[Halo 5 Battle of Shadow and Light]

It's strange that you talk about production quality in multiplayer maps, having stated that you consider Reach's multiplayer to be solid, as I personally find its multiplayer to be the worst in the series, and with the exception of 'Lone Wolf', its campaign to be dull, predictable and filled with flat characters. Its multiplayer maps in particular I found extremely lacking - remember, all of it's non-DLC content was either created in Forge, or ripped straight from campaign, meaning that while we had one or two decent maps like Countdown and Powerhouse, we also had some really terrible ones like Sword Base, Reflection, and Boardwalk. The quality of a map doesn't necessarily correlate to whether it's made in Forge - there are simply more bad Forge maps because there are significantly more Forge maps. If you frequent content creators like THFE, Ducain, or our very own Forge Group, you'll find an abundance of really high-quality maps - one of my all-time favourite maps, the pre-rebuild Synergy, was made in Forge, for example.

 

I have no idea why you're making the assertion that I don't know anything about software development, running a business, or that I'm somehow new to gaming, giving that I haven't mentioned my experience with any of those things. The last in particular is an odd one as the first time I owned and played a competitive shooter online, the Millenium Bug was still something people were worrying about and I've been gaming pretty much continuously since then. While I freely admit that I'm neither trained in running a business or creating software (the most I can claim is a passing familiarity with Source, UE4, a small number of various games' map creation tools, and the day-to-day running of a fairly large website) I don't really see how that's relevant to a discussion about the quality of another person's work. If you have relevant skills here, please show me and I'll be happy to defer to your judgement.

 

Your statement that I don't know the difference between trying and putting no effort in is also odd, firstly as it's an empty and vague soundbite which you back up with absolutely nothing other than personal feelings, and secondly as you're talking about a game which has been in development for three years, consuming however many hundreds of thousands of man-hours, millions of dollars, and in a high-pressure environment for a company (Microsoft) which doesn't have a history of accepting failures. 'Passion', even if it weren't an empty and abstract concept which serves as little more than a positive buzzword, doesn't necessarily translate into quality: plenty of games down the years have been made as labours of love and flopped, while a great many titles are lauded for their quality even though they were likely made purely for the money.

 

Just because a map has been created in Forge or anywhere else, it doesn't mean that it isn't poor quality. What I saw while playing BTB was nothing short of a lack of effort. I personally develop software for a living and know what kind of testing and work goes into making something of quality. Given that you maintain a large website yourself, I understand to have about the same experience as you. However, I know that they haven't done their due dilligence when I am trapped inside a structure which clearly has objects around it to climb up and onto it (somewhere near the red base spawn in Deadlock, toward the top of the map). I do feel that 343 has done a poor job with this update, but I also feel that Halo 5 is a better quality game than Halo 4 could hope to be. Whether the game has been in development for 3 years or not is irrelavent. The product given in this iteration is terrible and it needs to be known in order to improve. I think Forge can produce high quality maps. (Storm the Beach, Territories comes to mind) I've played many that were fun and interesting.

 

Perhaps my comment regarding your inexperience regarding FPS and gaming in general was out of context. I don't know if you are a member of technical services or development, but either way it is probably unwarrented. I apologize for that. However, I can say that I have seldom been this disappointed with any production-level product as I have with this. I make the assumption that you have never played some of the really fun (though not neccesarily focusing on competetive gameplay) maps like Rocket Races on Sandbox and the aforementioned Storm the Beach. The real crux of it is that I'm not asking for new and inventive gameplay. I understand the kind of hole Halo has dug itself into. I just want the game to provide me with maps that show me the developers care. The maps need to fit in with what they've created thus far and they need to have at least a similar level of detail. When I play these maps, I feel like I'm playing early beta like Overwatch has right now. You bring Microsoft as an example of a company that doesn't allow failure, yet we can look at Operating Systems (Win 10, Vista) that have done very poorly and created solely in their name. The only reason Win 10 has so many downloads is because they are practically forcing their users to update with regular reminders and notifications.

 

Outside of this, as I feel it should also be addressed given its close relation to our discussion, I have very passionate feeling toward how development *should* exist. I've stated before that fast, poor content will not win my vote. This is the same reason I wait until the very last day to preorder, if I preorder at all. I feel that rushed products (like what has been shown in this update) have less quality and are TOO subject to the users' input. Before developers could push an update to fix gameplay, they were forced to ensure their disc (or whatever medium they were going to deliver their product in) was of a quality that wouldn't lead to players being upset. They were pressured to ensure gameplay, graphics, and design were all up to par. In general, we don't see that today. Batman: Arkham Asylum and the Halo Master Chief Collection come to mind, with huge flaws and even major segments of the game being largely unplayable. This is a problem with modern gaming production and it shows its ugly teeth here.

