Support NeoGAF

[no bullets hans]

What exactly did 343 devs hate about Halo?

A fun story

 

[OdysseusVA]

What exactly did 343 devs hate about Halo?

Halo

 

[Zeouterlimits]

"How can we make it easier on ourselves when developing Halo 4?"

"Well, trying to balance all those loadouts and AAs from Reach must have been tough on Bungie, why don't we just scrap that stuff and bring back traditional Halo? Then we could just focus straight away on fine tuning that classic experience. It's a win/win all around."

"Fuck that."

Ah now, this is a terrible spin on what they said.

Not setting out to give yourself a challenge, when you're some of the best paid, most talented individuals in the industry wouldn't be particularly exciting. "Hey, I moved to Seattle and have committed to 2 years of crunch time just to churn out more of the same thing. woohoo."

And if you want to strawman it (I don't), you could just say that doing something different and CoDy was the easy thing, while finding a way to make traditional Halo appeal to that 500,000 (number out of thin air) active MP shooter playerbase would be the hard thing.

 

[Madness]

What exactly did 343 devs hate about Halo?

The fact guys like Juices, Kyle and others probably donged on them non stop the previous games.

Remember, a lot of this talent they hired, probably never had much competitive FPS multiplayer development experience before.

On bulletins, they openly talk about camping with Boltshot and camo as a legit tactic.

So they probably hated the fact, it played like a game of chess, where the smarter player won. They wanted a sprint and respawn CoD type game, that has tons of random funs.

 

[TCKaos]

What exactly did 343 devs hate about Halo?

The part that wasn't Call of Duty.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Ehhh, I'll agree people might be giving you a hard time on this page (quick glances mind), but you have been kind of beaten down from originally a much more pro-Halo 4 stance.

The tone of your posts about the game has changed in the past 2 to 3 months has changed from what it was before that, do you agree?

Oh no doubt. I think that happens with a lot of games though. After Reach I was fully on board the Halo 4 hype train because I was 100% ready for someone new to take a shot at Halo. As the game released and as it's gone on I've come to the realization that Halo 4 really isn't a sequel to Halo 3, it's more of a Reach sequel. This disappointed me somewhat, but because I also find 4 to be fun I was able to detach myself from that and just play the game for what it was.

I don't intentionally try to be "always pro 343" either. I think I generally see a ton of negativity come up after an article like this and I try to balance that out by saying "yeah that sucks, but let's look at why it happened that way" and that comes off as me simply trying to brush the issue under the rug, which is not the case. I just want people to see that there are reasons for every single decision we question, and it seems some folks get caught on blaming one person or one team for something that they may not even have had anything to do with.

Halo 5 needs to be more like Halo 2 and 3. 343 has a lot to learn about what made core Halo into the phenomenon that it was, and the new changes they brought in Halo 4 might have seemed like solid ideas (and some of them were) but they weren't core Halo. That better for everyone?

Fuck 343. They are a bad developer.

*Sigh* Maybe "they are a bad developer for Halo" would more fit your feelings?

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

Ah, man whatever, I give up. Nowhere at all did I say "OMG 343 did so good! They never do anything wrong! Halo 4 is a perfect game! Everyone <343!" Like some seem to think.

I always just try to interject a perspective of thinking from multiple points of view, and that includes 343. I may like Halo 4 in general, but I've always noted it has faults. Also on this (and the last) page alone I've said more than once that I want them to find that old build and use something like it for Halo 5 and make it more traditional.

I've always said 4 is not traditional Halo. I've never once said the game is more Halo (or even necessarily better) than Halo 1/2/3. It's a completely different beast.

It just seems whenever I say "let's look at it from 343's perspective" or "from a business perspective" people just take that as the ultimate defense of 343, when in reality I like to view the situation from all angles. I guess people just feel better with seeing me as the unabashed 343 fan that loves them to the end, if so you're completely mistaken, but go for it. If you'd rather just make fun of any point that's not "343 and Halo 4 suck" then you're better off just posting funny pictures and gifs laughing at those that like the game than having a true discussion.

