Halo 3: ODST Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Its Like Some People WANT Halo 3: ODST To Fail
  • Subject: Its Like Some People WANT Halo 3: ODST To Fail
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Its Like Some People WANT Halo 3: ODST To Fail
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

While the hype for Halo 3: ODST is mainly positive, there are people who are going out of their way to make ODST seem like a failure. I understand if you have criticisms about the game in general.

1. Bungie made the game $60 when they promised it would be $40! They only want money!

A: Bungie stated they didn't view Halo 3: ODST as a full priced game. Microsoft, as the publisher, is in charge of the pricing of games. Even though Bungie is a very prestigious company, they weren't convincing enough to get ODST discounted. And yeah, getting money wouldn't hurt.

2. You are paying for the maps again!

A: While the maps may have been a way to justify the $60 price tag, it isn't what we are paying for. It may seem like a revolutionary idea, but I am willing to bet most of us are getting ODST for the game itself. Odd huh? Actually getting a game to play the game. Absurd.

3. If you don't pre-order and get Sgt. Johnson, its not the full game!

A: This is probably the most ridiculous idea I have ever heard. To think that not getting a special pre-order bonus means you don't get the full game. Maybe if Johnson had special abilities you may have a point, but he is the same as the ODSTs. I mean Nintendo offers special Pokemon you can only get a certain events, but they are never accused of releasing a "incomplete" Pokemon game.

4. Firefight won't have Matchmaking!

A: This may seem bad. but I am sure there will be some options for us. Maybe it will be like -blam!- Zombies. Doubtful. but you never know.

5. MW2 will sell more than Halo 3: ODST!

A: I am positive it will sell more, but I don't quite think ODST is meant to be a AAA title. It is still fine on its own.

I, again, understand if you have criticisms, you can that is fine, but when we nitpick little parts of the game in an attempt to make it bad, then it just becomes a mess. What do you think?

  • 08.10.2009 9:48 AM PDT

Evil, always finds a way!
Gnarl: Overlord

It's ok i'm with you. *hugs* it's ok .....

  • 08.10.2009 9:50 AM PDT

Fellow Floodian:
Posted by: Oh This Dude
I had a very similar thing, only I threw a 14 story building out of a pool and hit a kid on a paper aeroplane.


The Flood is just this awesome :D

correction for number one M$ is the one that changed the price to 60$ not Bungie

  • 08.10.2009 9:52 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: shadowknight566
correction for number one M$ is the one that changed the price to 60$ not Bungie

I know. I believe I mentioned that. I stated that Bungie didn't view ODST as a full priced title. Microsoft, the whole M$ thing is immature IMO, thought "Aw -blam!- it, its $60!".

  • 08.10.2009 10:02 AM PDT

Posted by: shadowknight566
correction for number one M$ is the one that changed the price to 60$ not Bungie

Seems like YOU posted before reading the whole post. You disgust me >:(

[Edited on 08.10.2009 10:05 AM PDT]

  • 08.10.2009 10:04 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i know a joke at one point someone will use:
"this thread fails LOLOLOLOLOL,"
and i just used it

  • 08.10.2009 10:05 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

idk if MW2 will sell more i am confident in ODST

  • 08.10.2009 10:10 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: black spartan n8
idk if MW2 will sell more i am confident in ODST

I doubt it. I will be amazed if ODST sells more, but from what I am hearing pre-order-wise, MW2 may win. But ODST is still a great game.

  • 08.10.2009 10:11 AM PDT

Underwater Eagle.

I don't see why everyone complains, it's still a full game, and it's the consumer's choice wheter or not to buy it. If they don't want it, they shouldn't buy it, and they definitely shouldn't rewen it for those who do want it.

  • 08.10.2009 10:13 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Go Vader
3. If you don't pre-order and get Sgt. Johnson, its not the full game!

A: This is probably the most ridiculous idea I have ever heard. To think that not getting a special pre-order bonus means you don't get the full game. Maybe if Johnson had special abilities you may have a point, but he is the same as the ODSTs. I mean Nintendo offers special Pokemon you can only get a certain events, but they are never accused of releasing a "incomplete" Pokemon game.

i'm surprised this even crossed anyone's mind. Seeing as you can only see your character when you die or in theater mode, people are just complaining that they don't get something to brag about.

