Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

It's my money and ill spend it on what I want

OP HellJumper2397

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 5
In all honesty I hate BDobbinsFTW solely because he's a biased -Yoink-. Now I'm perfectly fine with certain people not wanting to buy Halo 5 after the MCC issues but for the love of god don't force consumers what to buy and not to buy. They rightfully earned the cash and not him hence making it their decision and not his.
You already know what you're getting into by reading the title of his video.

I used to dislike him, but at this point I'm convinced that he's nothing but a clickbait troll. Don't let him get the best of you, if you enjoy Halo, go ahead and pre-order the game. I already did.
Wolf S305 wrote:
In all honesty I hate BDobbinsFTW solely because he's a biased -Yoink-. Now I'm perfectly fine with certain people not wanting to buy Halo 5 after the MCC issues but for the love of god don't force consumers what to buy and not to buy. They rightfully earned the cash and not him hence making it their decision and not his.
I agreed.
themanss22 wrote:
Wolf S305 wrote:
In all honesty I hate BDobbinsFTW solely because he's a biased -Yoink-. Now I'm perfectly fine with certain people not wanting to buy Halo 5 after the MCC issues but for the love of god don't force consumers what to buy and not to buy. They rightfully earned the cash and not him hence making it their decision and not his.

I agreed.
If ANYONES making a biased decision it's you guys. All he wants is for the Master Chief Collection to work. He's not telling yall dummies not to buy the game, but for now make it seem like you wont until the damn mcc is actually fixed.
TryHardFan wrote:
L377UC3 wrote:
Baron Kit wrote:
You can do whatever you want my friend with your money and I don't see why people think that pre ordering a game equals a broken game on day one I pre order games to help pay it off sooner when I have the money then paying it off later when I don't have the money.


Companies don't even check pre orders before launch, and to my knowledge don't even get the money until release. It's the same logic as the 343i is MS BS which is 100% false.


Care to elaborate on how 343 isn't MS?


They were created by Micro$haft for the specific purpose of carrying the Halo torch, but that doesn't mean that they are MS. Whether all of the 343 members are/were MS employees or not is of little consequence, because now they're 343. If they were MS, they would just call themselves that.

Ok, then let me ask you this: if you saw people were pissed back in the day about the policies of the Xbox one before launch, including requiring a constant internet connection to play any games, did you try to settle them down by saying "Stop talking crap about the people that made the xbone because Microsoft made them do that and it's all their fault?" No you did not because people would think you're an idiot. This screw up of tmcc may have mostly been caused by Microsoft, but you gain nothing from trying to defend a bunch of strangers' reputations. This issue about is nothing personal but you make it one, even though the main problem at hand is one company selling a faulty product to the consumer. To spend any more time separating 343 from Microsoft and Microsoft itself is illogical. Also the only reason 343 would probably not refer themselves as ms is so that their PR doesn't take a hit, given the notorious reputation Microsoft has gained.
That post had nothing to do with Halo or the MCC. Is was simply a statement of fact that 343 Industries is not actually Microsoft. KitKatTheFox had it when he said "that's like calling DICE EA or calling Bungie Activision." Being paired with does not mean the same thing as being one.
TryHardFan wrote:
Quote:
I already talked about how the population drop can't be considered concrete evidence of Halo 4's "failure", so I won't waste the time to talk about it again. I'll just reiterate this bit: If it sold well and was enjoyed by many people, I don't see how that can be considered a colossal failure from an objective standpoint. That means that it can subjectively be considered a colossal failure, but - by definition - subjectivity is not factual.
Every Halo game has had quitting/betrayal penalties, so I don't see why MCC should be any different. They haven't described what the penalties will be like yet, so it's way too early to complain about them. Maybe the quit penalties will be like Reach, where it would only start to penalize you if you quit too many games in a short amount of time. If you're quitting that many games, odds are you deserve to be penalized.
I don't understand what you doubt. Battlefield 4 was unplayable for the first ~6 months (horrendous lag, game crashes, not being able to find an occupied lobby), you said so yourself. Destiny was equally unplayable (constant kicks to main menu, lag, game crashes), but they did get their issues sorted out within the first month.
I played the Halo 5 Beta, and I had more fun playing it than I have had playing Halo in a long time. I really enjoyed the small portion of gameplay that was showcased in the beta, so I can safely assume that I will enjoy the final game just as much. MCC works now, so I don't feel bad about having Halo 5 preordered. If it was in the same condition as it was in the first few months, I would probably be holding off. The Halo 5 beta worked just fine (better than MCC did at the time), so I'm confident that the full game will work similarly well. And even if it doesn't at first, that has been the case with most releases lately anyway. Pretty much every multiplayer experience has had a really rocky start on the Xbox One, and they've all been fixed. I'm okay with waiting for the kinks to be worked out, because I know they will be.
Not to mention the fact that Halo 5 is one game, whereas MCC is 4 games (5, if you split H2C and H2A) all running on individual original servers. The MCC was an overly ambitious project, especially as the first project from 343 for the Xbox One. Halo 5 will be one game with one multiplayer experience, and they've had the MCC to learn from.
Finally, I have no idea who "bdobbins" is, but I don't appreciate being insulted because I want to buy a game I like. I never said you had to buy it, I just said that I will. I'm not sending any kind of message to anyone, I'm keeping up with a universe that I love. If that's hard for you to wrap your head around, I really don't know why you're on these forums.

