being said, we're roughly 4 mths after the release of this game and things aren't so rosy anymore. Im not gonna take the stance, 'Halo is dead' or make any dramatic claims here, but if you look at the facts, community feedback for the most part and online population, this game is, well 'dying', I think is fair enough to say. Personally Ive played all installments of the franchise, and I mean a lot, and Ive never encountered so few players online, and furthermore the struggle (time) to find a match even. Scary part is, is this game is still essentially new. I personally feel its about fair to proclaim 343i has failed with this game. For those who feel otherwise, if the population continues to decline at this rate, no one will be able to find a match, and thus will have to agree. My question is, assuming this inevtiblity progresses, what next? If/when that day comes, will 343i have some (in my opinion needed) turnover? The bottom line is, they "sales wise" killed it, but "quality of product wise", failed miserably. Im just reallllly curious if they'll be given another chance with Halo 5, or will they attempt to go a new direction? Just so we're clear here on the negatives w this game. -No proper ranking system was a really bad call -weapon balancing issues -forge impossible to use -custom games unacceptable -jip issues -playlist choices etc (sorry this can go for a longgg time) But back to the question at hand, will 343i or perhaps even Microsoft implement/demand a changing of the guard in the creative dept? Someone who is more in touch with what made Halo, Halo and possibly ressurect this game with Halo 5. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 An honest question here. We're all well aware 343i decided to take Halo in a new direction from its predecossors with this new installment. And no one can argue the quality marketing and hype surrounding this game was through the roof, and furthermore was well reflected through its impressive sales. But that being said, we're roughly 4 mths after the release of this game and things aren't so rosy anymore. Im not gonna take the stance, 'Halo is dead' or make any dramatic claims here, but if you look at the facts, community feedback for the most part and online population, this game is, well 'dying', I think is fair enough to say. Personally Ive played all installments of the franchise, and I mean a lot, and Ive never encountered so few players online, and furthermore the struggle (time) to find a match even. Scary part is, is this game is still essentially new. I personally feel its about fair to proclaim 343i has failed with this game. For those who feel otherwise, if the population continues to decline at this rate, no one will be able to find a match, and thus will have to agree. My question is, assuming this inevtiblity progresses, what next? If/when that day comes, will 343i have some (in my opinion needed) turnover? The bottom line is, they "sales wise" killed it, but "quality of product wise", failed miserably. Im just reallllly curious if they'll be given another chance with Halo 5, or will they attempt to go a new direction? Just so we're clear here on the negatives w this game. -No proper ranking system was a really bad call -weapon balancing issues -forge impossible to use -custom games unacceptable -jip issues -playlist choices etc (sorry this can go for a longgg time) But back to the question at hand, will 343i or perhaps even Microsoft implement/demand a changing of the guard in the creative dept? Someone who is more in touch with what made Halo, Halo and possibly ressurect this game with Halo 5. Thanks most of your points are ivalid as forge is not impossible to use at all and yes the playist choices are fine 343 outdid them selves with action sack only issue with halo 4 i have is that i dosent have the halo feel the feel that makes u want to play forever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Im ginger bush Posted March 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Invalid? no no no, sorry that's pure denial talking on your part. Perhaps not denial, but definately the minority perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 (edited) Invalid? no no no, sorry that's pure denial talking on your part. Perhaps not denial, but definately the minority perspective. just wait and see me break it down now An honest question here. We're all well aware 343i decided to take Halo in a new direction from its predecossors with this new installment. And no one can argue the quality marketing and hype surrounding this game was through the roof, and furthermore was well reflected through its impressive sales. But that being said, we're roughly 4 mths after the release of this game and things aren't so rosy anymore. Im not gonna take the stance, 'Halo is dead' or make any dramatic claims here, but if you look at the facts, community feedback for the most part and online population, this game is, well 'dying', I think is fair enough to say. Personally Ive played all installments of the franchise, and I mean a lot, and Ive never encountered so few players online, and furthermore the struggle (time) to find a match even. Scary part is, is this game is still essentially new. I personally feel its about fair to proclaim 343i has failed with this game. For those who feel otherwise, if the population continues to decline at this rate, no one will be able to find a match, and thus will have to agree. My question is, assuming this inevtiblity progresses, what next? If/when that day comes, will 343i have some (in my opinion needed) turnover? The bottom line is, they "sales wise" killed it, but "quality of product wise", failed miserably. Im just reallllly curious if they'll be given another chance with Halo 5, or will they attempt to go a new