Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo: The Master Chief Collection

Been gaming for 28 yrs, hugest disappointment ever

OP Bezzle

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 5
Am I the only patient one here
INVID 76 wrote:
The only thing they got right was the Halo 2 Campaign. They should have simply done a Halo 2 anniversary like CE anniversary instead of copy pasting all the other games so they could charge full price.
There was a lot more work involved than copy/pasting.
stckrboy wrote:
INVID 76 wrote:
The only thing they got right was the Halo 2 Campaign. They should have simply done a Halo 2 anniversary like CE anniversary instead of copy pasting all the other games so they could charge full price.

There was a lot more work involved than copy/pasting.
Pray tell?
Have you seen Battlefield 4 at launch?

Took them a year to fix their multiplayer.

and people say this is the worst launch in history.

Give me a -Yoinking!- break.
no body cares man you shouldnt have to wait to play multiplayer when that is the best part about it. i get it battlefield had a year wait but do you realize how many people and old school gamers bought an xbox one just for halo for it to not work. So many people expected to be able to play it on their winterbreak being home from college or on vacation from work come to these forums to act like this isn't a terrible situation
MaGicBush wrote:
Odd I played bf4 fine after I bought it which was about two months after release :p. But I do agree this is not the worst launch ever. AoC, and SB were so much worse at least campaign works fine.
at least campaign works on 4 games that have the most interest in their multiplayer
I have come to the conclusion this will not be fixed. Good luck with your Halo 5 sales and launch 343
How can some of you still defend this company. 343 put out a game that they knew was not even close to ready. Then some try to defend them argueing that Battlefield 4 and other games had a worse launch. Maybe you overlooked the fact that none of this should happen to begin with! does not matter how long or which game it is! The fact is I spent $60 bucks on a bs brocken game that I have yet to still play with a friend. How sdo you defend that?
uyttgghj wrote:
How can some of you still defend this company. 343 put out a game that they knew was not even close to ready. Then some try to defend them argueing that Battlefield 4 and other games had a worse launch. Maybe you overlooked the fact that none of this should happen to begin with! does not matter how long or which game it is! The fact is I spent $60 bucks on a bs brocken game that I have yet to still play with a friend. How sdo you defend that?
God yoinking yoink. I am tired of the misinformation and the blame being put on people who really did not cause it.

Microsoft STUDIOS (aka the Publisher for Halo MCC) was responsible for this whole dilemma of having 343i release the MCC when it was clearly not ready. What a lot of people don't seem to understand is that the publisher has a lot of power over developers (speaking from a personal point of view because I have several friends who are programmers in video gaming) and sometimes the developers do not have the power to delay the release. This could be due to many factors, but a lot of the more common factors are nearing the limit of a budget and business opportunities (sales).



In addition, to Microsoft Studios allowing the release of this "acceptably functioning game" they also outsourced the MCC to multiple developers. Which is why there are 6 netcodes and the 4 engines that the game runs on. A lot of the companies worked on different games with 343i only being responsible for Halo 2 remaster and maps and other developer companies working on the other Halos. This causes a conflict, because a lot of programmers may have made mistakes or did not pinpoint the error when simulating the games individually.

In conclusion to this, for those who like to say, "these were games that Bungie had already coded so there should be no issues", a lot of the patches and fixes that Bungie did for all of their Halos were not included in the TMCC because technically that is Bungie's source code and it is what you would called "patented", so they could not use that code directly, and they have to recode for all of those hot fixes.

So no, it is not as much of 343i's fault as it is Microsoft Studios fault. That is why we defend 343i because a lot of developers are getting butt yoinked by Publishers in recent months.
Urg, they're working on it. I know, it's frustrating. Original release was basically a beta, which is what they SHOULD have done... But all in all the multiplayer is getting a lot better. Recently though, I can't find any games in halo 4 which is my favorite :/
Repete1779 wrote:
cqs1a wrote:
what a bunch of farking cry-baby-growing-cun+s

yes the game was farked, but it works almost perfectly now and they continue to fix it

yes they screwed up by releasing it 2 months too early, but sith happens

i've been haloing since the original xbox, nobody cares

and no, all of these empty threats "I'm done with halo" and "not buying halo-5" are pure BS... you spend hours posting and reading on HALO FORUMS and you're gonna quit Halo... yeah.......right!!!!