Disclaimer: Not singling any one person out necessarily. I fully appreciate those of you who do have the deep discussions. Everyone here likes the Halo franchise, some are just worse at discussing it than others.

I too enjoy playing devil's advocate for the insights and discussion. It also forms the basis for empathy of different sub-communities or settings etc.

You and I obviously enjoy seeing behind the magician's curtain, that is another fine line to walk. I prefer 343i's style over say CCP's tight lips, so to speak.

 

[squidhands]

oh come on

Is this Kevin Franklin's first post on GAF?
__________________________________________________________________________

That article. Fascinating read, really. The candor is appreciated. So 343 actively hired people who 'hated' Halo and wanted to change it, and this was somehow "passion for the game". I see.

No, wait, I don't see. One thing I'm now pretty sure about is that I don't want these multiplayer and campaign leads to be in charge any more. The Prometheans are easily the worst enemies created in Halo, and the campaign story and atmosphere completely lacked anything that drew me in originally (too much style, not enough substance). Multiplayer is just too infested with unnecessary features that have to be massively scaled back to achieve the same feeling as older, more popular multiplayer experiences have given us. The "less is more" mantra was completely lost during development, it seems.

Maybe 343 HAD to go big and overdo it for Halo 4. I'm not sure if anything they'd produce as their first foray into the franchise would have been met with anything other than division and anger from the vocal fanbase. The main thing I hope 343 ends up excelling at is the ability to adjust their vision when it is viewed as not working the way they intended.

 

[The Henery]

So 343 make games to a deadline and not to a quality bar that they are happy with?

Fantastic compromise.

This is the future for Halo now. They've already spoke of release 'cadence' and how three years is too long. It's not about making the best Halo possible in the here and now, not about trying to make something timeless. It's about Halo being their blockbuster name exclusive and getting that holiday release no matter what. Bungie and every other studio use deadlines but at least they used to have a three year punctuated schedule with no spin-off title to distract in the interim.

But then, you have to question MS's whole approach to the carriage and transition of the Halo franchise in the post-Bungie era. In particular, one wonders what the psychological effect of having an entire trilogy of mainline Halo titles announced has on 343 when at the time it was announced, they hadn't even pushed one out of the door. I couldn't name you a single instance of an untested, embryonic studio having three gargantually budgeted games commissioned before they'd even managed one. Yes members of dev teams come and go but the core of 343 will remain intact - MS wouldn't want the trauma of essentially having to rebuild a studio again given that is the primary excuse for much of Halo 4's failings. With that trilogy already on the table, the significance of a single release is dramatically reduced, mentally. It becomes the practice sketch, an opportunity to 'cut teeth' on the [bold]idea[/bold] of a Halo development without any real sense of urgency that this could be the last Halo ever. It subconsciously engenders a 'we'll do it next time' mentality because everyone's already comfortable that there will be a next time (and a time after that). They did a decent job with Halo 4 when considered in isolation as a standalone game. But in terms of series progession? No improvments to multiplayer theatre, no theatre at all for campaign, a replacement for Firefight which felt hurried and rushes and didn't scale to a player count difficulty below 4, no ranking system whatsoever, a pitiable set of 4v4 maps. The incremental improvements to Forge are undermined by the lack of precision editing.

The list goes on. Maybe many of us were unrealistic in thinking that 343 could deliver a true 'next step' to the Halo series. Not a next step as in 'loadouts and instant respawn', more a next step like theatre evolves to spectator mode; bungie pro evolves to youtube rendering; Forge to a map editor. An increased suite of custom options instead of a reduced one. A thoughtful and sensible in game ranking system that amalgamates the best tenets of Halo 3's and Reach's systems instead of completely jettisoning the feature altogether. Halo 4 was supposed to be the next step, the opening salvo of a company which we were told was formed from the industries finest. Halo 4 was supposed to be the next step in a series which was always forward thinking, pioneering, from the console Lan party to Halo 2's online lobby's to Halo 3's incredible feature set. In many ways Halo 4 just feels like a perfunctory entry in an already planned out trilogy. It can play a rendition of Halo very well but makes too many errors, has too many ommissions and is lean in all the wrong areas for it to be considered the true sequel to Halo 3.