direction? Just so we're clear here on the negatives w this game. -No proper ranking system was a really bad call -weapon balancing issues -forge impossible to use -custom games unacceptable -jip issues -playlist choices etc (sorry this can go for a longgg time) But back to the question at hand, will 343i or perhaps even Microsoft implement/demand a changing of the guard in the creative dept? Someone who is more in touch with what made Halo, Halo and possibly ressurect this game with Halo 5. Thanks ` 1 we do have a ranking system in game 1 to 130 but as well as that a true skill one as well coming in april 2 343 have fixed the worst and only big noticable wepon the boltshot with SUPERNERF 3 forge is not impossible to use at all 4 343 have fixed some issues in custom games but the only issues with custom games is the flood gametype but some fixes have been made 5 yes jip has some issues but is worth keeping 6 343s playist choice is preety good thi year they have turned them selves around doubles sniper action sack GREAT breakdown done Edited March 12, 2013 by Caboose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeckoningZebra1 Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 lol When I saw the name of this Topic I thought it was gonna be like actual casualties 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SatanicBagels Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 just wait and see me break it down now ` 1 we do have a ranking system in game 1 to 130 but as well as that a true skill one as well coming in april 2 343 have fixed the worst and only big noticable wepon the boltshot with SUPERNERF 3 forge is not impossible to use at all 4 343 have fixed some issues in custom games but the only issues with custom games is the flood gametype but some fixes have been made 5 yes jip has some issues but is owrth keeping 6 343s playist choice is preety good thi year they have turned them selves around doubles sniper action sack GREAT breakdown done All of those points are opinions. You can't say invalid based on a foundation of opinions. You have to support it with facts. Just a few things I noticed though in response to the OP... 1. Forge is possible to use. That's not to say it is a huge step down from Reach which as far as I'm concerned is unacceptable and needs to be fixed in Halo 5. After playing countless custom games I have arisen to the conclusion that incredible maps can be made in Halo 4. 2. Playlists are terrible in Halo 4... But they are improving little by little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 (edited) All of those points are opinions. You can't say invalid based on a foundation of opinions. You have to support it with facts. Just a few things I noticed though in response to the OP... 1. Forge is possible to use. That's not to say it is a huge step down from Reach which as far as I'm concerned is unacceptable and needs to be fixed in Halo 5. After playing countless custom games I have arisen to the conclusion that incredible maps can be made in Halo 4. 2. Playlists are terrible in Halo 4... But they are improving little by little. in some aspects yes manily terrain not enough of it but i dont see how the playists in halo 4 are bad becase yes 343 did a bad job at lauch but now ever sice snipers and doubles came in 343 have turned them selves around with halo 4 Edited March 12, 2013 by Caboose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SatanicBagels Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 in some aspects yes manily terrain not enough of it but i dont see how the playists in halo 4 are bad becase yes 343 did a bad job at lauch but now ever sice snipers and doubles came in 343 have turned them selves around with halo 4 Well all opinions of course but I'm going to allude to several things. ~ No BTB Objective ~ Action Sack arguably being terrible ~ Grifball getting wrecked ~ No FFA Playlist ~ Flood isn't very fun Also, starting to fix a game this far after launch is not acceptable. If they were not dealing with the Halo franchise they wouldn't have had nearly the success that they had at launch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Im ginger bush Posted March 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 In rebuttal to Caboose's statement. 1 we do have a ranking system in game 1 to 130 but as well as that a true skill one as well coming in april 2 343 have fixed the worst and only big noticable wepon the boltshot with SUPERNERF 3 forge is not impossible to use at all 4 343 have fixed some issues in custom games but the only issues with custom games is the flood gametype but some fixes have been made 5 yes jip has some issues but is worth keeping 6 343s playist choice is preety good thi year they have turned them selves around doubles sniper action sack GREAT 1) The SR 1-130 fails as a ranking system bc it simply isn't one. Its experience points based, so it might as well be a clock saying how long someone has played. Virtually no indicator of how 'good' a player, just how much they play. Which leaves zero incentive to keep playing. Not to mention caps at 130, then what? The long awaited semi-proper CSR coming in April will fail, bc it is only available on Waypoint....this won't please the masses, at all. Wait for the backlash. 2) Yes they have nerfed the boltshot, thankfully, but have done nothing remedy the most used gun in the game, the DMR. Its far overpowered, make BR, lightrifle, + others obsolete. 3) Sorry i dont use forge personally, but have heard numerous complaints about the mechanics and capabilites of it. A down grade for Reach's version. 4)Custom games ppl cannot disarm the 'flagnum' feature as well simplify the game, like removing loadouts and other features. Plus ppl cannot join. Id eloborate but again dont personally play too many customs. 