Microsoft finally seems to be ready to not have business considerations interfere with their games.
If the supposition of the article's title was correct it would never have been shown in the state we witnessed in the demo. Not to mention what is now surfacing that seems to point to a game in serious development hell. The reverse the article posits is actually true. Redmond was unwilling to put the game first and it was only after worldwide criticism, predictions of doom and franchise ruination, topped off by a mountain of Craig memes that they finally changed their minds.
Or, it really couldn't go because it wasn't close to finished. As in...broken and incomplete. That's where my money is at...
I do believe if the feedback would have been positive they would have launched this fall with episodic campaign content and a few MP modes.
Then why embarrass themselves and the Series X by showcasing it? They could have delayed it without showcasing it and probably gotten more mileage out of the COVID excuse. Showcasing it not only soured people on the game itself but also has people (further) questioning Xbox's cross-gen strategy, the XSX, Phil Spencer, 343i, Xbox's ability to consistently produce high quality 1st party exclusives, and Game Pass' affect on their exclusives. Why risk all that to showcase a title that wasn't close to finished a few months from launch unless they thought they could get away with releasing it in that state?
@RauL, I have no doubt Phil thought things were fine, wearing his Halo t-shirt. He probably wasn't close enough to it, and people high up within 343 very well might have been lying to themselves, I see that happen all the time with software projects in the corporate world. You really want to believe you can make it because the alternative is career ending
@Raul, You are using logic ha ha. The people running that show live in a house of lies. Every time things are found out they just fall back to another story. All you state is accurate and completely counter to the ridiculous title of this article.
@RauLeCreuset: "Then why embarrass themselves and the Series X by showcasing it?" Quite frankly, despite technically if not realistically being in last place as far as consoles go, because MS consider themselves to be the only game in town. They really haven't changed from the days they crippled Netscape by privatizing a public it was dependent on, only to not improve on IE which then left room for Firefox and Chrome. The same mentality that pretty much ruined the XB1 are alive and well with the Halo demo. They honestly thought that they could get away with it. That they only needed to impress the faithful and fix - do the actual work - post launch like with Sea of Thieves.
@Raul I think the problem is that Phil Spencer doesn’t actually know what a good game is. He’s proving more and more that he is just a suit and not a real gamer. This a man who believed crackdown 3 was good before release. Any average gamer could tell you what hot garbage that game looked like yet Phil Spencer the boss of Xbox thought it was good. If the man in charge doesn’t know what a good game is or looks like how can they deliver quality software? He showed again he doesn’t have a clue with the halo reveal, thinking that demo was the the most amazing thing ever. Do you think shuhei or now Herman would ever look at a game like that and think damn this is ready to go? Never in a million years
@TheProblem: " This a man who believed crackdown 3 was good before release. Any average gamer could tell you what hot garbage that game looked like yet Phil Spencer the boss of Xbox thought it was good." Not only him, but many Xbox fans. Some of whom defend it still as a "good Game".
"Halo Infinite’s Delay Is Evidence That Microsoft Is Finally Willing To Put The Game Before Business" -Duke Nukem Forever
Are you saying Phil is retarded, since you assume he thought the game is fine as is?
Lol or they don't have a choice??
“Are you saying Phil is retarded, since you assume he thought the game is fine as is?“ If you look at past remarks by Phil he states he plays Microsoft titles under development including 3rd party properties. This is a 1st party and the flagship, and the launch flagship for a new generation so there is no doubt he “supposedly” played it several times along the dev cycle. In addition he and his top level people would have watched the demo video several times before it went public. He is the final word and he approved it. So possibly he doesn’t know what he is looking at because he really isn’t that intimate and knowledgeable with games, a fact that would make him incompetent as the head of Xbox. Or else he simply looked at a game in second rate condition for a next generation launch title, one that was supposed to demonstrate the incredible power he had bragged about repeatedly, and didn’t care. Pick one. Personally I think it is the former. I think he is simply an incredibly bad manager of personnel and does not know how to organize and lead individuals nor does he know how to deal with incompetence under him. In addition he may not be able to look at a game and really grasp next generation. Knowing buzzwords does not make one knowledgeable. HALO Infinite has been through years of development as well as an engine change. There has been a sufficient amount of gross mistakes, missteps, and delays so the time is long passed when a firm leader would have stepped in and said, look you are a good person but the time has come for you to find something else and top heads at 343 should have rolled. It doesn’t mean being a jerk about it but HALO 4 and 5 both had serious problems as well and this should have been the final straw. There is the possibility that Phil does have an eye for things but hasn’t been hands on enough saw the final demo too late and panicked. With no other choice he crossed his fingers and hit the play button, fully planning on an episodic launch in the fall if the reviews from everyone were not too harsh. Either way he and the top people at 343 should be shown the door if Xbox wants to be viable. Remember this is not the first time he has walked away from a car wreck and at some point you have to tell the driver he can’t keep saying a squirrel ran out in front of him. At a certain point the ship hit an iceberg...again... you were the Captain and you shouldn’t have been boozing in your cabin.
