Try our new beta!Click here
Submitted by StrongMan 1109d ago | news

343 Industries "made a lot of mistakes" with Halo 4, "we can do better"

"So let me save you the trouble of trolling my statement: We have a lot to learn. We made a lot of mistakes. We can do better. And we know this, and we will. But I don’t want to spend the first moments of the year thinking about the negatives, because frankly, I am incredibly proud of both the team and the game that team created." (Halo 4, Xbox 360)

TrevorPhillips  +   1109d ago
What mistakes? I thought the game was incredible! Can't wait for Halo 5 :)
Eldyraen  +   1109d ago
Probably network problems--for myself and most friends around the US it was the laggiest Halo yet. It wasn't near as bad as some games though but when it was at its worst was just beyond bad. Other times though was fine but just consistenty wasn't there even compared to other p2p server games (looking at you Gears, which is saying something).

I haven't played in over a month though so may be better now, no clue. We've just never had that kind of problem even playing custom games among ourselves. The game itself though seemed great.
edawg11885  +   1109d ago
True. The main problem was they didn't do a beta for this game.
Septic  +   1109d ago
Of course they'll make mistakes- they are only human but the game itself was excellent. Taking over such a huge franchise is no mean feat and I can't imagine the various pressures 343 would have faced in the development of the game.

The Halo community is a force to be reckoned with and you simply cannot make everyone happy.

Now that 343 have proven themselves capable of handling Halo, here's hoping they have the courage to take some more risks and push the envelope as far as the franchise is concerned.

Still, a cursory glance at their statement shows how enthusiastic and devoted they are to the IP and that is reassuring. Halo is in good hands. I can't wait for what 343 have in store for us next-gen.
Perjoss  +   1109d ago
Before Halo 5 maybe we will get a remastered version of Halo 2, just like they did for Halo 1.
Mainsqueeze  +   1108d ago
I thought they could of done a much better job of supporting the competitive crowd in alot of regards. other than that it was a really good game.
DasTier  +   1107d ago
well, they killed custom games, there was a glaring lack of variables (some of which were also absent from reach).
They still have no browser for forge maps or custom games, Forge it self was a let down. Also there was too much randomness in competitive multiplayer, namely ordinance. Oh and the fact that now vehicles are incredibly weak, Spawn with plasmas? ridiculous and the DMR and the Battle rifle are far too effective vs all vehicles.
antz1104  +   1104d ago
Great game, and its good to see a dev saying "we did good, but we can do better."
Steelmanner  +   1109d ago
Other than network difficulties I love this game, it was easily the best shooter of 2012.
Derek-Flint   1109d ago | Spam
TheRealHeisenberg  +   1109d ago
I enjoyed the game trmedously but I must say it is the first Halo game in the Halo series that I was not compelled to go through a second playthrough on.

I'm referring to the campaign. I don't have Live Gold anymore so no multiplayer for me. Never used the trial that came with the game.
#3 (Edited 1109d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Avraj45  +   1109d ago
The scale of the missions was so down scaled. I expected so much more and the last part where the tried to pull an mw2 really saddened me. I hope they improve on this.
-Gespenst-  +   1109d ago
A few months after Halo 5:

343 Industries "made a lot of mistakes" with Halo 5, "we can do better"

If devs think or know there's something wrong with their game before they release it, they should just make it better. Eff the greedy, impatient masses.

If they know there's something wrong with it and they release it anyway, that's dishonest and dickheaded.

If they're forced to release it (by publishers etc.) and there's stuff wrong with it, they should be vocal about that. That somewhat absolves them and I might be more inclined to buy the game and support them, despite it's flaws. Three strikes policy though. If they keep releasing crap games, claiming they'll improve so long as you keep buying them and supporting them, then they're clearly taking the piss- clearly lying.

Let me know straight away that your game isn't as good as you wanted it to be. Don't pretend it's the best thing ever but then admit further down the line (when everyone's bought it) that it's not as good as you wanted it to be. Like I said, that kind of honesty would encourage me to buy the game (within financial reason) if it meant supporting the devs on possibly much improved future titles. At the same time, others might decide they want to avoid the game because of this, but that's fine. You shouldn't be tricking customers into buying incomplete products - making them possibly waste loads of money on games they couldn't help but get excited about because of the false hype. Some will still buy the games for the sake of supporting devs, others will choose not to in order to save money they desperately needed to not spend- to not be drawn into buying luxuries with.