  • 08.10.2009 10:18 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

You face an opponent who has never known defeat, who laughs in foreign tongues at your efforts to survive. This is Reply suicide.

"Oh Molly Connoly ruined my life, I thought the world should know."
Say Anything - Every Man Has A Molly

1. Anyone who uses the argument "They only want money" has no idea how economics works and are completely idiotic in their own right. Of COURSE they want money. What is wrong with a company wanting money? Let's see, companies need money to OPERATE. They have to pay their workers, their pensions, their health plans, costs of production, costs of support, costs of future production, while still taking home money to THEIR OWN families in order to live in a way which comforts them. Is it wrong to be rich? No. Being rich is what many people WANT to be. But somehow, when someone else is rich and you are not, you think they don't deserve it. No, rich people deserve their riches. They earned it through hard work and dedication. The only ones who didn't earn it, are the trust fund people. And they blow through their money in a generation or so, so who cares? If a company produces a product you enjoy or want, you pay the price for it. If you don't like the price or product, you don't buy it. The company doesn't force you to buy it. It's ENTIRELY choice. It's what they're charging for their game. Live with it, or shut up about it.

2. See my answer for number one. That's the price they cost, live with it. Buy them or don't.

3. Actually, Nintendo is accused, quite frequently, of releasing an "incomplete game" with pokemon. Many people, like myself, wish they'd just put all the pkmn in the game, with no rares that only people who live in SELECT CITIES can obtain. This is stupid, this is annoying, and it's an EXTREMELY poor business practice. However, accusing Bungie of not releasing a "full game" just because Johnson isn't in the games that weren't preordered... That's kind of childish. All he is, is a reskin. I doubt he even has armor permutations to unlock or anything. He's just there for fun. He's just there to show people online that you preordered the game when you play with him. He's a "novelty" and not an actual "gameplay element".

4. If you already own Halo 3 (and why would you be in these forums if you DIDN'T own it already?) then there's no need for Firefight to have a "multiplayer" type option. The one you have is "Firefight". To be honest, Firefight looks far more balanced and fun than standard Halo 3 Matchmaking is. There is no way to get matched against people better than yourself, while having all the idiots on your team with Firefight. The enemy team can't glitch out of a level, or with a weapon, or even a kill. Lag cannot help the enemy get kills and allow them to shoot you through walls. Firefight, in my opinion, will be far superior to the standard play of Halo 3 multiplayer. Especially since all anyone uses in Halo 3 is a Battle Rifle. Gameplay has gotten dull and stale, and I welcome this change.

5. Modern Warfare 2 will pretty much already sell to the existing Call of Duty fanbase. Being a sequel, it isn't likely to draw new players to the franchise. It will draw SOME, but it won't draw a lot. Halo 3: ODST is the same way. Though, since it is not really a true sequel, and could probably stand alone, it may have a larger chance of bringing in new players than MW2. Besides, the only reason you get a Call of Duty game is for the Multiplayer. The campaign is bland, tired, and done a million times before. Badguy is bad, take out badguy. Oh, and badguy has nuke, or army, or something else that makes him more dangerous than he should be. ODST, looks like it will be sold on the basis of the campaign instead of the multiplayer. However, even if MW2 sells more copies... Big deal. They still make a profit, games still get made. Who cares which games are on top? A ton of people like Gears of War, and I absolutely hate it and can't see why people enjoy it. But, that doesn't mean I should hate the success of the game. It's a game people like, let them like it. If people like MW2 more than ODST, oh well. Some people will be buying just one of them, but most people will be buying both of them. Buy whichever one you like and enjoy your purchase.