5) Agreed, i like jip but it simply isnt working, at all. See failed Team throwdown for proof. Not to mention quit ban in affect. 6) Agreed but should have been all along. Its rather obv, many types of playlists are near extint now. Time to delete them, or combine in a multi-team setup, so ppl can actually find matches. Perhaps BT objective. More topics 7) Maps in general, something just feels missing. They become tiresome, quick Lag, why no dedicated servers for such a 'huge' game? 9) Aim assist, the game has been realllly dumbed down, wayyy to forgiving, takes the skill out of it. 10) Friendly fire, perhaps the only game that didnt have it all along, again more a skilled player request 11) Loadouts, ordinance drops. Very COD'esk, personally not entirely opposed but a lot to digest 12) User interface, very difficult to navigate, just generally not user friendly 13) Endless medals, get a medal for a "generic kill', what next one for finishing a game? Whyd they remove the "sniper spree's" and other weapon spree's? 14) No firefight .....This list can actually keep going. Point is Im actually a fan, still, kinda, of this game, but this is far too much change for the sake of change. And worse yet it wasnt even properly executed. Its just reallly disappointing and near impposible not to take note. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoFlame Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 you forgot one of the biggest issues social interaction in the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Well all opinions of course but I'm going to allude to several things. ~ No BTB Objective ~ Action Sack arguably being terrible ~ Grifball getting wrecked ~ No FFA Playlist ~ Flood isn't very fun Also, starting to fix a game this far after launch is not acceptable. If they were not dealing with the Halo franchise they wouldn't have had nearly the success that they had at launch. btb objetive is terrible becase lets say i wanted to play ctf in reach well i cannot becase it was always just slayer in there action sack is just plain fun and crazy grifball had been improved the only bad thing is not big expotion we have ffa majestic dont we flood is fun we just lack the settings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Im ginger bush Posted March 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 @TornadoFlame "you forgot one of the biggest issues social interaction in the game." Yes i missed that part, but it hasn't been hard to notice that aspect while playing, theres virtually zero interaction. I guess there's two theories, from how I see it. One, without a competitive (ranked) aspect to the game, the need for communication is essentially minimal, everyones playing for 'fun'. If visible ranks were present and winning actually mattered youd likely have a spike in social interaction, with teammates communicating with one another to win, team work 101. Either that, or head sets and first person shooters in general are just a diminishing fad these days, not really sure tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 break down begin More topics 7) Maps in general, something just feels missing. They become tiresome, quick Lag, why no dedicated servers for such a 'huge' game? 9) Aim assist, the game has been realllly dumbed down, wayyy to forgiving, takes the skill out of it. 10) Friendly fire, perhaps the only game that didnt have it all along, again more a skilled player request 11) Loadouts, ordinance drops. Very COD'esk, personally not entirely opposed but a lot to digest 12) User interface, very difficult to navigate, just generally not user friendly 13) Endless medals, get a medal for a "generic kill', what next one for finishing a game? Whyd they remove the "sniper spree's" and other weapon spree's? 14) No firefight .....This list can actually keep going. Point is Im actually a fan, still, kinda, of this game, but this is far too much change for the sake of change. And worse yet it wasnt even properly executed. Its just reallly disappointing and near impposible not to take note. 7 no comment on this one would like to hear how they are boring 8 agreed we need dedicted servers halo 4 lags so much 9 dont see how is it dumbed down 10 dont mind it stop team killers and de ranker once true skill comes out 11 it is mondernizing halo 12 yes i agree with u there 13 i dont mind 14 sparten ops is better 4 sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Im ginger bush Posted March 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Oi, at the end of the day, I just listed 14 pretty recognizable flaws with the game, some you agree with, some you dont, and thats fine. Never meant to get into a debate, feature by feature whats works, what doesnt. Fact is, as a whole, the game is very flawed, and essentially a major disappointment in comparison to its previously impressive standards. I appreciate you seem to love the game, but there used to be soooo many more ppl like you feeling the same way, but thats not the case anymore, and I dont blame them one bit (you can through me into that category too.) Ive sure youve seen this before, but visuals always help. http://www.halocharts.com/2012/chart/dailypeakpopulation/all All factors aside, Halo should never be that low, its an embarrassment, but its also an accurate reflection of the quality of the product. Heck even Reach still 6 figures playing just before H4 came out, and everybody hated Reach supposidly. So back the question at hand, who's getting fired for this sub par product? I seriously would love to know, especially if they expect me/anyone to purchase H5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconShelf Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Forge; not as good as Reach due to no zoom/ presicion