Jump to content


Photo

Feedback for Halo: Anniversary

Halo: CE

  • Please log in to reply
104 replies to this topic

#61 Slightly Live

Slightly Live

    Forward Unto Dawn

  • Veteran
  • 461 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:Slightly Live
  • PSN:ForwardUntoD
  • Steam:iwasdani
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 01 July 2011 - 12:28 PM

How is this an example?
ODST had the whole Halo 3 multiplayer experience and a halfassed Horde mode copy. Because everyone expects a FPS to have an online component.

All I see is blatant water-carrying.


I'm trying to work out if you are purposely acting dumb here.

ODST didn't have a competitive online multiplayer component of it's own. It had Halo 3's multiplayer suite. It sold really well and was well received.
CEA doesn't have a competitive online multiplayer component of it's own. It has Reach's multiplayer environment and seven unique maps.

You said that if a FPS comes out in 2011 without it's own competitive online multiplayer it is a "guaranteed failure". ODST proves that your assessment is without merit. The market has not changed drastically since ODST came out.

So, you are talking utter crap. Unless you have your own unique definition of "guaranteed failure" which isn't shared by any rational person, and if you do, well, I hope you like living in your fantasy world. Truth is you are butthurt. You didn't get the multiplayer mode you wanted and are whinging and bitching because some corporation isn't pandering to your niche.

#62 Syracuse022

Syracuse022

    Build My Gallows High, Baby

  • Veteran
  • 4,159 posts

Posted 01 July 2011 - 12:28 PM

Ivan, you don't need to repeat yourself. Talk about Department of Redundancy Department: Halo Defense Force Branch. My argument, at least, is not that it won't sell (see: Final Cut Pro comparison above). It just won't sell to me. Because I'm not interested in seeing my favorite game of all time remade by a green new studio who decide that the best course of action is to farm this first foray into development out to glorified DLC factories. Then, to make things considerably worse, they decide that half of what made that game so great isn't worth putting into a remake (all while doing a whole bunch of hand-waving about doing this for the fans).

#63 JCTucker

JCTucker

    Likes everyone as a person.

  • Veteran
  • 3,061 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:JCTucker
  • PSN:Poor_Judgment

Posted 01 July 2011 - 12:34 PM

A guaranteed failure huh? So it won't sell and no one will like it?


u b trollin' now.

If I could lay this out for you in color by numbers, I would.

I said releasing an FPS with no online component in 2011 is a guaranteed failure. An FPS is expected to have a multiplayer component.

To keep players in the "Reach" universe, they are including 7 maps that can be played in the Reach playerspace to satisfy that expectation.

Butthurt? You best motherfucking believe I'm butthurt.

Quit trollin' me, Ivan.

#64 JCTucker

JCTucker

    Likes everyone as a person.

  • Veteran
  • 3,061 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:JCTucker
  • PSN:Poor_Judgment

Posted 01 July 2011 - 12:52 PM

I'm trying to work out if you are purposely acting dumb here.

You said that if a FPS comes out in 2011 without it's own competitive online multiplayer it is a "guaranteed failure".


Follow along, please.

That's not what I said, at all. I said:

Releasing a FPS in 2011 without some sort of competitive online play is guaranteed failure.


Because your and Ivan's argument is that $20 of the $40 is because it includes DLC for Reach. I'm saying it isn't DLC. It is the EXPECTED, multiplayer component for a FPS game thing. Hence, the campaign of HCE should cost $20, according to you. However, I'm saying that's rubbish because to release ANY FPS in 2011 without a multiplayer component means that no one will buy it.

Translated:

If Halo Decennial was released for $20 with all multiplayer removed, just the HD campaign, no one would buy it. That's my "guaranteed failure" scenario. They know this, so they include maps for Reach that don't require Reach to play. You can only just play those maps if you have the HA disc.

Now, does that make sense? Or can you twist that shit around, too?

#65 Slightly Live

Slightly Live

    Forward Unto Dawn

  • Veteran
  • 461 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:Slightly Live
  • PSN:ForwardUntoD
  • Steam:iwasdani
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:04 PM

Follow along, please.

That's not what I said, at all. I said:


Because your and Ivan's argument is that $20 of the $40 is because it includes DLC for Reach. I'm saying it isn't DLC. It is the EXPECTED, multiplayer component for a FPS game thing. Hence, the campaign of HCE should cost $20, according to you. However, I'm saying that's rubbish because to release ANY FPS in 2011 without a multiplayer component means that no one will buy it.