Here's the problem: you don't consider the general feedback of the players regarding halo 4 and its many problems, including weapon balancing along with literally going against the entire gameplay that halo used to be and only define success in a game by profits. You don't take in the longevity that games have to offer and the overall time players actually play the game. The problem with this kind of thinking is that it encourages games to be made for generating the most money while using the least amount of resources, which in turn, strips down the fun in what people actually paid for, primary example being destiny. The term "colossal failure" is subjective in of itself, but the issue people address that makes halo 4 earn that title is very much the truth.

Creating quitting penalties is a problem due to the damage made to tmcc because of the botched launch. Admittedly, it may be too early to complain about this, but if 343 makes it too strict, people may be more likely not play the game given the frustrations of the collection already.

The point I tried to make was kinda skewed by mentioning bf4, as it suffered the same fate as mcc. Really was trying to only mention destiny, with the different time it took for both games to be fixed, with halo taking nearly 4 months.

Also, the point bdobbins is trying to make in the video is that you shouldn't preorder (not necessarily buy) halo 5 because that shows you're allowing 343 to not be punished for destroying the launch of tmcc and that in turn creates a bigger chance for 343 to create the exact same problem for halo 5. This has nothing to do with halo 5 itself, but with the chance of tmcc dying a very premature death due to a company's incompetence. He wants you along with everyone else to encourage the #savemccfirst every time microsoft encourages preorders of halo 5. This will show that mcc is to remain a priority and that 343 needs to actually give proper support instead of just monthly updates. Hopefully this will clear up some confusion between you and the message bdobbins is trying to send.
Don't get me wrong about the population drop and general dislike of Halo 4. I do think the population suffered more than should have, and I know that an uncomfortably large amount of people were disappointed with Halo 4. The point that I was trying to make, however, was that I don't think it's fair to put Halo 4's population charts up against say Halo 3's population charts. The gaming industry is not what it was in 2007, and neither are gamers. There are a lot of reasons that a game loses population, not all of them leading to the conclusion that the game was a colossal failure. I also am not trying to measure its success by profits, I was just using that as an objective example of how the game was not a failure. Plenty of games are bad, yet still make money (looking at you, CoD). We all know CoD is terrible, but a lot of people still play/buy it every year and they always turn a profit. I say that CoD cannot be classified as a failure because they still make money and people still play their games. I wasn't using profits as an excuse, merely as an attempt to bring some objectivity into the discussion

I do agree that the quit penalties cannot be too strict, or they will lose players. But as I said (and as you agreed), it is too early to judge yet.

So now we're on the same page with BF4 and Destiny. BF4 was just as bad as MCC, and Destiny was really bad but they got their crap together a lot faster.

