Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: Who's the one who said Halo 4 didn't need a beta?
  • Subject: Who's the one who said Halo 4 didn't need a beta?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Who's the one who said Halo 4 didn't need a beta?

"If you want to test a man's character, give him power" -- Abraham Lincoln

Its not that certain parts were implemented terribly, its that as a whole the multiplayer was implemented sloppily.

  • 12.06.2012 2:56 PM PDT

Online ID: GriffGraff15

Halo 4 had a beta, just like every other AAA game in the last decade.

It was just a closed beta

  • 12.06.2012 2:57 PM PDT

If Halo 4 had had a beta, not as many people would have bought the game.

It's simple as that. 343 wanted you to BUY the game in order to criticise them, instead of letting you play a beta for you to complain on forums about how that game wasn't worth buying.

  • 12.06.2012 3:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Idiots, mostly.

  • 12.06.2012 3:00 PM PDT

"Why concentrate on the negative when we can speak of the positive?"
My File Share
Try using the Search Bar next time.
Halo 2 was the best Halo game
A7x FoREVer!

I think Halo fans were spoiled with the Halo 3 and Reach betas... In order to make a public beta, the developer has to spend additional time creating it. If we had a Halo 4 beta, then the game probably wouldn't have been ready until 2013. Besides, Halo 4 has the same amount of glitches most other releases have. Thankfully, none of them are game breaking (such as Skyrim on PS3).


Also, everyone claiming Halo 4 is broken is making that assumptions based off their opinion. The game is not broken, it just plays differently then previous Halo games (like every Halo sequel has). Listening to you guys rant about changes 343i made and call them "glitches" or "broken" is getting really old. Its like the Halo 2, 3, and Reach forum resurrected itself inside the Flood.

[Edited on 12.06.2012 3:10 PM PST]

  • 12.06.2012 3:06 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2