Translated:

If Halo Decennial was released for $20 with all multiplayer removed, just the HD campaign, no one would buy it. That's my "guaranteed failure" scenario. They know this, so they include maps for Reach that don't require Reach to play. You can only just play those maps if you have the HA disc.

Now, does that make sense? Or can you twist that shit around, too?


Do you consider ODST a failure?

Why are you bothering to argue a hypothetically? CEA isn't being released just with the Campaign. So by your own definition CEA won't be sure failure.

You don't need to fluff up a "What if..?" scenario just to express your disappointment with the lack of CE multiplayer. You seem to be obfuscating here.

#66 JCTucker

JCTucker

    Likes everyone as a person.

  • Veteran
  • 3,061 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:JCTucker
  • PSN:Poor_Judgment

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:17 PM

Do you consider ODST a failure?

Why are you bothering to argue a hypothetical (fixed this, brah)? CEA isn't being released just with the Campaign. So by your own definition CEA won't be sure failure.

You don't need to fluff up a "What if..?" scenario just to express your disappointment with the lack of CE multiplayer. You seem to be obfuscating here.


Anniversary has to sell the same number of copies as the original to be considered a worthwhile endeavor, imo.

ODST sold less than half of Halo 3, while costing the same amount. I do not consider it a success.

Since you're into telling people what they do and don't need to do, let me help you:
You don't need to create excuses (the online component is 2 map packs, so there's $20) that are so easily shot down with basic logic (So, if the next CoD has 12 maps, it should cost $100).

Hell, yes, I'm pissed that I won't be playing Sidewinder or Blood Gulch the way it was meant to be played. I would gladly pay Name Your Price for Anniversary with Xbox Live multiplayer in its original format. No Cr, no saved films... None of that stuff that's been around since Halo 3.

#67 Slightly Live

Slightly Live

    Forward Unto Dawn

  • Veteran
  • 461 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:Slightly Live
  • PSN:ForwardUntoD
  • Steam:iwasdani
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:25 PM

Anniversary has to sell the same number of copies as the original to be considered a worthwhile endeavor, imo.

ODST sold less than half of Halo 3, while costing the same amount. I do not consider it a success.


You have unrealistic expectations. Anniversary will never sell as well as CE and I doubt there's anyone that's expecting it to.

#68 JCTucker

JCTucker

    Likes everyone as a person.

  • Veteran
  • 3,061 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:JCTucker
  • PSN:Poor_Judgment

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:34 PM

Really? It can't hit the 6m mark, the same as the 50% more expensive ODST?

#69 Slightly Live

Slightly Live

    Forward Unto Dawn

  • Veteran
  • 461 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:Slightly Live
  • PSN:ForwardUntoD
  • Steam:iwasdani
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:37 PM

Really? It can't hit the 6m mark, the same as the 50% more expensive ODST?

I have no idea about sales and stuff. 6 Million sounds like a lot.

#70 Syracuse022

Syracuse022

    Build My Gallows High, Baby

  • Veteran
  • 4,159 posts

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:42 PM

I posted a graph on Page 3 of this thread. Seriously?

Edited by Syracuse022, 01 July 2011 - 01:43 PM.


#71 JCTucker

JCTucker

    Likes everyone as a person.

  • Veteran
  • 3,061 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:JCTucker
  • PSN:Poor_Judgment

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:44 PM

I'll be interested to see how it sells. Let's put it that way. I would also love to know what kind of numbers 343i is hoping/thinking that they will garner with this release.
Posted Image

Most favorably reviewed game in the series gets remade... with multiplayer from the least favorably reviewed game. Cool.
Posted Image


Since I doubt Dani's ability to switch pages at this point...

#72 Slightly Live

Slightly Live

    Forward Unto Dawn

  • Veteran
  • 461 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:Slightly Live
  • PSN:ForwardUntoD
  • Steam:iwasdani
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:46 PM

I posted a graph on Page 3 of this thread. Seriously?

I replied to it. Unreliable chart.

Still, 6 million is a big number. I doubt CEA will sell that number but my thoughts on this particular area are meaningless. Haven't got a clue about sales stuff.

Since I doubt Dani's ability to switch pages at this point...


Thanks.

#73 JCTucker

JCTucker

    Likes everyone as a person.

  • Veteran
  • 3,061 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:JCTucker
  • PSN:Poor_Judgment

Posted 01 July 2011 - 01:52 PM

You're welcome, friend.

#74 Jironimo

Jironimo

    Hunter Master Race

  • Admin
  • 3,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2011 - 02:31 PM

Ivan, you don't need to repeat yourself. Talk about Department of Redundancy Department: Halo Defense Force Branch. My argument, at least, is not that it won't sell (see: Final Cut Pro comparison above). It just won't sell to me. Because I'm not interested in seeing my favorite game of all time remade by a green new studio who decide that the best course of action is to farm this first foray into development out to glorified DLC factories. Then, to make things considerably worse, they decide that half of what made that game so great isn't worth putting into a remake (all while doing a whole bunch of hand-waving about doing this for the fans).