As far as "punishing 343 for the MCC's launch" goes, I don't agree. They shouldn't be punished for a botched launch, because it was fixed. It took a really long time, which sucked, but it is fixed. I don't think it's fair of us, the community, to punish 343 for a mistake they made and subsequently rectified. MCC still has work to be done and tweaks to be made, but the game is in an overall working state. Like I had said previously, if MCC was still broken, I probably wouldn't have Halo 5 pre-ordered yet. But since it works, and I enjoy playing it nearly every day, I have no qualms about throwing my money at 343 for the next installment of my favorite series.
Dragnet 38 wrote:
Dragnet 38 wrote:
I'd like to add that I read your links. The first one can hardly be taken as fact; it's one of the most blatantly biased things I've ever read. The graphs may or may not be correct, but the fact that writer can't go two lines without slandering 343/MS really tanks his credibility. Also, custom games were definitely horrible in Halo 4. To be fair though, custom games pretty much died with Reach anyway. At least for my friends group they did. Gaming as a whole has gotten to the point where very few people want to play custom matches on any game simply because it doesn't help them "progress" - there aren't any ranks or unlocks or any tangible reason to play customs. It really is a shame that most people don't want to just play a game to have fun anymore, they need to be rewarded for playing.


It's not bias at all. The writer objectively listed the events during Halo 4's downfall and his "slandering" was a direct response to the 343's total ineptitude to support the game after launch. More than enough reason to get angry was given


There is a difference between a game not being the supported the way that you want it to, and it not being supported at all. 343 constantly supported Halo 4 by nerving/buffing guns, changing playlists, adding custom community maps to matchmaking, and fixing other gameplay issues like glitches/bugs. I had a lot more fun playing Halo 4 multiplayer a year after it came out than I did right after it was released.

The writer was looking for any and all reasons to bash 343/MS, whether founded or unfounded, and never once mentioned anything good that they did. That's the definition of biased.



Bro,

It took them 3 months to fix the Boltshot, 7 months to release a title update for global weapon balancing and in the realm of 9 months to release frigging 1-Flag CTF (which was the only alleviation Custom games ever got). This is far from being a shining example of post launch support.


I had a lot more fun playing Halo 4 multiplayer a year after it came out than I did right after it was released.

^Isn't that exactly my case in point?

As for the writer, his article was specifically about the DOWNFALL of Halo 4. The entire purpose was to pinpoint the issues with Halo 4 and 343, hold them accountable and berate them for it.
1. I never said it was "the shining example of post-game support". I just said that you can't claim that they didn't support it, which you were trying to do.

2. I suppose I just have more patience with video games than some other people do. I don't mind if a game's multiplayer doesn't work flawlessly at launch. I realize that in this day and age, that will likely never happen for any video game. I'm completely fine with waiting a few months for the multiplayer to be fully functional, as long as I have campaign/co-op to keep me busy.

3. Whether the information was correct or incorrect, he presented it in a slanderous, offensive, one-sided manner, which is the exact definition of biased. If he would have written a calm and logical article, I would have taken him more seriously. This the last time I will address this particular point, because if I haven't convinced you that he is biased, then there is likely nothing I could say to make you think he is. So it's not worth continuing to talk about.
So I just watched a video by B something FTW saying don't preorder Halo 5. I've watched a few of his videos and their basically all the same but he said something like if you preorder Halo 5 then you hate halo and we need to save the MCC first. NO. I'lll preorder Halo 5 because I like what I've seen and played from the beta. I don't even play Halo for the mp I play for the story and so far 343 have done a good job. So I am going to preorder Halo 5 not because I hate Halo but because I love it.
I'm as tempted to pre-order as anyone. I have had special editions in the past, I've been a Halo fanatic since 2002, I love all of the books and games, and I want a nice, fancy special edition to add to my collection. It's my prerogative!

But you people are missing the point.

The game industry has changed from a model of "ship a finished game" to "make the most money" regardless of what condition the game is in when it "goes Gold". We need to have principles and standards by communicating with our money that we do not support this business model. You know who loses? Consumers. Especially those with little or no internet who just want to be able to put the disc in an play on day one.

No, you don't have to listen. Yes, it is your right to pre-order. Just know that when you pre-order (at this time in the gaming industry – not in general), you are undermining the influence that the gaming community has to stop this new business model and demand quality. You are giving publishers and studios the green light to continue putting the consumer experience second to profits.

You can pretend that all of these issues don't exist, that your gaming experience is the only one that matters, that as long as you personally don't have "too many issues" with the game when it launches then it doesn't matter... but it does.

Here's a comparison. If it became public knowledge that Walmart knowingly sold children's toys containing lead-based paint, people would start boycotting Walmart. If you then came along and said, "Hey, I don't have a child. I wasn't affected," how do you think the parents of the affected children would react? Even if you were able to prove that there weren't any other products sold by Walmart with lead-based paint, your continued financial support of Walmart would be enabling at best and selfish at worst.