Just be honest and noble for chrissakes.
theWB27  +   1109d ago
You do realize what you're saying right?? Every perfectionist looks at what they do and nitpick about what they could have done better. Stig Asmussen stated after GOW3 that they wanted more Titans...Gran Turismo 5 surely wasnt everything Kaz wanted. Everytime he releases a game he says how much more he wanted to do. Most developers will tell you that they wanted to do more with a game but there are limitations to hardware and time. Time doesnt mean everything either...just look at Duke Nukem and Too Human. You're being very short sighted with those comments.
-Gespenst-  +   1109d ago
There's a difference between honestly being a perfectionist and in retrospect being unsatisfied with your work- and withholding doubts about the game until everyone's bought it.

Who's to say that 343 didn't know the game was flawed long before they released it? Who's to say they didn't just hype the game (and they did) to make people buy it, when they knew it had problems? If it was the case that the game was flawed early on, they should have said something.

How am I being short-sighted? I've covered pretty much all the bases. You just need to read my comment closely. If 343 just plain lied about the game's quality and are only coming out about it now (when everyone's bought it) that's deceitful. If it was a matter of time constraints and publisher / producer pressures, refer to my second last paragraph.
Perjoss  +   1108d ago
You should read up a little about game design. There is a fine balance between quality and profit. In an ideal world every dev would hold onto their games until they are honed to perfection, in reality this rarely happens as it gets to a point where they have to draw the line or the profits just start flying out the window.
theWB27  +   1108d ago
No game is perfect...every game releases with flaws. Thats why its short sighted. Games have have flaws...developers look back and regret decisions. It's going to be the same way next gen.
aviator189  +   1108d ago
....implying that we live in a perfect world with perfect outcomes.
TotalSynthesisX  +   1109d ago
I think it's a great game, apart from the multiplayer lagfest. War Games has its hiccups, but SpOps is nearly unplayable in multiplayer. A solid second of latency is not something you just deal with. Shit's insane.

Anyway, the campaign could've been better, but by no means was it "bad." The rest of the game is all right by me. Best Halo yet.
Belking  +   1109d ago
Wow, can't wait for part 5 if they said that. I thought it was one of the best games last year.
Perjoss  +   1109d ago
It's amazing what they managed to squeeze out of the old 360, I'm almost scared to see what 343 will do on the NextBox.

edit: watch out, disagree ninja is lurking in the shadows!
#6.1 (Edited 1108d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Funky_Homosapien  +   1108d ago
Next game they need to dig deeper into mastercheif character he still felt robotic.
BanBrother  +   1108d ago
Yes but if he was too talkative it would have ruined the game. Like it or not, it is building up slowly, there is no way around it.
LAWSON72  +   1107d ago
Wow they need to make up their mind. Best halo yet or we could do better, does that mean halo4 was less than full effort.
#8 (Edited 1107d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Firewatch (PS4) Review | VGChartz

6m ago - VGChartz's Jared Katz: "Firewatch is a simply gorgeous game that is less about telling an explosi... | PS4

The Witness Review - Beautiful Madness | OnlySP

6m ago - OnlySP: After 8 years of leading the development team for The Witness, Johnathan Blow has deliver... | PC

Be the first to know the Release Date for PlayStation VR

Now - All N4G members who track PlayStation VR through will get 10% off on all PSVR launch titles! | Promoted post

Review: Firewatch - Gabbin' In The Woods | Gameinformer

6m ago - GI: "When Henry gets into his truck and heads from Colorado to Wyoming, he’s looking to escape... | PC

AIPD – Artificial Intelligence Police Department Review | Hardcore Gamer

9m ago - Like so many other would-be Retro Evolved usurpers, AIPD is an on-paper clone of Geometry Wars at... | PC

Firewatch Review – Mystery in the Woods | BagoGames

11m ago - Christopher Cross from BagoGames writes: You’re alone in the woods of Wyoming, and away from ever... | PC