 

[Popeck]

Wow, are you sure that website is legit? I've never heard of it but I can't believe that last quote is true.

I would say that Gamasutra is one of the most respected business / developer oriented gaming websites. There's a lot of interesting stuff about making games there, you should give it a read!

 

[Madness]

Oh no doubt. I think that happens with a lot of games though. After Reach I was fully on board the Halo 4 hype train because I was 100% ready for someone new to take a shot at Halo. As the game released and as it's gone on I've come to the realization that Halo 4 really isn't a sequel to Halo 3, it's more of a Reach sequel. This disappointed me somewhat, but because I also find 4 to be fun I was able to detach myself from that and just play the game for what it was.

I don't intentionally try to be "always pro 343" either. I think I generally see a ton of negativity come up after an article like this and I try to balance that out by saying "yeah that sucks, but let's look at why it happened that way" and that comes off as me simply trying to brush the issue under the rug, which is not the case. I just want people to see that there are reasons for every single decision we question, and it seems some folks get caught on blaming one person or one team for something that they may not even have had anything to do with.

Halo 5 needs to be more like Halo 2 and 3. 343 has a lot to learn about what made core Halo into the phenomenon that it was, and the new changes they brought in Halo 4 might have seemed like solid ideas (and some of them were) but they weren't core Halo. That better for everyone?

I will say, having tried Halo 3 for the first time in nearly 3+ years, I felt a bit annoyed I couldn't sprint. It's almost blasphemy for me to say it, because I know how it breaks classic maps, acts like a get out of jail card, leads to Cat and mouse or hide and seek type gameplay, but I was a bit taken back by how slow I was moving. I think Reach and Halo 4 have ruined it for me.

Maybe an increase in movement speed and strafe speed, could make me forget sprint. I think it's because sprint was also the only thing I ever chose in Reach and have mobility on all the time for Halo 4 that in used to it now

 

[GrizzNKev]

"We knew that we had thrown away what our dedicated audience wanted, and realized that if we held a multiplayer beta to get a wider range of feedback the game would have bombed.

So we scrapped that."

- blee floor blee spindustries

 

[MaximumFlipFlop]

Ah now, this is a terrible spin on what they said.

Not setting out to give yourself a challenge, when you're some of the best paid, most talented individuals in the industry wouldn't be particularly exciting. "Hey, I moved to Seattle and have committed to 2 years of crunch time just to churn out more of the same thing. woohoo."

And if you want to strawman it (I don't), you could just say that doing something different and CoDy was the easy thing, while finding a way to make traditional Halo appeal to that 500,000 (number out of thin air) active MP shooter playerbase would be the hard thing.

I just don't get why you would sign on to make a Halo game, then complain about it being too Halo. They're working on the wrong franchise then. Whatever though, I don't know what really happened behind closed doors that led to many of the changes, I will probably never know. I can still have fun with the game but it is disappointing to read these interviews because they sometimes confirm fears I had about 343s development team and process.

 

[Hydranockz]

I just don't get why you would sign on to make a Halo game, then complain about it being too Halo. They're working on the wrong franchise then. Whatever though, I don't know what really happened behind closed doors that led to many of the changes, I will probably never know. I can still have fun with the game but it is disappointing to read these interviews because they sometimes confirm fears I had about 343s development team and process.

Some people would like to see things they don't like become things they like.

 

[TCKaos]

This is the future for Halo now. They've already spoke of release 'cadence' and how three years is too long. It's not about making the best Halo possible in the here and now, not about trying to make something timeless. It's about Halo being their blockbuster name exclusive and getting that holiday release no matter what. Bungie and every other studio use deadlines but at least they used to have a three year punctuated schedule with no spin-off title to distract in the interim.