Obviously, this is a much more extreme example (I don't think anyone got sick from the MCC, except for going insane), but the principal stands.

Stop enabling abuse of consumers, even if you personally weren't heavily affected by the MCC's myriad of problems. Stop scrambling to consume every bit of "bonus" that vendors/publishers are giving you for paying them early without thinking of the consequences.

No doubt many will disagree with me (especially those emotionally attached to their precious pre-orders), but it has to be said.

*prepares for "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO"-based arguments*

...

As far as "punishing 343 for the MCC's launch" goes, I don't agree. They shouldn't be punished for a botched launch, because it was fixed. It took a really long time, which sucked, but it is fixed. I don't think it's fair of us, the community, to punish 343 for a mistake they made and subsequently rectified. MCC still has work to be done and tweaks to be made, but the game is in an overall working state. Like I had said previously, if MCC was still broken, I probably wouldn't have Halo 5 pre-ordered yet. But since it works, and I enjoy playing it nearly every day, I have no qualms about throwing my money at 343 for the next installment of my favorite series.
You see Doctor, we're not punishing them. I fully intend on buying the game once I see that it works after it has been released. The goal isn't to "punish" – it's to stop paying people early for a product that will likely (speaking both statistically and from past experience) not be where it should be when it is released.

I enjoy playing MCC every day, too. It makes me really tempted to blissfully pretend that the MCC's launch never happened and live with my head in the sand. I'd be ignorant, but I'd sure as hell be happy. But I have more integrity than that, and so do a lot of other gamers. We demand quality. We demand fulfilled promises. And we won't continue to support a business model that is inconducive toward these expectations.

Halo 5 will be a huge success, I will almost certainly buy the game, and 343 will finally begin repairing their tarnished name. I just refuse to pay them early, even with them trying to bribe me with little perks so to try to get me to continue supporting the flawed business model.
Wolf S305 wrote:
In all honesty I hate BDobbinsFTW solely because he's a biased -Yoink-. Now I'm perfectly fine with certain people not wanting to buy Halo 5 after the MCC issues but for the love of god don't force consumers what to buy and not to buy. They rightfully earned the cash and not him hence making it their decision and not his.
Yeah. He's an entertainer. That's what he does. Of course he's biased. His videos are 45 minute (well-spoken) forum posts with swearing and gameplay and audio. He's not really forcing anyone to do very much of anything. The only power you give him is what you do with your wallet.

He's an activist, not a news outlet. He's biased because he has opinions. He has subscribers because people agree.
themanss22 wrote:
Wolf S305 wrote:
In all honesty I hate BDobbinsFTW solely because he's a biased -Yoink-. Now I'm perfectly fine with certain people not wanting to buy Halo 5 after the MCC issues but for the love of god don't force consumers what to buy and not to buy. They rightfully earned the cash and not him hence making it their decision and not his.


I agreed.

If ANYONES making a biased decision it's you guys. All he wants is for the Master Chief Collection to work. He's not telling yall dummies not to buy the game, but for now make it seem like you wont until the damn mcc is actually fixed.
You do know I'm not against his opinion, RIGHT??? But yea it seem people are trying force some of the people not to buy the game by making dumb excuse.
I'm with you! Just because you don't want to buy it (because of reasons YOU don't like) doesn't mean we shouldn't buy it. I'll see you guys on release!
themanss22 wrote:
themanss22 wrote:
Wolf S305 wrote:
In all honesty I hate BDobbinsFTW solely because he's a biased -Yoink-. Now I'm perfectly fine with certain people not wanting to buy Halo 5 after the MCC issues but for the love of god don't force consumers what to buy and not to buy. They rightfully earned the cash and not him hence making it their decision and not his.


I agreed.


If ANYONES making a biased decision it's you guys. All he wants is for the Master Chief Collection to work. He's not telling yall dummies not to buy the game, but for now make it seem like you wont until the damn mcc is actually fixed.

You do know I'm not against his opinion, RIGHT??? But yea it seem people are trying force some of the people not to buy the game by making dumb excuse.
No one said don't buy it so shshshhhs. We as consumers want other consumers to finally make the smart choice and vote with their money. Don't pre-order unless you want to tell 343 that yoinking us over was fine to do.

...