MS was working off the age old, often wrongly assumed notion that a name is all you need to sell a game. That Halo is big enough to sell regardless of if it's good or not. They knew some people would mock or criticize the visuals, they just didn't expect it to become so big, nor for even the faithful to start to waver. It did take some time once it went viral, because if you saw MS twitter account after the reveal, you did see quite a few people who were positive about the game, and the negativity was mostly contained to singular posts and replies within. But after about a week that snowballed into Craig Memes as MS couldn't contain the negativity with their lame attempt at trying to embrace the criticism, nor people accepting their excuses and promises of improvement
Yup, because non-factually based conspiracy theories against MS and XB are all you seem to know about. LOL. You sound like Donald Trump. Are you on political forums raising the K. Harris birther issues too? There is not a single fact to backup the theory proposed. The showcase demo may have had graphics fidelity issues, but there was no signs that it was glitchy, lousy framerates, or in an unplayable state.
We know they planned to release it as is because interviews said Ray tracing would be added in a patch down the road and not be there for launch. Thoa game has beem in development for 6 plus years with 500 million dollar budget. Something else is going on besides the fact that it wasn't close to finish
"We know they planned to release it as is because interviews said Ray tracing would be added in a patch down the road and not be there for launch." Undeniable proof that stomps on the heads of these ridiculous posts that would have everyone believe otherwise. And this was said knowing full well the current state of the game.
You're just arguing cause vs. effect here. If everything you said is true, and I believe a lot of it is, the effect is still the same. In the end, a choice was made. They listened to feedback, and made a decision. Your whole "supposition" is that they should have made the call sooner. Ok? The call was made to improve the game. Stay upset if you want, but it was the right call, regardless of the timing or cause. Their showing was public, which does cast this into a different situation. However, it's not so uncommon to think you're ready to ship only to get that feedback influencing a delay. Now would be the time you typically start to solicit early mock reviews and critic feedback. That's common. It's also common to see that feedback precede a delay. Let's go back to January of this year. TLoU2 gets a media preview event a month in advance of its announced February release date. 2 weeks later it gets delayed, citing the need to polish. You can connect the dots there. So whether it's public feedback or it comes from behind closed doors, the decision to delay often gets made after you start to obtain outside feedback. MS probably should have delayed a year ago based on the rumors that we're hearing. They didn't, and pressed forward. Once they obtained even more feedback, they finally made the smart call to put the game's quality above making a few hundred million off of it right now. Effect is the same, even if you want to question the cause.
You ignore the mismanagement factor though, and you're defending the fact they were willing to put out yet another completely unfinished game. They shouldn't have needed to become the laughing stock of the internet to know the game wasn't ready. It's like they got drunk crashed the car and you're rewarding them for calling a tow truck to take it to the shop... But they still got drunk and crashed the car causing it to need to be repaired.
Why do you straw man so very much? You do this ad nauseum. Why do you state people said something or that they feel a certain way (when they obviously did not and do not) and then argue against that rather than address the actual remarks? And that question is rhetorical. A shame I have to point that out but...the history of your remarks makes such tiresome clarifications necessary. Where am I upset? I am celebrating with glee and I have been very clear about that fact. My feelings toward Redmond, publicly stated countless times, leave no room for doubt. You yourself state MS should have delayed a year ago. Thank you for reinforcing my point. But they did not because the game itself was not their concern. The situation with TLOU2 was hardly the same when one accounts for the personalities involved, a factor which is central part and party to this discussion. Where was I arguing against the effect? We are discussing the cause. Go ahead and reply to me from now on in any thread. I have neither the time to waste with you nor the inclination to do so. I am done ever discussing matters with you again. Ever.