  • 08.10.2009 10:19 AM PDT

i don't understand why so many people are complaining about the price for this game, new maps which are 3, 6 if u didn't buy mythic and another 3 if u didn't buy legendary tats about 2400 microsoft fun points, which is about 25 dollars i think. That basically covers that gap from $40 dollars to $60 dollars, firefight all we no is tat its multiplayer, (no one unless they already stated) that there won't be a matchmaking setting for this game but who knows you just gotta wait till the release, look at GOW 2 and COD WaW wit there versions of firefight, -blam!- zombies, and horde and they don't have a matching making system for them just a little gametype that you can play. So until it comes out i ain't complaining and so shouldn't you.

  • 08.10.2009 10:28 AM PDT

I swear to DRUNK, I'm not GOD!

I dunno where Bungie ever said that this game would actually be $40...

And the only justification I can give for the price of the game is this. It comes with a semi-open-world campaign mode, where you play as someone other than the Master Chief, and introduces new weapons, abilities, and different gameplay, like the stealth element. Granted, the campaign itself may be short if you just played through only it, but I think exploring the entire area, fooling around, and playing on different difficulty settings will make for plenty of replay value. (How many people play a Halo game all the way through only once?) On top of this, you can play the campaign with up to 3 other people, and I think it's safe to assume you'll be able to play with skulls on and other extras and such.

Now, that's just the campaign.

Also, you'll be getting Firefight, a mode that yes, does not have actual match-making, but is essentially a 'survive against wave-after-wave' mode. This part of the game features multiple levels, as well as probably armor you can unlock and customize, skulls you can turn on or off, and obviously a large challenge in general. (see how far you can get)

And after all that, we also get all the special Halo 3 multi-player maps, (including many of the ones that people like me payed for through the marketplace...) as well as 3 completely new maps.

Finally, let us not forget that this game ALSO comes with an invitation to the multi-player beta of Halo Reach, a game about which almost nothing is really known, but it's certainly going to be something new.

...After I thought it over, I think you'll find that there's at LEASE $60 worth of entertainment here.

And to top everything off, your title sounds a little bit like something Rush Limbaugh would say. lol

  • 08.10.2009 10:37 AM PDT

Go Rams and Missouri!

About the MW 2 thing. It's going to sell better, but only because it is on 3x as many systems.

CoD4 was outsold by about 4 million on Xbox 360, but the Wii and PS3 version put it ahead in sales by a few million.


Also, Bungie did say $40, but they also said 3-5 hour campaign. Since then, they've stated that the project has grown considerably. Firefight was put in, the campaign was extended by a lot, and the price reflects that.

[Edited on 08.10.2009 10:58 AM PDT]

  • 08.10.2009 10:57 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: DeNniz101
It's ok i'm with you. *hugs* it's ok .....


*joins in on hug* =3

  • 08.10.2009 10:57 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

some very long posts here

  • 08.10.2009 10:59 AM PDT

very long...

  • 08.10.2009 11:02 AM PDT

Posted by: Tai MT
1. Anyone who uses the argument "They only want money" has no idea how economics works and are completely idiotic in their own right. Of COURSE they want money. What is wrong with a company wanting money? Let's see, companies need money to OPERATE. They have to pay their workers, their pensions, their health plans, costs of production, costs of support, costs of future production, while still taking home money to THEIR OWN families in order to live in a way which comforts them. Is it wrong to be rich? No. Being rich is what many people WANT to be. But somehow, when someone else is rich and you are not, you think they don't deserve it. No, rich people deserve their riches. They earned it through hard work and dedication. The only ones who didn't earn it, are the trust fund people. And they blow through their money in a generation or so, so who cares? If a company produces a product you enjoy or want, you pay the price for it. If you don't like the price or product, you don't buy it. The company doesn't force you to buy it. It's ENTIRELY choice. It's what they're charging for their game. Live with it, or shut up about it.

2. See my answer for number one. That's the price they cost, live with it. Buy them or don't.

3. Actually, Nintendo is accused, quite frequently, of releasing an "incomplete game" with pokemon. Many people, like myself, wish they'd just put all the pkmn in the game, with no rares that only people who live in SELECT CITIES can obtain. This is stupid, this is annoying, and it's an EXTREMELY poor business practice. However, accusing Bungie of not releasing a "full game" just because Johnson isn't in the games that weren't preordered... That's kind of childish. All he is, is a reskin. I doubt he even has armor permutations to unlock or anything. He's just there for fun. He's just there to show people online that you preordered the game when you play with him. He's a "novelty" and not an actual "gameplay element".