[Halo 5 Battle of Shadow and Light]

You may wish to re-read my post, as the point I was making is that if we're going to get remakes of older maps, I'd rather that they be released as Forge variants so that the high-intensity work of actually building and texturing full maps goes on creating something new. The earliest Forge maps released for a game are always the weakest, by nature, as there simply isn't time to learn all the design and aesthetic tricks which become more common after release.

 

This would, of course, be the same Bungie who having shipped the garbage that was Reach, went on to make Destiny, which consisted of half a game followed by two poor quality expansions, and then insisted people pay for an expansion which basically consisted of what should have been the second half of the game?

 

I understand that you would wish that old maps were done as a learning experience, but the fact remains that these were released to production. As such, I expect production quality. If they really beleive that they are worth re-releasing, they should spend the time. I don't feel like they've done that. The quality of maps just isn't what I have come to expect or a quality of series as Halo is. It has been around for more than 2 generations. That's a long time. 343 isn't doing the job that is required of games in this generation. If this is the weakest that they throw out, it isn't setting a very high bar, and it doesn't make me, as a consumer of those products, expect a high quality moving forward.

 

I personally haven't played Destiny. This is only because I have found myself in the position where I couldn't upgrade when it was meaningful. As a result, I'm behind in gaming in general(I haven't played the lasted assassin's creed etc) and I want to play Destiny. I can't speak for what what it is now, but I can speak for what it was when I was involved. I loved reach. The campaign was an amazing rollercoaster of emotion and the multplayer was solid. They may have gone astreay with the ranking (I'm not a fan of exp based ranking) but it brought new and exciting content to Halo. This update simply doesn't have that. I'm sorry if you are new to gaming or the process of software development. I'm sorry if you don't know the difference between trying and putting forth little effort to make something to generate an income long term. The difference between them is huge, and it is made up of the passion and thoughtfulness to make a great game. Without that, the game loses soul, and it loses the ability to become something that matters. This update simply doesn't have that soul. I don't feel like the developers care enough to make me care.

[Halo 5 Battle of Shadow and Light]

These maps are terrible. I am incredibly disappointed in the quality of the graphics of these maps. It takes me back to the days of ps2. I'd rather pay for quality maps than this ****.

Well, just to throw this out there - yes, Orion is a bad map and it's appalling that it made it into the game. But on the other hand - well, it was made and tested by the same people who made the rest of the maps, including those built with full geometry. It's bad enough that they're present on a Forge map, but can you imagine what would have happened if they'd been present on a full map? It's an embarrassment, sure, but far better to happen to a crappy Forge variant which can just be edited and re-released a few weeks down the line for a few kilobytes' worth of data than needing to be completely rebuilt and then shipped as a much larger update six months from now.

 

Not excusing it, but that's actually an advantage of Forge, rather than a deficiency.
 

 

I don't see this as necessarily a bad thing in and of itself - these are going to be all we have to play for months, and so it's probably better to take something tried-and-true as a way of showing off what can be done with Forge and giving us maps that we're familiar with and which we know work, rather than risking something completely new. The first things made in any new Forge system are always remakes, anyway. But yes, I'll be very disappointed if we get any more remakes or re-imaginings of older maps when the time comes for proper DLC maps.

 

Quite probably. But hey, why worry about little things like gameplay balance, map variety, and original content when you can add yet more garbage to an already oversaturated REQ pool, thus decreasing your chances of actually getting a specific piece that you actually want?

 

 

For everything that I've ever thought of Halo and its series, I hope that you are being sarcastic. It looks like these maps were developed over the course of a weekend. These hurried maps are not to be defended. Give me quality. Make me wait. Hell, make me WANT to wait. If future patches are anything like what I've played so far, I can guarantee you I won't pay a single dime going forward. I won't stream, I won't talk about this game. I will simply forget it and move on to something bigger and better.

 

I honestly liked an enjoyed the story of halo going back to its roots. I have played multiplayer since it was LAN parties at my buddie's house for the weekend. The fact that 343 let this pile of trash through its "testing" only shows how devoted they are to pushing content and making a buck. Fast, frequest **** content will make a dollar, but it won't create an investment. Bungie understood this. They made a quality product that created a community that lives on today. If this is what 343 is about, it deeply disheartens me.