Eh, your overall premise is correct. The delay is good for sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they put the game before business. Putting out a bad game is bad for business in itself. The article would have been correct had we not seen the gameplay. The ultimate thing here is that we should have never seen Infinite in this state. You can bring up a list of games that have gotten delayed like the TLoU or Cyberpunk, but we don't know exactly why they were delayed in regards to using the footage as the proof of reasoning. As far as we are concerned the public demonstrations of the game were good. This is why generally when a game is delayed people are usually upset, because they don't know what is actually wrong with the game to cause the delay. In regards to Infinite, the gameplay that we saw, it was pretty obvious more work was needed to be done and that the ~3 months left wouldn't be enough to fix all the issues we had seen. The fact they even contemplated releasing the game in parts shows that the public perception was the determining factor and not the game's well being.
Not the same. The game was close to finished when they decided to do the reveal. They had no clue I would gather such a response. They were clueless. There was no decision or choice on their side...they were forced to delay due to the negative response. There wasn't even much feedback for the game...just the graphics.
I honestly think that about half of Sony's late development stage delays are to put the game in a more agreeable release window. Not sure about TLOU2, because that put it right around GoT, but I noticed this trend of Sony moving their big games out of the holidays and into less busy release months....which is probably why their hardware sales stay relatively high in the spring and summer. Kind of off topic, but just thought I'd throw that in there, because reasons for delays are varied, and the polish you get in a 3-6 months is not usually something that would be a huge factor to the game being ready to launch....especially if that delay comes right before something goes gold. Delays that late usually mean the game would be broken without a patch, which is typically something you try to avoid, although obviously it's often ignored.
Cyberpunk is another great example. After all, there are clear reasons why CDPR dislikes doing public demos, right? Well we know Cyberpunk was delayed multiple times, and some of those came after private and public showings. We may not know the full reason for the delay, but they chose to improve the game rather than make that money right now. Good on them for doing that. TLOU2 is a fascinating example. When have we ever seen a game get a preview event, announce a release date, and then delay it in a matter of days thereafter? Something caused those delays, right? Are we saying that in a matter of days, whatever caused it only became known for the first time? Or, is it likely that a tough decision was made based on some kind of feedback of some previously known issue or factor? As far as graphical and aesthetic criticism leading to delays, we're looking right at Avengers releasing soon. Remember the criticisms over its character models. Speaking of character models, look at the Sonic movie feedback. Delays for graphics, story, bugs, etc. all going into the same boat. Delay to improve the game = putting business interests second to the importance of delivering a quality game. And Rain, I may agree that Sony has made some delays out of strategic arrangements for release dates in the past. That's not to say that the devs are lying when they say its for quality reasons, so the fanboys can calm down before starting that nonsense. But in the case of TLOU2, remember that Sony's FY runs through March 31. Pushing that title out of their last FY plus putting it right next to GoT didn't seem like a business move. I believe the guys at ND heard something from critics that they wanted to change (my guess is something about the way the time line played out in the game personally).
Can't say why TLOU2 got it's last delay. Sony typically always uses the polish excuse when they delay. Most people accept it because their games end up releasing extremely polished. But, you're making assumptions as to why it was delayed, speculating on the causes and effects, then using them to try and disprove someone else doing the same thing. While the examples given are relevant to the conversation, both what the conversation is based on, and counter-arguments therein, are all speculatory at best, and I feel neither of you are really providing any kind of meaningful discourse on the actual topic at hand....which is if it's actually putting the game before business, or the counter argument that MS was backed into a corner. I feel both of you are basically skirting the issue, with your counter arguments being more distraction than worthwhile. To be blunt about it, that's how I feel, but I don't care either way, and MS did the right thing by delaying the game regardless of their reasons. All I know is that MS has once again proved their incompetence, and that they haven't changed one bit.
I'll take that as a concession from you, Rain. You know I have to poke these kids into using their critical thinking skills. Of course it's speculation. Maybe MS has this big secret plan to delay Halo to some great financial benefit. Or maybe they see the writing on the wall and realize that damaging the brand isn't worth the quick buck. But the end of the day, I'm looking at them making the right call despite f***ing up the development here. I care more about Halo's continued quality than I do the financial well being of MS or the pride of their execs. Trolls are one thing,, but I just can't stand fanboys who think they can freely ramble and spew nonsense about any subject and not get challenged on it just because they have a thesaurus. I especially enjoy it when they can't handle getting criticized about it. But I'll put money on ND messing with the 1st half of the game after getting critical feedback for the record.