But then, you have to question MS's whole approach to the carriage and transition of the Halo franchise in the post-Bungie era. In particular, one wonders what the psychological effect of having an entire trilogy of mainline Halo titles announced has on 343 when at the time it was announced, they hadn't even pushed one out of the door. I couldn't name you a single instance of an untested, embryonic studio having three gargantually budgeted games commissioned before they'd even managed one. Yes members of dev teams come and go but the core of 343 will remain intact - MS wouldn't want the trauma of essentially having to rebuild a studio again given that is the primary excuse for much of Halo 4's failings. With that trilogy already on the table, the significance of a single release is dramatically reduced, mentally. It becomes the practice sketch, an opportunity to 'cut teeth' on the [bold]idea[/bold] of a Halo development without any real sense of urgency that this could be the last Halo ever. It subconsciously engenders a 'we'll do it next time' mentality because everyone's already comfortable that there will be a next time (and a time after that). They did a decent job with Halo 4 when considered in isolation as a standalone game. But in terms of series progession? No improvments to multiplayer theatre, no theatre at all for campaign, a replacement for Firefight which felt hurried and rushes and didn't scale to a player count difficulty below 4, no ranking system whatsoever, a pitiable set of 4v4 maps. The incremental improvements to Forge are undermined by the lack of precision editing.

The list goes on. Maybe many of us were unrealistic in thinking that 343 could deliver a true 'next step' to the Halo series. Not a next step as in 'loadouts and instant respawn', more a next step like theatre evolves to spectator mode; bungie pro evolves to youtube rendering; Forge to a map editor. An increased suite of custom options instead of a reduced one. A thoughtful and sensible in game ranking system that amalgamates the best tenets of Halo 3's and Reach's systems instead of completely jettisoning the feature altogether. Halo 4 was supposed to be the next step, the opening salvo of a company which we were told was formed from the industries finest. Halo 4 was supposed to be the next step in a series which was always forward thinking, pioneering, from the console Lan party to Halo 2's online lobby's to Halo 3's incredible feature set. In many ways Halo 4 just feels like a perfunctory entry in an already planned out trilogy. It can play a rendition of Halo very well but makes too many errors, has too many ommissions and is lean in all the wrong areas for it to be considered the true sequel to Halo 3.

I want to know what kind of degree you have that allows you to write such elegant posts that cut so deeply with such amazing precision. Does your current job pay you by the post?

 

[Plywood]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=547908

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

I don't know where you get the statistic that over 50% of gamers play for the campaign. if that's accurate, then I'm surprised.

I'll say this though, if campaign is the driver behind gamer retention, then why is all post-release DLC multiplayer only? There has never been a single added campaign level to Halo, ever. It has always been matchmaking maps. Plenty of other games have added campaign, but never Halo.


And again, I'm not apologizing for 343's handling of Halo 4. I just think its weird that people think they should release a new game for a fanbase of a 2007 game. Or a 2010 game. Or a 2004 game. 343 is not in the business to make a Halo game for a bunch of adult gamers. They're in the business of making a new Halo game for new gamers.

The source is Frankie in every fourth interview, almost literally.

I agree they missed the boat without launch rank and classic arena though.

Further SPOPS is your answer to campaign DLC. It should continue but done as 1-4 campaign missions per month then keep the story and CGI scenes but add Reach style customised Spartan in game scenes.

 

[Gui_PT]

Hey guys I have an idea!

Let's not buy the next Halo gam...oh who am I kidding.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Hey guys I have an idea!

Let's not buy the next Halo gam...oh who am I kidding.

I'm just asking for a beta beforehand.

 

[Plywood]

I'm just asking for a beta beforehand.

Betas? Dedi's? Classics already remade on disc? Standards?

Are you insane?

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

This is the future for Halo now. They've already spoke of release 'cadence' and how three years is too long. It's not about making the best Halo possible in the here and now, not about trying to make something timeless. It's about Halo being their blockbuster name exclusive and getting that holiday release no matter what. Bungie and every other studio use deadlines but at least they used to have a three year punctuated schedule with no spin-off title to distract in the interim.