As far as "punishing 343 for the MCC's launch" goes, I don't agree. They shouldn't be punished for a botched launch, because it was fixed. It took a really long time, which sucked, but it is fixed. I don't think it's fair of us, the community, to punish 343 for a mistake they made and subsequently rectified. MCC still has work to be done and tweaks to be made, but the game is in an overall working state. Like I had said previously, if MCC was still broken, I probably wouldn't have Halo 5 pre-ordered yet. But since it works, and I enjoy playing it nearly every day, I have no qualms about throwing my money at 343 for the next installment of my favorite series.

You see Doctor, we're not punishing them. I fully intend on buying the game once I see that it works after it has been released. The goal isn't to "punish" – it's to stop paying people early for a product that will likely (speaking both statistically and from past experience) not be where it should be when it is released.

I enjoy playing MCC every day, too. It makes me really tempted to blissfully pretend that the MCC's launch never happened and live with my head in the sand. I'd be ignorant, but I'd sure as hell be happy. But I have more integrity than that, and so do a lot of other gamers. We demand quality. We demand fulfilled promises. And we won't continue to support a business model that is inconducive toward these expectations.

Halo 5 will be a huge success, I will almost certainly buy the game, and 343 will finally begin repairing their tarnished name. I just refuse to pay them early, even with them trying to bribe me with little perks so to try to get me to continue supporting the flawed business model.
MCC is still broken due to low population. Matches are never balanced
Wolf S305 wrote:
In all honesty I hate BDobbinsFTW solely because he's a biased -Yoink-. Now I'm perfectly fine with certain people not wanting to buy Halo 5 after the MCC issues but for the love of god don't force consumers what to buy and not to buy. They rightfully earned the cash and not him hence making it their decision and not his.
His video's titles are very misleading. But I watched the whole thing and he brought up some very interesting and important points. It's just the titles he uses are click bait (Which isn't a good strategy because it makes him lose credibility).

...

As far as "punishing 343 for the MCC's launch" goes, I don't agree. They shouldn't be punished for a botched launch, because it was fixed. It took a really long time, which sucked, but it is fixed. I don't think it's fair of us, the community, to punish 343 for a mistake they made and subsequently rectified. MCC still has work to be done and tweaks to be made, but the game is in an overall working state. Like I had said previously, if MCC was still broken, I probably wouldn't have Halo 5 pre-ordered yet. But since it works, and I enjoy playing it nearly every day, I have no qualms about throwing my money at 343 for the next installment of my favorite series.

You see Doctor, we're not punishing them. I fully intend on buying the game once I see that it works after it has been released. The goal isn't to "punish" – it's to stop paying people early for a product that will likely (speaking both statistically and from past experience) not be where it should be when it is released.

I enjoy playing MCC every day, too. It makes me really tempted to blissfully pretend that the MCC's launch never happened and live with my head in the sand. I'd be ignorant, but I'd sure as hell be happy. But I have more integrity than that, and so do a lot of other gamers. We demand quality. We demand fulfilled promises. And we won't continue to support a business model that is inconducive toward these expectations.

Halo 5 will be a huge success, I will almost certainly buy the game, and 343 will finally begin repairing their tarnished name. I just refuse to pay them early, even with them trying to bribe me with little perks so to try to get me to continue supporting the flawed business model.
I agree in principle, but the reality is something different. The money from pre-orders doesn't actually go them until the game is released. And honestly, whether or not we "demand" a working product at launch, the likelihood of it happening isn't going to change. I'm sure that they put in the same amount of pre-launch work regardless of preorders.

...

As far as "punishing 343 for the MCC's launch" goes, I don't agree. They shouldn't be punished for a botched launch, because it was fixed. It took a really long time, which sucked, but it is fixed. I don't think it's fair of us, the community, to punish 343 for a mistake they made and subsequently rectified. MCC still has work to be done and tweaks to be made, but the game is in an overall working state. Like I had said previously, if MCC was still broken, I probably wouldn't have Halo 5 pre-ordered yet. But since it works, and I enjoy playing it nearly every day, I have no qualms about throwing my money at 343 for the next installment of my favorite series.


You see Doctor, we're not punishing them. I fully intend on buying the game once I see that it works after it has been released. The goal isn't to "punish" – it's to stop paying people early for a product that will likely (speaking both statistically and from past experience) not be where it should be when it is released.