Lol. Grow tired if you will, Morgan, but it won't prevent me from disagreeing or pointing out fallacies in an argument. No straw men are needed to identify that you feel a certain way about Redmond. Ad hominem arguments don't help you make a stronger point, though. It's videogames and its the internet. Stop taking it so seriously that someone disagrees with you. The article itself is about the effect, not the cause. The fact that it was delayed, in effect, demonstrates that the game's quality was put ahead of "business." They could have released the game in its current state, memes and all. The effect would be that they would be putting business above the game's quality, right? You respond in turn by only arguing causation and strain to conflate the two. That does not make the "reverse" of the article's point true as YOU posit. It only means that you want to take issue with what led to the decision that was made. That's basically creating a false dilemma in order to sound like you're rebutting the article, but you're really not. No strawmen. Literally what you admit to doing. If you had said "that's fine, but it still doesn't excuse the state it was in, etc etc," I'd probably agree with you. Like Haku -or whatever his new alt account is - said ^. But again, whether the parties or "personalities" are different or not, late delays based on reception are common place. You can carve out whatever differences you wish to, but this is not abnormal. It was also the right call. I thought it should be delayed because I want it to be the best game it can be, and it sounds like it wasn't ready. I've been vocal that I intend to wait on next gen, so waiting for Halo is no big deal for me. I heard the rumors and mismanagement talks, too. I think 343 needs serious overhaul in the production department. But I'm glad the right call was made regardless of the cause. I'm happy anytime a pub makes a decision to my benefit. Knowing that their goal is ultimately to do things to only their own financial benefit, I am not inclined to dwell on the negative aspects of what caused that decision, I'm just happy it did because it is all too rare. But hey, here in a few days, we're likely going to see the release of another game that was delayed by MS after negative public feedback (Battletoads). Just giving you a heads up.
You aren't pointing out fallacies. Go ahead directly quote something with your direct response to it. I want to see what fallacy you're actually disproving. What you're doing is ignoring much of the issue and propping up what little you think you can give a silver lining to. This is like if you tell us they fixed the toilet now, great job, but they waited till the floorboards rotted through. This should have been done ages ago, and these new issues should have never been brought to light be the public. For every public mismanagement spectacle, there are tons of things that never see the light of day. Their management is so bad and incoherent that we see so much terrible decisions by them, and people still soak it up and try to squeeze the good out of it and ignore the problems. A classic "every error is a learning opportunity", but after so many times it isn't like that anymore.
"The fact that it was delayed, in effect, demonstrates that the game's quality was put ahead of 'business.'" If the call to delay the game should have been made sooner but was instead made in response to public reaction to the showcase, that's not putting quality ahead of business. That's making a decision to delay because public reception to the showcase indicates releasing it on schedule versus delaying it will be bad for business.
@sin It's right there at the beginning. "You're just arguing cause vs. effect here. If everything you said is true, and I believe a lot of it is, the effect is still the same." See, he said the entire premise is not true. That's a fallacy. The premise is true, he just takes issue with the "why," not the end result. That's a typical issue though. For whatever reason, some feel that delaying b/c it received negative reactions from the public is STILL demonstrable of a continuing failure (see above). No one is defending the decisions that led to the poor showing, and no silver lining is needed. It is what it is, and they're making the right decision. I'm not interested in joining the cj of bashing it with every other breath, though. If the demo had received glowing acclaim, but was still delayed in order to improve it, the article's premise is the same. Responding to fan and critical feedback is not only typical, it is appreciated. Apparently it is not appreciated by everyone, but their issues are their own.
"If the demo had received glowing acclaim, but was still delayed in order to improve it," But this would have never happened, Microsoft's track record with releasing other unfinished projects show this. Without the backlash they absolutely would have released it. That's why people are disagreeing with what your saying.
@Atom666: The problem is, that no matter you may wish to deflect, the true argument is why does MS keep making these kinds of mistakes? Why can't they get things right the first time. And no matter how much you or others try to defend them, the only true counter has to come from Xbox/MS.
"If the demo had received glowing acclaim, but was still delayed in order to improve it, the article's premise is the same." No, it would make the premise correct. Because then that would mean people were willing to buy it based off the demo, but then they delayed it for the sake of releasing a quality product. This is actually how it usually goes with high profile game delays in general. We see an impressive demo, but the game ends up being delayed due to behind the scene stuff that we aren't aware about. I bring up cyberpunk again. The demos we've seen were impressive, yet it was delayed.
Come on, Atom... Anyone that looked at that demo should have immediately said, there is no way in hell that we can show this. To say now that they are putting the game before business is ludicrous. If you launched that game in that state it would be very very bad for business. They are still putting the business before the game, they just finally realized through backlash that the game they were wanting to launch would be bad for business without MAJOR improvements.