4. If you already own Halo 3 (and why would you be in these forums if you DIDN'T own it already?) then there's no need for Firefight to have a "multiplayer" type option. The one you have is "Firefight". To be honest, Firefight looks far more balanced and fun than standard Halo 3 Matchmaking is. There is no way to get matched against people better than yourself, while having all the idiots on your team with Firefight. The enemy team can't glitch out of a level, or with a weapon, or even a kill. Lag cannot help the enemy get kills and allow them to shoot you through walls. Firefight, in my opinion, will be far superior to the standard play of Halo 3 multiplayer. Especially since all anyone uses in Halo 3 is a Battle Rifle. Gameplay has gotten dull and stale, and I welcome this change.

5. Modern Warfare 2 will pretty much already sell to the existing Call of Duty fanbase. Being a sequel, it isn't likely to draw new players to the franchise. It will draw SOME, but it won't draw a lot. Halo 3: ODST is the same way. Though, since it is not really a true sequel, and could probably stand alone, it may have a larger chance of bringing in new players than MW2. Besides, the only reason you get a Call of Duty game is for the Multiplayer. The campaign is bland, tired, and done a million times before. Badguy is bad, take out badguy. Oh, and badguy has nuke, or army, or something else that makes him more dangerous than he should be. ODST, looks like it will be sold on the basis of the campaign instead of the multiplayer. However, even if MW2 sells more copies... Big deal. They still make a profit, games still get made. Who cares which games are on top? A ton of people like Gears of War, and I absolutely hate it and can't see why people enjoy it. But, that doesn't mean I should hate the success of the game. It's a game people like, let them like it. If people like MW2 more than ODST, oh well. Some people will be buying just one of them, but most people will be buying both of them. Buy whichever one you like and enjoy your purchase.


ummmm.... well that's better than what i was going to write.... you speak the truth

  • 08.10.2009 11:05 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

We better get out of here because its gonna get messy

- PandemicPenguin

Posted by: ddd777
Posted by: DeNniz101
It's ok i'm with you. *hugs* it's ok .....


*joins in on hug* =3


I want a hug too!

  • 08.10.2009 11:06 AM PDT

i agree that mw2 will sell more but reach will then break all records and become the most sold game for xbox

  • 08.10.2009 11:06 AM PDT

The fight has been complete.... now get the cookies!

While we certainly share your enthusiasm for the return, we here at the Bungie.net community are mostly made up of snarky asses and jerks who will ridicule you for making a thread about something revealed months ago. We regret that your innocent intentions will almost certainly be replied with anger and sarcasm, and politely invite you to don your Flame-suit, because you just did the internet equivalent of jumping up the Construct lifts.

This thread makes my head hurt and bulge out.

  • 08.10.2009 11:06 AM PDT

Duracell.
I don't keep going and going and going and...
but i Start, and just don't Stop.

So what if the saxophone is black?
it has better tone the the gold one.
damn straight i play Jazz.

Posted by: Go Vader
While the hype for Halo 3: ODST is mainly positive, there are people who are going out of their way to make ODST seem like a failure. I understand if you have criticisms about the game in general.

1. Bungie made the game $60 when they promised it would be $40! They only want money!

A: Bungie stated they didn't view Halo 3: ODST as a full priced game. Microsoft, as the publisher, is in charge of the pricing of games. Even though Bungie is a very prestigious company, they weren't convincing enough to get ODST discounted. And yeah, getting money wouldn't hurt.


actually here is the reason it is $60: It's a bigger game now then when bungie made that statement

just an FYI it isn't a 5 hour campaign any more. as they said 1 hour per mission and about half an hour between each mission to reach the different way points(Joe Staten said this in the play through of the first mission, it's why he used that teleport 'cheat')

**also i did not include the time it would take to get the audio logs etc as this is extra content not critical to the story. this is a bare minimum calculation**

Now lets do some fairly simple math.