But then, you have to question MS's whole approach to the carriage and transition of the Halo franchise in the post-Bungie era. In particular, one wonders what the psychological effect of having an entire trilogy of mainline Halo titles announced has on 343 when at the time it was announced, they hadn't even pushed one out of the door. I couldn't name you a single instance of an untested, embryonic studio having three gargantually budgeted games commissioned before they'd even managed one. Yes members of dev teams come and go but the core of 343 will remain intact - MS wouldn't want the trauma of essentially having to rebuild a studio again given that is the primary excuse for much of Halo 4's failings. With that trilogy already on the table, the significance of a single release is dramatically reduced, mentally. It becomes the practice sketch, an opportunity to 'cut teeth' on the [bold]idea[/bold] of a Halo development without any real sense of urgency that this could be the last Halo ever. It subconsciously engenders a 'we'll do it next time' mentality because everyone's already comfortable that there will be a next time (and a time after that). They did a decent job with Halo 4 when considered in isolation as a standalone game. But in terms of series progession? No improvments to multiplayer theatre, no theatre at all for campaign, a replacement for Firefight which felt hurried and rushes and didn't scale to a player count difficulty below 4, no ranking system whatsoever, a pitiable set of 4v4 maps. The incremental improvements to Forge are undermined by the lack of precision editing.

The list goes on. Maybe many of us were unrealistic in thinking that 343 could deliver a true 'next step' to the Halo series. Not a next step as in 'loadouts and instant respawn', more a next step like theatre evolves to spectator mode; bungie pro evolves to youtube rendering; Forge to a map editor. An increased suite of custom options instead of a reduced one. A thoughtful and sensible in game ranking system that amalgamates the best tenets of Halo 3's and Reach's systems instead of completely jettisoning the feature altogether. Halo 4 was supposed to be the next step, the opening salvo of a company which we were told was formed from the industries finest. Halo 4 was supposed to be the next step in a series which was always forward thinking, pioneering, from the console Lan party to Halo 2's online lobby's to Halo 3's incredible feature set. In many ways Halo 4 just feels like a perfunctory entry in an already planned out trilogy. It can play a rendition of Halo very well but makes too many errors, has too many ommissions and is lean in all the wrong areas for it to be considered the true sequel to Halo 3.

Retrospectively your last paragraph is what I would have done or work towards now. Personal speculation in me thinks part development time issues for new studio and part of me thinks corporate strategy is purposefully withholding such developments for an early Halo 5, this year with a launch of next gen.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Betas? Dedi's? Classics already remade on disc? Standards?

Are you insane?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvULAgk_QQA

 

[Mix]

I think you need chill out and realize why decisions like this are made. They aren't just making a game for us, they are making a game that must sell to everyone. That quote is disappointing for sure, but before you jump to conclusions and just blame Josh for scrapping that you have to understand the decisions behind it, and that it was likely more MS and others that scrapped it.

If the game was too close to being Halo 2 or 3 (while that's what a lot of Gaf wants) it may have not gone over well overall. We're seeing the result of the changes in the population decline (partially I guess, partially that is due to other influences) but what would the results have been had they used that early build? We may be happy, but the game could have tanked. Could have been critically panned for being just another Halo.

Interesting overall, but we have to be careful not to jump to conclusions. I just hope they revive that build for Halo 5. Then we can see the true results.

I did not mean for it to sound like I put full blame on one or two members of the Dev team, but I am saying that they made a mistake. It was almost like they told themselves that people are going to buy it as long as it has the Halo name on the box and arguably, people did just that. People also put their faith in 343 saying that they know what they're doing, and I am in no way a salty player, I enjoy Halo 4 at a much more toned down playset, but I don't want to be forced to play one or two playlists to get what I want out of a Halo game. Halo is not dead, Master Chief just never stepped out of his Cryo Sleep.

 

[Madness]

Retrospectively your last paragraph is what I would have done or work towards now. Personal speculation in me thinks part decelopment time issues for new studio and part of me thinks corporate strategy is purposefully withheld or in development fir an early Halo 5, this year with a launch of next gen.