Thank you for at least admitting that mistakes were made, but as far as it works almost perfectly now just is not true. The game still has busted playlists. The game still has issues with such fundamental things as even teams, and 4vs4. Over a hundred maps that you will never see thanks to voting.

As far as being "done with Halo" and "not buying Halo 5". I will not buy it just because of the matches that I did play on it in the beta did not make it feel like it was Halo. Why the hell is there an announcement to say that a power weapon has respawned. When the hell did that happen. The fun of the franchise has been in decline for a while now and to be honest there are plenty of other games to be played. This collection just showed me that the best is in the past for Halo.
Games still end prematurely with noone quitting.
Rank resets still happen and only one playlist has ranking.
Can't play with parties.
Hell, some people still encounter CODE with the find game page.
Far from perfect.
uyttgghj wrote:
How can some of you still defend this company. 343 put out a game that they knew was not even close to ready. Then some try to defend them argueing that Battlefield 4 and other games had a worse launch. Maybe you overlooked the fact that none of this should happen to begin with! does not matter how long or which game it is! The fact is I spent $60 bucks on a bs brocken game that I have yet to still play with a friend. How sdo you defend that?

God yoinking yoink. I am tired of the misinformation and the blame being put on people who really did not cause it.

Microsoft STUDIOS (aka the Publisher for Halo MCC) was responsible for this whole dilemma of having 343i release the MCC when it was clearly not ready. What a lot of people don't seem to understand is that the publisher has a lot of power over developers (speaking from a personal point of view because I have several friends who are programmers in video gaming) and sometimes the developers do not have the power to delay the release. This could be due to many factors, but a lot of the more common factors are nearing the limit of a budget and business opportunities (sales).



In addition, to Microsoft Studios allowing the release of this "acceptably functioning game" they also outsourced the MCC to multiple developers. Which is why there are 6 netcodes and the 4 engines that the game runs on. A lot of the companies worked on different games with 343i only being responsible for Halo 2 remaster and maps and other developer companies working on the other Halos. This causes a conflict, because a lot of programmers may have made mistakes or did not pinpoint the error when simulating the games individually.

In conclusion to this, for those who like to say, "these were games that Bungie had already coded so there should be no issues", a lot of the patches and fixes that Bungie did for all of their Halos were not included in the TMCC because technically that is Bungie's source code and it is what you would called "patented", so they could not use that code directly, and they have to recode for all of those hot fixes.

So no, it is not as much of 343i's fault as it is Microsoft Studios fault. That is why we defend 343i because a lot of developers are getting butt yoinked by Publishers in recent months.
343i killed the Halo population with Halo 4, and it is them who continue to stay dark and not offer any more information regarding the state of the patch or even an update as to why the game released the way it is. They're just leaving it up to speculation. At least they could show they care, but instead they are horribly mishandling this entire debacle. We can't just absolve 343i because of their affiliation with Microsoft, or else Halo will die. A lot of their decisions as developers have been very questionable.
uyttgghj wrote:
How can some of you still defend this company. 343 put out a game that they knew was not even close to ready. Then some try to defend them argueing that Battlefield 4 and other games had a worse launch. Maybe you overlooked the fact that none of this should happen to begin with! does not matter how long or which game it is! The fact is I spent $60 bucks on a bs brocken game that I have yet to still play with a friend. How sdo you defend that?

God yoinking yoink. I am tired of the misinformation and the blame being put on people who really did not cause it.

Microsoft STUDIOS (aka the Publisher for Halo MCC) was responsible for this whole dilemma of having 343i release the MCC when it was clearly not ready. What a lot of people don't seem to understand is that the publisher has a lot of power over developers (speaking from a personal point of view because I have several friends who are programmers in video gaming) and sometimes the developers do not have the power to delay the release. This could be due to many factors, but a lot of the more common factors are nearing the limit of a budget and business opportunities (sales).