-There are 6 missions if the leaked achievements are to be believed.
-That means 6 one hour missions.
-6 x 1 = 6
-That means there is 6 hours in missions alone. Lets store that number away in our head and -move to the next part of our game length calculations.


-if there are 6 missions that means you need to travel to all 6, Correct? that means there are 6 times you need to travel to a new location, (travel to point one, travel to point 2, travel to point 3, travel, to point 4, travel to point 5, and travel to point 6. That's Six travel times)
-now we were told in the mission walk through by Jo Staten that it's about half an hour to walk to a target point when he used his teleport cheat.
-6Travel times of half an hour each
-6 x 0.5 = 3
-this means that that there is about 3 hours of just running to your objectives alone.
-now to move to the final part of our calculations here


-taking that first number we got from the beginning of ODST's development and the leaked achievements and adding them to the travel time result we get:
-6 hours of missions plus the 3 hours of travel time
-6 + 3 = 9
-This means there is about 9 hours of campaign.

Also note this calculation does not include the "final mission" Bungie has alluded to as it has not been directly confirmed to my knowledge.


This number of 9 hours of campaign is the equivalent of an average FULL game these days.
this with alone by game marketing standards warrants a $60 price tag.

The things people argue that you need for a full price game, often are not included in a campaign oriented game.

A full price title does not need:
-Match Making
-Multiplayer of any form(such as co-op/ split screen)
-a second game mode
Please note that with these features included in a large title often increases the price of the game by $10

A full game must include
-A single player campaign totalling a minimum of 6 hour average playtime OR a fully Multiplayer game(unknown standard)
-1000GS (Xbox 360)


Now ODST fits the Retail Requirements of a full game:
-9+hour campaign(larger than 6 hours)
-1000 independent GS(not related to Halo 3 GS in any way there is 750 GS also available on the Halo 3 multiplayer)
This here in the marketing world Labels ODST as a Full Retail game and is being Priced at $60 like any other full retail game.


As well ODST has:
-A second game mode
-Multiplayer Co-op
Please note that with these features included in a large title often increases the price of the game by $10. In ODST it does not.


So in the end is ODST worth $60?
-By marketing standards YES
-By your standards? Read the above and answer your self reasonably and truthfully. Then ask if it is just your disappointment in it now fitting the above requirements and hence being more expensive than you planned, or are you truly being ripped off? again answer yourself tuthfully.

  • 08.10.2009 11:10 AM PDT

Duracell.
I don't keep going and going and going and...
but i Start, and just don't Stop.

So what if the saxophone is black?
it has better tone the the gold one.
damn straight i play Jazz.

Posted by: jonesy90000
i agree that mw2 will sell more but reach will then break all records and become the most sold game for xbox


that makes it the most sold game ever, cause halo 3 is holding that right now

  • 08.10.2009 11:10 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Tai MT
4. If you already own Halo 3 (and why would you be in these forums if you DIDN'T own it already?) then there's no need for Firefight to have a "multiplayer" type option. The one you have is "Firefight". To be honest, Firefight looks far more balanced and fun than standard Halo 3 Matchmaking is. There is no way to get matched against people better than yourself, while having all the idiots on your team with Firefight. The enemy team can't glitch out of a level, or with a weapon, or even a kill. Lag cannot help the enemy get kills and allow them to shoot you through walls. Firefight, in my opinion, will be far superior to the standard play of Halo 3 multiplayer. Especially since all anyone uses in Halo 3 is a Battle Rifle. Gameplay has gotten dull and stale, and I welcome this change.


Totally agree. I'm gonna quit MM unless my friends wanna play on Social and I'll go FF all the way.

  • 08.10.2009 11:22 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

J D O S H

Posted by: Charlie50011
some very long posts here


CHARLIE'S BACK!

On topic though, ODST will be great, nonetheless of MW2 I still think ODST will be better, more sells or less...ODST ALL THE WAY!

  • 08.10.2009 11:36 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2