edits(a glitch, not intention). Be creative, use the map to your advantage. Coordinates can be used and magnets for larger floors and walls. Lock is good, and duplication is a huge timesaver when placing weapons on 1 respawn/ 5 clips. I do not care for online play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fzdw11 Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 In all fairness Caboose, the OP has a real point. Whether you agree with it or not is a whole other matter. But the real question at hand hasn't even been touched upon, everything has fallen to what the OP feels are flaws with the game, and people agreeing or disagreeing with them. Will there be a turnover at 343 because of how things with Halo 4 appear to be going? That was the question originally asked, and it is a very valid question. But that question opens up a whole slew of other questions, such as "Is Microsoft happy with how Halo 4 has turned out?" Personally, 343 needs to rethink their approach. While I personally like Halo 4, the player population problem is an obvious sign that many, many, many others do not. If I were in charge, I'd personally wait and see how 343 themselves handled this (which should be ongoing right now), and what their approach to Halo 5 will be. If I didn't think it was a good solution, yes, heads would be rolling. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Oi, at the end of the day, I just listed 14 pretty recognizable flaws with the game, some you agree with, some you dont, and thats fine. Never meant to get into a debate, feature by feature whats works, what doesnt. Fact is, as a whole, the game is very flawed, and essentially a major disappointment in comparison to its previously impressive standards. I appreciate you seem to love the game, but there used to be soooo many more ppl like you feeling the same way, but thats not the case anymore, and I dont blame them one bit (you can through me into that category too.) Ive sure youve seen this before, but visuals always help. http://www.halocharts.com/2012/chart/dailypeakpopulation/all All factors aside, Halo should never be that low, its an embarrassment, but its also an accurate reflection of the quality of the product. Heck even Reach still 6 figures playing just before H4 came out, and everybody hated Reach supposidly. So back the question at hand, who's getting fired for this sub par product? I seriously would love to know, especially if they expect me/anyone to purchase H5 i have seen these and there is many reasons for the numbers the best one i can think of is this we have many halo games offline... cough halo 2 cough.... and some online odst 3 reach and halo 4 cea and halo wars all online that is many games to play on some peaple like halo wars some like reach there is huge selection to choose from in the days of 2 and 3 the numbers where high becase there wasnt to many halo games then but now there is many more to play and come back to as well In all fairness Caboose, the OP has a real point. Whether you agree with it or not is a whole other matter. But the real question at hand hasn't even been touched upon, everything has fallen to what the OP feels are flaws with the game, and people agreeing or disagreeing with them. Will there be a turnover at 343 because of how things with Halo 4 appear to be going? That was the question originally asked, and it is a very valid question. But that question opens up a whole slew of other questions, such as "Is Microsoft happy with how Halo 4 has turned out?" Personally, 343 needs to rethink their approach. While I personally like Halo 4, the player population problem is an obvious sign that many, many, many others do not. If I were in charge, I'd personally wait and see how 343 themselves handled this (which should be ongoing right now), and what their approach to Halo 5 will be. If I didn't think it was a good solution, yes, heads would be rolling. i kinda agree maybe yes 343 might need to rethink there approch but how would u feel if u was the boss of 343 tring to live up the legacy of the halo trilogey this is 343s first game apart from cea not counting it in this though halo 5 will be better halo 4 was more like a testing ground done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloody Initiate Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 (edited) I'm not sure holding 343i to a typical business model makes sense. First, last, foremost, and most importantly, the definition of "good business" has been changing a LOT lately (I'm guessing within the last decade or three, I've personally only noticed it in the last decade+, but I'm only 27, so it's not like I have a lot of observation time logged). Each industry, one by one, is changing their model to be measured more and more by the year or even quarter. The gaming industry is doing this right now, and so I'm not really sure ANYONE at 343 or Microsoft cares AT ALL that Halo 4's only success is sales. Second, I'm not sure how much we're looking at 343's game. Due to the skyrocketing price of designing and producing a game a lot of the details get sort of contracted out. That's not unique to 343, btw. They pulled a lot of their skeleton from previous Halo titles, didn't make their own maps, didn't even make their own gameplay, and as far as I can tell the only people working over there are just a few people "minding the office." BS Angel releases irrelevant bulletins occasionally wherein she speaks a paragraph or two of wasted time and then hands the "mic" over to someone else. Obviously there is more going on than what we are shown, I understand that, my point is what I've seen of 343 just didn't look like what I've seen from other gaming companies. Third, this is one game in one year. I think we're looking at their new business model. They copied