In addition, to Microsoft Studios allowing the release of this "acceptably functioning game" they also outsourced the MCC to multiple developers. Which is why there are 6 netcodes and the 4 engines that the game runs on. A lot of the companies worked on different games with 343i only being responsible for Halo 2 remaster and maps and other developer companies working on the other Halos. This causes a conflict, because a lot of programmers may have made mistakes or did not pinpoint the error when simulating the games individually.

In conclusion to this, for those who like to say, "these were games that Bungie had already coded so there should be no issues", a lot of the patches and fixes that Bungie did for all of their Halos were not included in the TMCC because technically that is Bungie's source code and it is what you would called "patented", so they could not use that code directly, and they have to recode for all of those hot fixes.

So no, it is not as much of 343i's fault as it is Microsoft Studios fault. That is why we defend 343i because a lot of developers are getting butt yoinked by Publishers in recent months.
Ultimately the creator of the product is responsible for it... just because Microsoft Studios said we need you to get this out the door, doesn't mean they couldn't say this thing is not ready and will absolutely blow up in our face. DICE recently had similar issues with releasing the Hardline Beta back in the fall and quickly decided to postpone the game for nearly half a year in order to make it better because of negative player feedback. And -Yoink- that wasn't for infrastructure things, people just didn't enjoy playing it.

343i is responsible for making the game. Microsoft studios is responsible for funding and stockholder appeasement.
Texibus wrote:
uyttgghj wrote:
How can some of you still defend this company. 343 put out a game that they knew was not even close to ready. Then some try to defend them argueing that Battlefield 4 and other games had a worse launch. Maybe you overlooked the fact that none of this should happen to begin with! does not matter how long or which game it is! The fact is I spent $60 bucks on a bs brocken game that I have yet to still play with a friend. How sdo you defend that?


God yoinking yoink. I am tired of the misinformation and the blame being put on people who really did not cause it.

Microsoft STUDIOS (aka the Publisher for Halo MCC) was responsible for this whole dilemma of having 343i release the MCC when it was clearly not ready. What a lot of people don't seem to understand is that the publisher has a lot of power over developers (speaking from a personal point of view because I have several friends who are programmers in video gaming) and sometimes the developers do not have the power to delay the release. This could be due to many factors, but a lot of the more common factors are nearing the limit of a budget and business opportunities (sales).



In addition, to Microsoft Studios allowing the release of this "acceptably functioning game" they also outsourced the MCC to multiple developers. Which is why there are 6 netcodes and the 4 engines that the game runs on. A lot of the companies worked on different games with 343i only being responsible for Halo 2 remaster and maps and other developer companies working on the other Halos. This causes a conflict, because a lot of programmers may have made mistakes or did not pinpoint the error when simulating the games individually.

In conclusion to this, for those who like to say, "these were games that Bungie had already coded so there should be no issues", a lot of the patches and fixes that Bungie did for all of their Halos were not included in the TMCC because technically that is Bungie's source code and it is what you would called "patented", so they could not use that code directly, and they have to recode for all of those hot fixes.

So no, it is not as much of 343i's fault as it is Microsoft Studios fault. That is why we defend 343i because a lot of developers are getting butt yoinked by Publishers in recent months.

Ultimately the creator of the product is responsible for it... just because Microsoft Studios said we need you to get this out the door, doesn't mean they couldn't say this thing is not ready and will absolutely blow up in our face. DICE recently had similar issues with releasing the Hardline Beta back in the fall and quickly decided to postpone the game for nearly half a year in order to make it better because of negative player feedback. And -Yoink- that wasn't for infrastructure things, people just didn't enjoy playing it.

343i is responsible for making the game. Microsoft studios is responsible for funding and stockholder appeasement.
On top of this, Microsoft owns the rights so they own the code. Not sure what you mean they cannot use Bungies code... Doesn't make sense.
VyRiZ wrote:
Have you seen Battlefield 4 at launch?

