{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by High Charity:
8/6/2015 1:11:40 PM
2
It's funny because 343i went out of their way to hire people who hated Halo to develop Halo 4. Which explains a lot when you look back on it.
English
-
Wrong. 343 hired people who hated certain aspects of halo. They didn't hate halo as a whole. For example, I think halo 3 is a piece of shit compared to the others, but I still love halo.
-
Wrong. Read the article.
-
[quote]We had people who we hired who hated Halo because of 'X,'" says O'Connor. "But what that really meant was, 'I feel like this game could be awesome because of 'Y input' that I'm going to bring into it. I want to prove it, and I'm passionate about proving it.' [/quote] Hating certain parts of halo and wanting to improve it, like I said. Looks like you need to take your own advice.
-
Edited by High Charity: 8/7/2015 5:25:33 PMHating certain parts, such as the whole traditional gameplay (what made Halo Halo). Read the article kid.
-
Edited by ROBERTO jh: 8/7/2015 6:22:40 PMNonsense. You are conflating two unrelated aspects of the article and pretending that they are the same. They hired people who hated certain parts of Halo and wanted to improve it in their own way--nowhere do they say what parts they hated. Frankie's comment was about bringing in talent that holds multiple perspectives, which any rational artist would tell you is a sensible mentality to have to avoid creative stagnation. They then went on at a later point in the article and said that they scrapped an early idea for being too traditional, but no where does he say that they scrapped the idea because the people they hired hated Halo or its traditional gameplay. Wanting to do something creatively different from your predecessors is far different from wanting to dismantle what they built because they hated it. Even beyond that, 343i went on to admit the mistakes they made with Halo 4 and worked to bring Halo 5 back to its more traditional roots, so why is this conversation even being held? It's a dated conversation. Unless you can factually verify where they said they hate traditional Halo gameplay, in opposition to all of the comments that have been made in[i] support[/i] of traditional gameplay (Josh Holmes saying that one of the best things about Halo is that combat doesn't come down to who shoots who first for example) than your entire argument is being pulled out of a dark crevice. The original creative director of Halo 4 quit because, and I quote, "The Halo I wanted to build was fundamentally different and I don't think I had built enough credibility to see such a crazy endeavor through." So sure, 343i scrapped a too traditional idea--probably to avoid the aforementioned creative stagnation--but they also moderated how far from traditional they were willing to go. They went too far anyway of course and have been reigning it in since.
-
[quote]It's funny because 343i went out of their way to hire people who hated Halo to develop Halo 4. Which explains a lot when you look back on it.[/quote] That's an interesting perspective, you may be right that they wanted to target a new audience and that's why they did what they did to Halo 4's MP. At least they listened to our feedback and Halo 5 beta was more like the Halo we know.
-
They also built a more classic Halo game originally, which everyone in-house enjoyed, and all user research liked, and then scrapped the whole thing to make Call of Halo 4 because they wanted to "make their own mark" on the series.
-
Thanks it's a very interesting article to be honest. I feel that Halo 5 will be special. Due to the negative feedback about the MP in Halo 4 343 have taken this on board with the beta and it was great.