everything else that they could from other titles, I fully expect them to get a comfortable formula and start using it as a template for new games which can be produced faster thereafter. You see this with a lot of titles lately, EA is especially bad about it. Call of Duty also has a very well-known formula. UbiSoft as well very clearly has an easy time selling Assassin's Creed titles, I suspect a major part of their success is that they aren't a shooter. I don't know that we should expect 1 Halo title every year, but 1 every 2 years is very doable and probably on the horizon. So addressing the original question, my view is and has been that we simply shouldn't expect the same out of 343 that we've enjoyed from other developers in the past. We should probably expect it less and less from big developers as a group in fact, but the trouble is they can and will occasionally make really good games. So you buy the next game hoping for the same experience, and it's a bit of a let down, but around the time you're about to give up on a franchise (2-3 games in probably) they'll update their formula and have a major hit again. I can think of an example in every damn franchise I've played:Assassin's Creed II was amazing, it was stunning. I haven't played an AC game since, and from what I've read of the reviews that's not a horrible choice on my part. The games since aren't bad according to my sources, but that pivotal charm from AC2 hasn't been rediscovered. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare blew my mind for a military shooter. I was accustomed to trying such games and hating how hard they tried to make things feel "real" by really just making you terrible. For example whatever idiot many years ago thought you should have to switch to grenades to throw them as if they were a regular weapon should have been fired. Halo got it right, if you want players to throw grenades make it a single button. Then CoD4 got stuff like that right. Combine that with the slick production, genuinely solid gameplay and multiplayer, and a few other things, and there's your hit. I played the MW2 campaign and cannot think of a worse campaign in my own gaming history. I haven't played any of the Black Ops campaigns but heard they were good, but I DID play the multiplayer and see they hadn't really updated it. I heard MW3 was awful. Mass Effect made an excellent stab at a sci-fi RPG with a whole new world and a whole new pseudo-science propelling it. ME2 was pretty good, but directly betrayed a lot of what made Mass Effect unique. I also got a whiff of simplification and uniformity in ME2. Dragon Age: Origins surprised the heck out of me, I had been busy with college and didn't even know BioWare was making the game. I didn't play DA2, but based on what I read and heard of it I wondered if they'd gotten their template from ME2. I still haven't played DA2 or ME3, but I'm told my fearful theory turned out accurate. Ever wish you were wrong about a prediction? Developers now are just making stamps and to make a new game they upgrade some of the graphics technology to give it a facelift and then just stamp it onto a new title. That's the new model. It's not a good model, it's not appealing in most ways, but that's what it is. The people who say Halo "evolved" can at least claim to be half-right, it's business model definitely "upgraded" (I wouldn't call it "evolving") but the game didn't at all. This has been going on for a long time in a lot of places, but it's only lately that I personally have felt it was such a trend. There are some good things about uniformity. You can count on the same gameplay returning, which may or may not have been a problem for you depending on titles you've played in the past. I played multiple titles that were very good games (according to me, other players, and reviewers) but never made the money necessary to continue. Big business models bring uniformity. They do not bring much that anyone would call unique though. They don't innovate because investing in new ideas is a gamble and "smart money" doesn't gamble. You don't get new ideas, and you definitely don't get old ideas that a minority enjoyed. The only thing less attractive to a business than a new idea is an old idea that didn't sell as well as Call of Duty. Edited March 13, 2013 by Bloody Initiate 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Hansen Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 I'm sorry you didn't like BTB in Reach. ( I personally hated all of reach ) But your opinion on big team objective is in the extreme minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoFlame Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 @TornadoFlame "you forgot one of the biggest issues social interaction in the game." Yes i missed that part, but it hasn't been hard to notice that aspect while playing, theres virtually zero interaction. I guess there's two theories, from how I see it. One, without a competitive (ranked) aspect to the game, the need for communication is essentially minimal, everyones playing for 'fun'. If visible ranks were present and winning actually mattered youd likely have a spike in social interaction, with teammates communicating with one another to win, team work 101. Either that, or head sets and first person shooters in general are just a diminishing fad these days, not really sure tbh. i'm more upset with having no contact with the other team. i mean it makes it unplayable for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Im ginger bush Posted March 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 @Bloody Initiate First off, bravo sir, A++. I was kinda hoping all along for a response like this, no offense Caboose. But you clearly have a remarkable thorough grasp on the gaming industry today, from