I enjoy playing MCC every day, too. It makes me really tempted to blissfully pretend that the MCC's launch never happened and live with my head in the sand. I'd be ignorant, but I'd sure as hell be happy. But I have more integrity than that, and so do a lot of other gamers. We demand quality. We demand fulfilled promises. And we won't continue to support a business model that is inconducive toward these expectations.

Halo 5 will be a huge success, I will almost certainly buy the game, and 343 will finally begin repairing their tarnished name. I just refuse to pay them early, even with them trying to bribe me with little perks so to try to get me to continue supporting the flawed business model.

I agree in principle, but the reality is something different. The money from pre-orders doesn't actually go them until the game is released. And honestly, whether or not we "demand" a working product at launch, the likelihood of it happening isn't going to change. I'm sure that they put in the same amount of pre-launch work regardless of preorders.
Incidentally, I agree with you in practice. In other words, will a bunch of gamers refusing to pre-order a single game cause devs and publishers to scramble around and say, "Oh -Yoink-! They're not pre-ordering! We better make it work then, I guess."? Hell naw. I wish, but you're 100% right saying that it doesn't work that way. I've just always been an optimist (this is the part where people I call pessimists, but who are actually realists, say I'm naive, lol), and I truly believe that if enough people refuse to pre-order over an extended period of time, publishers will begin to reevaluate their habit of releasing unfinished, broken games. And it's not black-and-white. We won't go from utterly broken games to 100% finished/working games being released, even if people do what I've described. It'll be much more gray and gradual. The games will be less broken, more complete, more considerate of the consumer, with the goal of not pissing off fans and establishing credibility. Credibility = more predictable profits, along with more profits.

...

As far as "punishing 343 for the MCC's launch" goes, I don't agree. They shouldn't be punished for a botched launch, because it was fixed. It took a really long time, which sucked, but it is fixed. I don't think it's fair of us, the community, to punish 343 for a mistake they made and subsequently rectified. MCC still has work to be done and tweaks to be made, but the game is in an overall working state. Like I had said previously, if MCC was still broken, I probably wouldn't have Halo 5 pre-ordered yet. But since it works, and I enjoy playing it nearly every day, I have no qualms about throwing my money at 343 for the next installment of my favorite series.


You see Doctor, we're not punishing them. I fully intend on buying the game once I see that it works after it has been released. The goal isn't to "punish" – it's to stop paying people early for a product that will likely (speaking both statistically and from past experience) not be where it should be when it is released.

I enjoy playing MCC every day, too. It makes me really tempted to blissfully pretend that the MCC's launch never happened and live with my head in the sand. I'd be ignorant, but I'd sure as hell be happy. But I have more integrity than that, and so do a lot of other gamers. We demand quality. We demand fulfilled promises. And we won't continue to support a business model that is inconducive toward these expectations.

Halo 5 will be a huge success, I will almost certainly buy the game, and 343 will finally begin repairing their tarnished name. I just refuse to pay them early, even with them trying to bribe me with little perks so to try to get me to continue supporting the flawed business model.


I agree in principle, but the reality is something different. The money from pre-orders doesn't actually go them until the game is released. And honestly, whether or not we "demand" a working product at launch, the likelihood of it happening isn't going to change. I'm sure that they put in the same amount of pre-launch work regardless of preorders.

Incidentally, I agree with you in practice. In other words, will a bunch of gamers refusing to pre-order a single game cause devs and publishers to scramble around and say, "Oh -Yoink-! They're not pre-ordering! We better make it work then, I guess."? Hell naw. I wish, but you're 100% right saying that it doesn't work that way. I've just always been an optimist (this is the part where people I call pessimists, but who are actually realists, say I'm naive, lol), and I truly believe that if enough people refuse to pre-order over an extended period of time, publishers will begin to reevaluate their habit of releasing unfinished, broken games. And it's not black-and-white. We won't go from utterly broken games to 100% finished/working games being released, even if people do what I've described. It'll be much more gray and gradual. The games will be less broken, more complete, more considerate of the consumer, with the goal of not pissing off fans and establishing credibility. Credibility = more predictable profits, along with more profits.
It's nice that you can see my point. I would definitely be more open to the idea of not preordering or even boycotting certain video games if there was some kind of large-scale written agreement involvement. But I won't just decide on my own to not preorder in the hopes that enough other people so the same in order to send a message. Now if it there was a petition or a specific website with member counters, it could certainly be a worthwhile endeavor. But as it stands right (a few random people on forums talking down to other members for planning on getting a game), it's not enough to be effective.
themanss22 wrote:
themanss22 wrote:
Wolf S305 wrote:
In all honesty I hate BDobbinsFTW solely because he's a biased -Yoink-. Now I'm perfectly fine with certain people not wanting to buy Halo 5 after the MCC issues but for the love of god don't force consumers what to buy and not to buy. They rightfully earned the cash and not him hence making it their decision and not his.