Again, the reasoning behind the delay is not the issue. Everything we believe, everything we saw, and everything only rumored, can all be true and the delay would still be putting the game's well being over the immediate business goals. They're not mutually exclusive. It's not spin or silver lining to say that. Ignoring that, however, is a different kind of spin. I'm also willing to guess that more than a few here are being hypocritical. I've been vocal that I do not believe that the delay will have much impact on launch. The game is still coming, early adopters would buy regardless, etc. But if you are one of those that believe that the delay does impact the launch, then does that not mean that they are putting the game's well being ahead of business? Most of what you guys are saying only reinforces my point. This is MS. This Halo. If you want to argue that releasing the game in its current state would be bad b/c it wouldn't sell, I'd understand the argument you'd be trying to make, but it still wouldn't be true. Halo will sell even with Craig on the cover. Pockets of the internet may think it would flop, but to the millions and millions who buy the game, they'll see a commercial for Halo and say "oh look, Halo, I'm going to buy that." Pulling it from launch may not effect the launch success, but it's delaying MS from making 100's of millions in November from sales of the game, merchandise, advertising, etc. That is a business decision. We've seen them go the wrong way on this type of thing before, right? Sea of Theives was known to be lacking content, but they released anyway. MCC had busted MP, but they released it anyway. Crackdown still looked like a budget 360 title, and while they did delay it quite a bit, they still put it out there at $60. The list goes on, and let's not forgot that we've seen it from others. Drive Club comes to mind, as does NMS. Yet even after the sheer number of delays we've seen from all across the industry this gen, somehow Halo is the one that is not putting the quality of the game above financial interests? I understand that this may trigger others like OP, but you guys seem genuinely upset at the idea that people are saying that MS made the right choice here. That is amusing, but baffling to me. To be clear, nobody is saying that they weren't criticized. And again, if that's what caused them to see the light and make the right call, who gives a shit? They're making the right call and you helped them realize that they need to put the quality of the game over their business interests. As a fan of the series, thank you? Hopefully you also went to Waypoint and tweet 343 comms people directly like I did. Listen, I understand that it is Halo and Microsoft, and people smell blood in the water, but how is it bad that public opinion caused a game to go get a delay to improve it? I understand some think that without the graphics criticisms it wouldn't have been delayed. And? Why does that change the premise here? Whether it is a mock review or a public showing, taking feedback and deciding to make the game better is putting the quality of the game above your immediate business interests. Article's premise is true whether you spent hours making Craig memes or not. Saying they only did it b/c they were called out only reinforces my point.
While I would agree to any ideas that MS puts everything above games, cause that's who they are, I'm not entirely sure what you wrote is true in this case. I think the meme is why the delay happened. They would've probably go with episode release (1/3 of the game completed? No problem! We can release it in parts. (Just look what TF they do with Halo:MC collection on PC, this is just laughable) I think they don't care about games at all. About nextgen's core gamer audience - zero f.. given. I think they've made the Halo:I game for Xone. That's why they said it'll work at 4K 60fps. This is not the optimal resoltion for Xbox (Series X). The Xbox Series X is way too slow for it to be reasonable. The only explanation is that they don't care. The S model is what they're focusing on. I see MS going the Wii route with this gen. The X model is just a shield to stop the flood of memes like the "720p makes no differences" with Xone. They PLANNED to get raytracing. Then they probably realized that the Craig meme + episode release + resolution 900-1440p instead of promised 4K, would be too much and would cause a flood of negative media attention. They already had to delay the RT addon into post-release. This would end up badly. People expect great graphics and MS openly says "we don't give a f.. about you core gamers, we won't even make any nextgen game till 2022, cause we focus on Xcloud, Xone and Xbox S (Series S)" All that said, I think the viral nature of Craig meme was more important than any actual reasons. I mean, I would have no problem believing that it wouldn't be the case if the meme didn't go viral, if there was no such negative reception. I'm not THAT disappointed with how Halo:I looked on the recent presentation. Sure, it looks mediocre, but Xbox series X doing that at 60 in SP and possibly 120 in MP just eats too much of power, especially if they made a horrible mistake of focusing on dynamic lighting. Check Digital Foundry's video. The energy shields, the characters, everything looked BETTER on previous generation's Halo games. This was a mistake. The screenshots and teasers from 2019 suggested a truly next-gen visuals. This is a problem of overhyping the game. They probably chose the wrong location and time of day for the recent presentation and probably had listened too much to the artists instead of gamers. They assumed RT will fix it. They assumed everyone wants the same as artists (realistic lighting, which is absolutely NOT necessary in a game like Halo, which looked awesome on Xboxes from 2001 and 2005). Then MS screwed them over by prioritizing Xone and Xbox (series) S above Xbox X. Then there was Covid. All combined brought us where we are now. Too bad MS bosses are way too dumb to understand core gamer audience and now the "most powerful console" will get absolutely zero system seller games on release. People who let that happen should've been fired long ago. I'm not happy with what Sony is doing, but at least they showed some nextgen games being prepared for the release or not that distant future. All MS has is gamepass and cheap console (Xbox series S). That's enough for mainstream/casual gamers. But that's not the group you target for the nextgen release, FFS. Well, the day a corporate exec understands gaming market will be the day I see flying elephants, I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Nothing wrong at all with showing a demo of a game. Taking feedback and using that feedback to make a game better.