I only repeated myself because he didn't answer the question.

Dude, I'm being 100% genuine I totally understand if the cost isn't worth it to you. I'll ask you a legit question though, when this thing is $20 brand new in the bargain bin next year you wouldn't pick it up so we can play online coop with the original graphics?

u b trollin' now.

If I could lay this out for you in color by numbers, I would.

I said releasing an FPS with no online component in 2011 is a guaranteed failure. An FPS is expected to have a multiplayer component.

To keep players in the "Reach" universe, they are including 7 maps that can be played in the Reach playerspace to satisfy that expectation.

Butthurt? You best motherfucking believe I'm butthurt.

Quit trollin' me, Ivan.

You didn't answer the question so I asked again. So you're saying HA won't be a guaranteed failure. Ok, nice of you to inject some hypothetical game into the argument.

Anniversary has to sell the same number of copies as the original to be considered a worthwhile endeavor, imo.

ODST sold less than half of Halo 3, while costing the same amount. I do not consider it a success.

Since you're into telling people what they do and don't need to do, let me help you:
You don't need to create excuses (the online component is 2 map packs, so there's $20) that are so easily shot down with basic logic (So, if the next CoD has 12 maps, it should cost $100).

1. It doesn't need to sell as many as the original to be a success, that's just plain unrealistic. If the project doesn't lose money for MS, and the fans who get the game like it then it's a success.

2. ODST made more money than it cost, and it got good reviews so it is a success. To you it may not have been and that's ok, but what I stated is the typical criteria for defining a successful release for media.

3. Up to this point your criticisms have been alright, but this new COD game example for $100 is stupid. There's a difference between native maps which are an initial part of the game and DLC. This is 100% DLC, proven by the fact that the bundle includes the token to download the maps for Reach. There will be people who have no interest in HA and buy this just for the DLC.

#75 JCTucker

JCTucker

    Likes everyone as a person.

  • Veteran
  • 3,061 posts
  • Xbox LIVE:JCTucker
  • PSN:Poor_Judgment

Posted 01 July 2011 - 02:37 PM

Ivan, points 1 & 2 are solid. Point 3 is the exact same argument that we haven't been able to agree upon in 2+ pages now. Let's just agree to disagree here, yes? I understand your point, just as I'm sure you understand mine.

#76 Jironimo

Jironimo

    Hunter Master Race

  • Admin
  • 3,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2011 - 02:40 PM

That sounds good to me. I respect your opinion, I don't blame anyone for being upset that multiplayer isn't included.

#77 Syracuse022

Syracuse022

    Build My Gallows High, Baby

  • Veteran
  • 4,159 posts

Posted 01 July 2011 - 03:17 PM

Dude, I'm being 100% genuine I totally understand if the cost isn't worth it to you. I'll ask you a legit question though, when this thing is $20 brand new in the bargain bin next year you wouldn't pick it up so we can play online coop with the original graphics?

Hell yeah, I'd pay $20 for the HD campaign and (especially) online co-op, but I'm not going to pay $40 for the tacked-on nose-thumbing of a multiplayer mode that's included.

#78 Merguson

Merguson

    I don't know what I'm doing..

  • Veteran
  • 578 posts
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 01 July 2011 - 03:37 PM

Hell yeah, I'd pay $20 for the HD campaign and (especially) online co-op, but I'm not going to pay $40 for the tacked-on nose-thumbing of a multiplayer mode that's included.


Are we talking about Halo 3: ODST? I am so confused.

#79 Jironimo

Jironimo

    Hunter Master Race

  • Admin
  • 3,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2011 - 05:06 PM

Are we talking about Halo 3: ODST? I am so confused.

No, Halo Anniversary. I'm saying that for the people who think HA is a ripoff at $40 eventually it will be less than $20. I saw ODST today at the store new for $15.

#80 DangerousDave

DangerousDave
  • Member
  • 39 posts
  • Location:a room

Posted 04 July 2011 - 01:40 PM

How is this an example?
ODST had the whole Halo 3 multiplayer experience and a halfassed Horde mode copy. Because everyone expects a FPS to have an online component.

All I see is blatant water-carrying.


BioShock?

FPS don't need multiplayer modes, but then they definitely *do* need a much stronger singleplayer component to compensate.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Halo: CE

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

IPB Skin By Virteq