Took them a year to fix their multiplayer.

and people say this is the worst launch in history.

Give me a -Yoinking!- break.

no body cares man you shouldnt have to wait to play multiplayer when that is the best part about it. i get it battlefield had a year wait but do you realize how many people and old school gamers bought an xbox one just for halo for it to not work. So many people expected to be able to play it on their winterbreak being home from college or on vacation from work come to these forums to act like this isn't a terrible situation
People who buy an Xbox One or PS4 for only one game are completely let's put it nicely... Well let's see here didn't invest really well.
VyRiZ wrote:
Have you seen Battlefield 4 at launch?

Took them a year to fix their multiplayer.

and people say this is the worst launch in history.

Give me a -Yoinking!- break.


no body cares man you shouldnt have to wait to play multiplayer when that is the best part about it. i get it battlefield had a year wait but do you realize how many people and old school gamers bought an xbox one just for halo for it to not work. So many people expected to be able to play it on their winterbreak being home from college or on vacation from work come to these forums to act like this isn't a terrible situation

People who buy an Xbox One or PS4 for only one game are completely let's put it nicely... Well let's see here didn't invest really well.
Not true... People may not have time to game like others so they view this one game as a good reason to do so...
INVID 76 wrote:
stckrboy wrote:

There was a lot more work involved than copy/pasting.

Pray tell?
Just because the original 4 games were built, shipping and working on older consoles, doesn't automatically make them ready to paste and run on to a new system. 2 of the games were built for a a computer architecture (Halo 3 & 4 - PowerPC) that is completely different from the Xbox One. Even the original Xbox, although it's X86, it's over 10 years old and different enough not to be straight forward. There were numerous companies involved in porting each game over - not all API's from the old systems will be available on the X1 (code gets deprecated over the years), so there is extra work there to get the code up to speed and make use of new functions and functionality.

Now I'm not trying to say that all of that excuses the poor launch and state of the game today, it certainly does not, but the amount of work that had to have been put into the game to even get it to where it is now is staggering and really shouldn't be overlooked - it's an impressive feat to pull this together. I do agree this game needed a lot more time before it was released, either a later release or an earlier start.
The Sector wrote:
VyRiZ wrote:
Have you seen Battlefield 4 at launch?

Took them a year to fix their multiplayer.

and people say this is the worst launch in history.

Give me a -Yoinking!- break.


no body cares man you shouldnt have to wait to play multiplayer when that is the best part about it. i get it battlefield had a year wait but do you realize how many people and old school gamers bought an xbox one just for halo for it to not work. So many people expected to be able to play it on their winterbreak being home from college or on vacation from work come to these forums to act like this isn't a terrible situation


People who buy an Xbox One or PS4 for only one game are completely let's put it nicely... Well let's see here didn't invest really well.

Not true... People may not have time to game like others so they view this one game as a good reason to do so...
It is true they didn't invest really well.
The Sector wrote:
VyRiZ wrote:
Have you seen Battlefield 4 at launch?

Took them a year to fix their multiplayer.

and people say this is the worst launch in history.

Give me a -Yoinking!- break.


no body cares man you shouldnt have to wait to play multiplayer when that is the best part about it. i get it battlefield had a year wait but do you realize how many people and old school gamers bought an xbox one just for halo for it to not work. So many people expected to be able to play it on their winterbreak being home from college or on vacation from work come to these forums to act like this isn't a terrible situation


People who buy an Xbox One or PS4 for only one game are completely let's put it nicely... Well let's see here didn't invest really well.


Not true... People may not have time to game like others so they view this one game as a good reason to do so...

It is true they didn't invest really well.
Not really
Have you seen Battlefield 4 at launch?

Took them a year to fix their multiplayer.

and people say this is the worst launch in history.

Give me a -Yoinking!- break.
Also keep in mind that Battlefield 4 was a brand new game, not a port of several games that worked flawlessly for years and never had issues like this when they originally came out.
Trust me...... This pains me
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 5