Except that they planned to release it like that. They didn’t show the demo in order to get feedback, they showed that demo to sell products. They didn’t want feedback, they wanted to shovel another unfinished game to the xbox fans call it GaaS then pat themselves on the back. Delaying the game didn’t even enter their minds until the backlash.
@olafu all conjecture... if we are doing that well here goes...then they released the demo because people were asking for more gameplay, internally they were already having disagreements with some wanting to push the date out while others wanted to push it too early and release with the console. Finally the demo gave them the feedback that allowed devs to move the timetables and get more planned features like raytracing out at launch.
What... we know they were planning to release it before a 3 days ago when they announced the delay. Before the delay it was going to be a launch title, why are you trying to deny that. They were literally talking about how they were going to patch in RT after launch. You're trying to rewrite history.
If that were my game, I would not allow it to be shown in that state. Ever. And that is if I were making a 3rd party new IP. The fact that this is part of a MASSIVE highly rated franchise makes the stupid decision to show the game all the worse. As others have said, they literally thought that they could sell the game in the state that it is in. Trying to go back and fix it now after getting the shit kicked out of them is not a good business decision, it is necessary if they want to remain relevant at all in gaming. Stop making excuses for bad business. It reminds me of spousal abused women.
@Hakuroro thats exactly what I was doing, rewriting history to fit a possible theory but who knows if actually would be true, hence my point I was making with Olafu.
How is it conjecture? MS did, and even collaborated everything he said. They showed the demo because that's what people wanted to see....XSX game play. They had no choice after their last abysmal showing with all the criticisms. Leading up to it, it was all good according to Spencer. Nothing wrong. Maybe he didn't believe that, but he sure as hell spun it into something it wasn't. They showed this to counter Sony's own showing. Remember....he felt good about the XSX show after Sony's. Why else would they show it if not to sell a product? They didn't want feedback. After the show, after all the memes and criticisms, they made excuses, and talked about how everything would be fine. They even "embraced" the craig memes. That isn't getting feedback, that is trying to minimize the fallout from their failure. They wanted to push this out. They wanted fans to be OK with it, hence the prior paragraph where they made excuses and promises. Old builds, RT would fix it, etc. They said pretty much without even sugar coating it that the game was going to be GaaS. The game has a road map similar to Destiny....that $500 million budget....remember. You think all that money was put into just the prodution of the base game? No, this game is going to be GaaS....something I recall Obscure Observer mocking me over a while back how I made that wrong assumption....to which I said I was wrong, but turns out, I was right. MS always pats themselves on the back...that isn't conjecture. Delaying the game didn't enter their minds until the backlash. OK...well that part may be conjecture. They apparently did discuss the release of this game....talking about making it episodic. That just points to them knowing that the development was troubled, and wouldn't be ready in time, but it also makes one question why Spencer would say everything was going fine....unless they had that discussion after the feedback...in which case, I'd ask what the hell is wrong with MS execs that they can't look at these games and see where they are in development. Spencer should be very knowledgeable about such things. It was his job for quite some time before taking Mattricks job to manage these projects.
Regardless on how you feel about it. It still took some serious Balls to make that call. Knowing that you would get a ton of criticism heaped on you.
“ I think the problem is that Phil Spencer doesn’t actually know what a good game is. He’s proving more and more that he is just a suit and not a real gamer.“ This is a bit of perceptive insight. I always felt like Phil had someone pick out a T-shirt for him when he did a conference. Something that says I am a cool gamer but neither he nor the T-shirt picker know. I posted earlier that there are only two choices. Either Phil tried to shove a substandard product on his worshippers or he is incompetent and didn’t realize what he was looking at with the state of Halo. Pick one.