I agreed.


If ANYONES making a biased decision it's you guys. All he wants is for the Master Chief Collection to work. He's not telling yall dummies not to buy the game, but for now make it seem like you wont until the damn mcc is actually fixed.


You do know I'm not against his opinion, RIGHT??? But yea it seem people are trying force some of the people not to buy the game by making dumb excuse.


No one said don't buy it so shshshhhs. We as consumers want other consumers to finally make the smart choice and vote with their money. Don't pre-order unless you want to tell 343 that yoinking us over was fine to do.
Dude calm down. I want to buy halo 5 and have a good time, you can't just tell other consumers what they can't buy. It like your taking away people rights. :I
Quote:
Don't get me wrong about the population drop and general dislike of Halo 4. I do think the population suffered more than should have, and I know that an uncomfortably large amount of people were disappointed with Halo 4. The point that I was trying to make, however, was that I don't think it's fair to put Halo 4's population charts up against say Halo 3's population charts. The gaming industry is not what it was in 2007, and neither are gamers. There are a lot of reasons that a game loses population, not all of them leading to the conclusion that the game was a colossal failure. I also am not trying to measure its success by profits, I was just using that as an objective example of how the game was not a failure. Plenty of games are bad, yet still make money (looking at you, CoD). We all know CoD is terrible, but a lot of people still play/buy it every year and they always turn a profit. I say that CoD cannot be classified as a failure because they still make money and people still play their games. I wasn't using profits as an excuse, merely as an attempt to bring some objectivity into the discussion
I do agree that the quit penalties cannot be too strict, or they will lose players. But as I said (and as you agreed), it is too early to judge yet.
So now we're on the same page with BF4 and Destiny. BF4 was just as bad as MCC, and Destiny was really bad but they got their crap together a lot faster.
As far as "punishing 343 for the MCC's launch" goes, I don't agree. They shouldn't be punished for a botched launch, because it was fixed. It took a really long time, which sucked, but it is fixed. I don't think it's fair of us, the community, to punish 343 for a mistake they made and subsequently rectified. MCC still has work to be done and tweaks to be made, but the game is in an overall working state. Like I had said previously, if MCC was still broken, I probably wouldn't have Halo 5 pre-ordered yet. But since it works, and I enjoy playing it nearly every day, I have no qualms about throwing my money at 343 for the next installment of my favorite series.
I seriously cannot wrap my mind of how you consider the amount of feedback given from players for halo 4 and population drops are subjective compared to preorder and sales numbers. The statistics are just as real as anything, so I am truly confused as to why you think population drops and the amount of negative feedback is not considered an objective claim. Also, I think its completely fair to compare halo 4 to halo 3, as halo 3 went up against mass effect, cod 4 and assassins creed, and managed to remain the most played game on xbl a year after release. Halo 4, on the other hand could not maintain a consistent population for just 2 months, and the biggest reason why is that halo 4 strayed away from the foundation or gameplay formula that was already laid out. 343 completely went against equal starts and rendered fighting for power weapons useless because of ordinance killstreaks.

Also, with the fact of not preordering halo 5, this isn't as a means to get back or punish 343 for the mistakes they made. Rather, it is about making halo better because whether you are pro 343 or anti 343, both sides are ultimately pro halo and want the franchise to be as best as it can possibly be. If it means boycotting halo 5 or just simply not preordering the sequel, then so be it, because nothing hurts the company more than bad preorder numbers and it is the biggest protest we can make as a consumer to make 343 earn money by not trying to cut costs, but by creating an awesome game, and by that I mean taking shortcuts and cutting content out of the original game to be resold as dlc. It is nothing by any means as a sort of a personal issue but the gaming industry is suffering more and more by greedy and ultimately harmful acts of earning money in the short term, and it's up to the consumer to put an end to that nonsense.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 5