I think they realize this. Josh talking about how Halo 3 ranked/social split the likely choice, the hiring of guys like Bravo and Quinn. Looks like they're getting much better pieces together for their next entry in this new trilogy.

Look at what Treyarch did going from CoD 3 to World at War, granted they had Infinity Ward to do most of the heavy lifting but still.

I have no doubts, that Halo 5 will be a much better game than Halo 4 was. Hell, Halo 4 five months post launch is a better than launch Halo 4.

 

[The Henery]

I want to know what kind of degree you have that allows you to write such elegant posts that cut so deeply with such amazing precision. Does your current job pay you by the post?

A 2:2 in English Lit from a undistinguished University. True story. Thanks for the compliments though

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

I think they realize this. Josh talking about how Halo 3 ranked/social split the likely choice, the hiring of guys like Bravo and Quinn. Looks like they're getting much better pieces together for their next entry in this new trilogy.

Look at what Treyarch did going from CoD 3 to World at War, granted they had Infinity Ward to do most of the heavy lifting but still.

I have no doubts, that Halo 5 will be a much better game than Halo 4 was. Hell, Halo 4 five months post launch is a better than launch Halo 4.

Same as Halo 2.

Of course 343i are an adaptive company with Halo. I hope they continue to take development choice risks in future titles. They've enough experience now to keep the roll on effect going into they're next titles while not alienating a few community divisions they did with Halo 4.

 

[Ramirez]

I'm not gonna sit here & believe that his traditional Halo was actually anything we'd wanna play either.

 

[Booshka]

I'm not gonna sit here & believe that his traditional Halo was actually anything we'd wanna play either.

Good point, the easy as shit aiming, huge hitboxes, little to no strafe, and sprint default makes Halo 4 pretty shallow even when played like "traditional" Halo.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

RIP Halo.

 

[The Henery]

I have no doubts, that Halo 5 will be a much better game than Halo 4 was. Hell, Halo 4 five months post launch is a better than launch Halo 4.

I honestly think the dramatic improvement seen in Halo 4 is because they employed somebody like Bravo as a lead of the sustain team rather than somebody who didn't really respect what made Halo what it was. More people like Bravo going forward. Quinn seems cool too.

 

[MaximumFlipFlop]

Some people would like to see things they don't like become things they like.

They could have gone into specifics with that.

 

[User 73706]

"We actually had Spartan Ops using completely new locations and featuring canonically engaging segments with near-seamless transitions from level to level.

So we scrapped it."

"We had the music in campaign lossless and working optimally and even had all the tracks in a two-disc OST for a while.

So we scrapped it."

"I know Kevin Franklin loves dual wielding and for a while it was in.

So we ripped Halsey's arm off."

 

[no bullets hans]

lololol

 

[The Henery]

"We had people who we hired who hated Halo because of 'X,'" says O'Connor

That explains no red death X's at launch.

 

[NOKYARD]

What exactly did 343 devs hate about Halo?

People playing through the Campaign too fast.

 

[EagleBurnn]

They were building a team while they were making Halo 4 instead of building a team first and establishing one idea. Instead of one idea, it was a mash of different ones that collided unnaturally. They were hiring people who were not fans of the series. You can't give someone a crash course on why Halo is popular and expect them to understand what a Halo sequel needs. Many of these developers that were hired seem to be shooter fans, not Halo ones. The average FPS fan nowadays tend to lean toward a CoD like game. Place these developers next to ones that are large fans of the series and you have development hell. A game that attempts to please both parties, though in the end, it comes short-sided to each party. 343 needs to choose on where they want Halo to be, not on trying to please the entire FPS fanbase.

 

[Ramirez]

Hiring people who hate Halo was the best part though.

 

[Blueblur1]

Oh man, Fyrewulff's tweets are so delicious.

Edit: Hope he doesn't mind me retweeting it from the HaloGAF account.

 

[TheOddOne]

Since when is "We had people who we hired who hated Halo because of 'X,'" meaning they hired people who hated Halo? Clearly says they hated certain elements, not Halo as a whole.