I posted this in a previous story, but it's still relevant here. I think a few people are missing a major indication of what this bombshell news means. We all know MS. We know how they run, we know how they operate. We all know how stubborn they are, how they will lie and mislead if they think they can get away with it, how they absolutely HATE losing and will do anything in their power to one up the competition. They are well aware of how monumentally bad this news is and how it's going to hurt them, sending a shock wave that will last the entire generation. So for them to delay their only decent launch title and effectively hand Sony another generation win means... ...means that the development of halo must be so much more worse than we think and what the rumours of development hell are saying. If MS had at least a very rough looking GaaS halo that was still playable they would have absolutely still released that at launch with gamepass and saying they would polish it after with free added content and promising to do better in the future, thus appeasing the easily placated xbox fanbase and call it a day. You know it, I know it, MS fans know it. But halo must be in such, and I mean in SUCH a poor state that even smoke and mirrors MS thought it would hurt them more to release it at launch than delay it. Just think about that for a second. MS thought it would be better to delay a FLAGSHIP generation LAUNCH title than to release it in the state it's in.
That's very opportunistic. Now we're judging games before they get released? Microsoft HAD to show Halo Infinite in their event. They had a console to launch and a big game among with it. We're in a world where listening to feedback is now being twisted negatively by fans of the opposite "team". Microsoft did the right thing on spite of the impact to their launch... that's the Microsoft true gamers want and I'm glad they did it. I'm still getting an XSX to play The Medium, Scorn and whatever is released on Game Pass and also the better version of Far Cry 6 and Cyberpunk 2077. Playing enhanced version of XOX will not hurt either. I'll have a lot of entertainment while Halo gets polished to the point we gamers deserve.
It's sad that you can't even realize how bad MS has botched the reveal of Halo. Stop spinning and stop defending this behavior. MS messed up and they're picking up they pieces right now.
Why are you trying to spin this into a positive when you were not too long ago criticizing PS5's launch lineup? "Funny how desperate some people are to see Halo failing. I'm confident about 343 Industries. The game will deliver and it's still, by far, the best offering on games at launch. "Sony is playing the safe card. A very small game based on the same assets as on the past generation's Spider-Man. That's all they have for launch, which would be surreal in other generations. "These guys are doing a next-gen full game, with a huge SP mode and Multiplayer + New Engine, all that in the middle of a global pandemic. "If I have to wait a few weeks for Ray Tracing, then I will. I'm very comfortable with that MS is doing for this new generation." https://n4g.com/comments/re...
They didn't have to do anything... Phil didn't have to announce it as a launch title way back in 2019 before they even had anything to show. What happened was Phil mismanaged thier biggest franchise in the worst possible way. Why? Because they were focused on hyping up things they lost sight of reality. It's a common problem with them, same as cross gen which has now been scrapped. It's the same mentality that had them show a trailer for Fable when they hadn't even filled key roles and it clearly hasn't even started development. "Playground is still looking to add a Lead Audio Engineer, Lead AI Engineer, Lead Game Designer, Animation Director, and a Lead Scriptwriter to the team. These positions are just a few of the nearly 40 that are currently available at Playground right this moment." It's not the PlayStation fans that are out of touch it's you guys who keep defending the total mismanagement of the xbox brand.
Do you actually believe what you are saying, Marq?... You sound like a cultist. Don't drink the Koolaid. Open your eyes and see.
Lol... I don't get why you guys are so mad at Microsoft making the right decision. I'd be mad at MS if they released a broken/unfinished Halo game. It's that simple. It just makes me realize that it was indeed, the best thing to do. Chances are that Halo Infinite will boost XSX when Sony doesn't have anything big to release in that window. Who knows... it might end up being the best for the brand in the mid term. Btw... Lol @RauLeCreuset and everyone sniffing on my story.
"Chances are that Halo Infinite will boost XSX when Sony doesn't have anything big to release in that window." Actually given Sony's clockwork release schedule "chances are" they will never have an open release window. But I'd love for Halo to release side by side with Horizon: Forbidden West
***"That's very opportunistic. Now we're judging games before they get released?"*** LMAO Aren't you judging Miles Morales before it releases? ***""But I'd love for Halo to release side by side with Horizon: Forbidden West" Halo was pushed to 2021, not 2022+"**** https://www.theverge.com/21... Insert Coin and try again my friend.
this article is full of it, lol. if microsoft truly cared, they wouldn't have shown halo in that condition. now they have to literally backpedal to save face.