a business perspective, which was the direction I wanted this thread to go. Ill have to keep this short though as time is of the essence and frankly I'm not nearly as eloquent. Basically you hit the nail on the head, with everything. I couldnt agree more with the direction/business model gaming company's are following today, and yes Ive been saying it all along Halo 5 and 6 will be coming out a lot quicker then the general public expects (ie def not the 3 yr Halo norm). My whole conundrum is this and its a dangerous one. Halo 4 sold like crazy, had generally very high reviews, but in reality did not deserve either. I strongly believe this isnt even debatable. So that being said, for a lover of the Halo franchise, we might just very well be doomed going forward. My question is, is there anyone at Microsoft essentially, that has the insight to realize they are in dire trouble going forward with 343i as is? Or is it simply going to be a case of looking at the bottom line. "Great sales, great reviews, go do again it 343 with H5, green light!". I hope/pray someone is taking note of the dying population, the frustration from fans on allllll the forums, and the sloppy/slow patch work 343i has offered to remedy things. Again from the business point of view, I feel I can safely predict, if things don't change at 343i, Halo 5 will tank, hard. Im not even speaking about the quality of game, which Im confident will not be great, but by the number of sales. Think about it from this perspective, the hype surrounding Halo4 was through the roof, then it sold nearly 10 million copies (in or around the most of any Halo), now nearly 4 months removed can't even get 50k online at one time. Basically the percentage of ppl still playing the game who bought the game is atrociously low, especially this early on. All this is a reflection of the quality of the game. Now looking forward to Halo 5. Halo 4 pissed off soooo many of the oldschool, hardcore halo players (i guess u could throw me in there), with all the terrible decisons they made, with the no ranking system, weapon balance issues, loadouts, ordinance etc etc etc etc, some have left for good, and others on their way out. The few millions that bought the game out of hype and positive word of mouth about the franchise from ppl like myself, are no longer playing as well, cuz the game, well just isnt that fun. All Im getting at is, how do they expect to sell Halo 5 when Halo 4 was such a let down. I doubt the few million who bought (tried out) Halo for the first time, then stopped playing after a month or two, will be stupid enough to fork over another $60 for it. And more importantly, the loyal Halo fanbase who feels 343i turned their back on them, I doubt will be back. No matter how impressive the ad campaign for the next installment, I feel the negative word of mouth from the formally diehard faithful, might cause a much bigger hiccup than expected for Microsoft. Remember, the best way to keep ppl coming back in the future, is to keep your client base happy, and provide them with a quality product. They've seem to have forgotten that notion entirely and Im worried for the future of the franchise if things remain as is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halogeek99 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Op. You're half right. Games stunning, but lacks in balance parts. New playlists and rank system may help, but I can't say I'm noticing s bigger influx of gamers because of new lists, just a wider spread of already thin player base. But let's see what'll happen I think 343/Microsoft should give all map packs for free. This would be a good investment for the 720 and coming Halos, and also draw back a lot of players to get things going again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloody Initiate Posted March 18, 2013 Report Share Posted March 18, 2013 (edited) Noting trends is a lot easier and safer than making specific predictions about how a product will perform, which is why I spent more time noting the trend in my post. There are a lot of different things that can happen with Halo 5, and even though 343 showed zero interest in making a good Halo title with Halo 4, there are still a lot of variables in between now and Halo 5. I can agree that most of the evidence (Halo 4 + 343's Public Face on Halo Waypoint) still shows a developer with no resemblance to any fan of Halo I ever met. I only get to see so much and the same evidence that damns them could throw us a curve ball. For me I would never have predicted that a company could be so stupid as to blatantly copy other games as much as 343 did with Halo 4, but that same shock could be something else next time. What they've shown is an ability to do much worse than I expected, which could either mean they're just plain awful and have no hope, or it could mean they "had a bad game" just as all of us do so often when playing these games. If 343 had a Trueskill rating the variable which measured their consistency would be very high right now. They've only made two games on their own, both of which were largely copies of other games. That could mean they're worthless copycats with no original ideas, or it could mean that they're improving by imitation. We don't really know, but since Halo 4 at least pretends to be original, I suspect they just don't have any plans for innovation in the future. The evidence I have shows that you can't count on these people for anything, sadly that includes consistency in failure or success. I can't comfortably project as many years into the future as Halo 5 is, I can only hope they'll do well while I play other titles, because I'm sure as hell not playing Halo right now. Edited March 18, 2013 by Bloody Initiate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.