 

[Ramirez]

Since when is "We had people who we hired who hated Halo because of 'X,'" meaning they hired people who hated Halo? Clearly says they hated certain elements, not Halo as a whole.

Most people who hate Halo are BKs who want to COD-ify it, which is exactly what happened, shocking.

Link to FW's tears?

 

[CyReN]

dem halogaf rts

 

[Gui_PT]

Since when is "We had people who we hired who hated Halo because of 'X,'" meaning they hired people who hated Halo? Clearly says they hated certain elements, not Halo as a whole.

X = Halo

"We had people who we hired who hated Halo because of Halo"

 

[DeadNames]

MTW was right from the start.

RIP.

 

[TheOddOne]

X = Halo

"We had people who we hired who hated Halo because of Halo"

Gui pls.

 

[MaximumFlipFlop]

Oh man, Fyrewulff's tweets are so delicious.

Edit: Hope he doesn't mind me retweeting it from the HaloGAF account.

Sounds like a fucked up situation for him :/

 

[BigShow36]

DC, I think everyone is sick of your defend 343 to the grave posts. Nothing personal, it's just getting really old.

The irony of this post is that I was told the exact opposite thing prior to release (not by you Napsta):

"I think everyone is sick of your attack 343 to the grave posts. Nothing personal, it's just getting really old."

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

The irony of this post is that I was told the exact opposite thing prior to release (not by you Napsta):

"I think everyone is sick of your attack 343 to the grave posts. Nothing personal, it's just getting really old."

We have come full circle.

 

[Plywood]

Most people who hate Halo are BKs who want to COD-ify it, which is exactly what happened, shocking.

Link to FW's tears?

Copy/Pasted off his twitter, interesting to hear his side:

The 343 Gamasutra article just piles on more dodging and "but, at least we outsold Reach"

Day 1 sales don't mean much when your a franchise game. Sales don't reflect quality until the next game after everyone played the last one.

But sure, keep digging up the old chestnut of "woe is us, we had to build a studio / hire people while making the game". OWN YOUR SHIT.

It's always an external force, someone else's problem, a bad process, a bad employee, never actually a decision you actually made.

@Overdoziz Considering they were bolting the game on top of Reach it's even more concerning how hot the game came in as.

Nobody requested Palmer backstories. But it's part of their plan, part of the script, and they don't deviate from it one bit.

But I think this just goes back to my point that you're wasting your breath if you think 343 gives a shit about any of your feedback.

@ZaneZavin I think there's good people at 343 too. Held back by the now fully-installed-into-343 Microsoft work culture.

Overdoziz: @fyrewulff I'd love to hear the complete story behind how 343 treated you (and others) as a CC.
@Overdoziz Summary is it went from a collaborative process under Bungie to being unpaid Microsoft employees under 343. Gruntwork. Top-down.
But I think this just goes back to my point that you're wasting your breath if you think 343 gives a shit about any of your feedback.
@Overdoziz I just feel used.
Overdoziz: @fyrewulff Damn, that's some embarrassing stuff on 343's part.
@Overdoziz If you think it's embarassing for them, I feel like a total idiot in comparison.

Doing stuff that Certain Affinity was supposed to do and then was outsourced to CCs to finish or fix Certain Affinity's work.

Doing stuff that 343 should have the manpower for, but then fixing their stuff, and having it binned because of pointless pride.

I busted my ass and helped multiple 343 employees with consultation on how backend stuff worked.

I paid for a gold account and wrote up an entire process just so Reach could update during the fileshare blackout.

My reward was being called "someone who didn't know what he was talking about" by someone else that works there after I helped.

 

[kylej]

What exactly did 343 devs hate about Halo?

Steep Learning Curve

Quality

A fun story

Halo

The part that wasn't Call of Duty.

lol

 

[Blueblur1]

Sounds like a fucked up situation for him :/

Definitely. I didn't mean to sound like I was making light of the situation if I did. His story is important in my opinion because it reveals much about 343.