Precisely, they knew perfectly well the state the game was in and where more concerned with hyping their console they put it out hoping gamers would blindly eat it up. Some fans did, others called it out for being what it was, a game that looked like it was made in 5 months not years.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't I guess? ... Smh
exactly.....they would have pushed it out in its current state and use the gaas approach like sea of thieves. this is why they are so quick to tag every game as free with gamepass cuz the quality has been lowered so much to make them basically f2p. crackdown 3 was awful and suffered multiple delays. Halo and this debacle is a result of ms and Phils obsession with gamepass before anything else.....especially the quality of their first party games. they have become so watered down due to that. Just look at the graphics and the outrage after the reveal. Bare minimum efforts go into their games cuz of the money not being made by f2p gamepass as opposed to potential sales that devs recoup money on. Good, maybe this will wake Phil and Co. up and make them realize people arent going to settle for gaas garbage. Make a complete true AAA game day one and stop pushing the gamepass bs over everything.
It really isn't. They were completely ready to put it out. I think the game was literally so unfinished they simply couldn't release it in the shape it was in graphics aside. And delaying one game hardly representative of any type of long term change. Heck they showed Fable a game which we can see from Job listings for essential roles hasn't even been started yet. And it hasn't stopped them from putting out other incomplete games like Bleeding Edge and Grounded. I am 100% certain that even when it releases it's not as complete or polished as Sony games.
"They were completely ready to put it out." This is the central issue which everyone is annoying. They were fully prepared to damn the torpedoes and go full steam ahead. Then the game community rightfully gave them a beatdown. There wasn't one central issue that embarrassed MS. Not just the comparisons, not just the memes and it certainly wasn't lack of raytracing. It was a combined 2x4 to the forehead that finally made them say uncle and decide to delay it. They had to have their feet held to the fire. As I stated before, this game was supposed to be in mid to late beta status. There shouldn't have been a technical issue surfacing to cause the delay THAT WASN'T KNOWN BEFORE THE DEMO. And that is the key. You are exactly right and I have stated it elsewhere. Going into the demo they were fully prepared to launch.
Ha ha should read “This is the central issue everyone is ignoring”
Microsoft has been babied too much by the media to have the discipline to put out a competent product. And even this time it wasn't the media that said anything, it was the consumers/gaming community which decided to fend for itself, because no one else would. For the sake of having some competition against PlayStation, the media has lowered the bar so much for Xbox, and allowed them to spew the most egregiously false statements without having to answer for any of it. When Phil spoke before the Halo reveal he said that we would get industry defining fidelity, performance, precision and immersion. Then they rolled the Halo video. Phil never had to worry about what he said, because he expects the media to give him a free pass. 2 Days before the show, 343 hyped the reveal up by saying that they wished there was an E3 this year because Halo would have won. And of course I know some people are going say that 343 actually believed that statement, but out of respect to 343, lets just say they were lying because if they meant it, you have a far more pressing problem.
"I am 100% certain that even when it releases it's not as complete or polished as Sony games." It'll probably be complete, or at least I'd hope so....disclosed GaaS release model notwithstanding. But as polished as Sony games? That doesn't even take any kind of guess work. When was the last time MS has put out a game as polished as Sony's big games? Even before Sony stepped it up a couple notches this gen. I'm hopeful for some of their new studio acquisitions to breath some talent into MS studios. Playground I felt was probably MS most talented studio for 2nd party, and it'll probably be one of their most talented for 1st party....possibly competing with Oblivian and Ninja Theory assuming MS can fund them probably and cultivate that mentality. But, I also think MS isn't as interested in cultivating that level of dedication to gaming as Sony has to make it a studio culture to always be the best, and try to out do not the industry, but their peers within their publishers inner circle. As of right now, when it comes to top tier games, I think Sony studios are competing more with themselves, even singular studios and their last game, than they are competing against the rest of the industry.
The fact that Halo Infinite was designed around a 10 year business plan says otherwise.
This is the utterly undeniable rock dropped on their ever changing direction. Nothing like a counter argument baked into their own design.
Wow I’m getting dizzy from all the spin coming after Halogate 2020. Clearly the whole handling of Halo from announcing it as a launch game way too early then showing a graphically completely downgraded game that was clearly unfinished then trying to convince people it was an older build and they were going to patch in good graphics after having digital foundry run 3 point defense then ultimately being forced to delay them game was brilliant. Nothing they could have done could have ever filled me with more confidence as a consumer than the way Phil handled Halo! /s
Yeah, people seem to forget very easily how Greenberg assured everyone that it was just an old build (that was running on PC, not even XSX), that the game looked nowhere like that and Xbots ate that BS. This delay proves that what he said was a lie, and Covid is in no way responsible for that game looking like that, a game is not in that shape if you had it in development for 5+ year and only the last couple of months you were affected by what happened (where you still had people working from home), I'm sorry but that's ANOTHER lie.