Official Thread Halo: Infinite - Season 5 - Firefight Returns
- Thread starter karmakid
- Start date
People are misunderstanding the outsourcing part. Employees hate outsourcing for numerous reasons. All the big tech companies are doing it a lot. Its huge throughout all of Microsoft. Reason? You can be more agile within budget. Yes there's quality control risks but generally thats mitigated by the extra manpower you can throw at a project in full production. It makes perfect sense that Halo Infinite is outsourcing more than usual. Reason? Game engine. You dont need to permanently higher people for something thats a 1 time massive overhaul. In addition as budget for Xbox increased in 2018, my bet is they increased the scope of the game. Contracting is the fastest way to ramp up.
To me the issues aren't contracting. Thats a symptom. It can still be rectified as long as they give it the proper time.
To me the issues aren't contracting. Thats a symptom. It can still be rectified as long as they give it the proper time.
I don't want to move off topic too much but I'm wondering have you ever been involved in out sourcing? I've been outsourced twice and insourced once. It is an absolutely chaotic experience during hand over. Projects get delayed left and right, people get reassigned, quit, let go, etc, product ownership changes, toolsets change, knowledge transfer becomes a new buzz word, partner process starts to impact when contract disagreements happen and more. There is no way that outsourcing did not have a negative impact on this.
Just to give a perspective, Naughty Dog outsourced to 14 different studios for The Last of Us 2 in order to finish the game at dead lines.
Sony Santa Monica and Insomniac do too, SSM is kinda notorious for that and kinda a red flag to other studios if ya worked with them. The Initiative sounds like it may be on the same path as them
If Naughty Dog, 343, Turn 10 outsource, there must be hundreds of others that outsource.Sony Santa Monica and Insomniac do too, SSM is kinda notorious for that and kinda a red flag to other studios if ya worked with them. The Initiative sounds like it may be on the same path as them
I don't think it's necessarily that they outsourced, but more that they mismanaged the inherent complexity of following that model.
Well, they were wrong about the show, and everyone outsources. So more than likely, the entire article is false.
It is clear that the development of this game has been rough with a lot of hurdles.
Hopefully they can figure out how to fix it all. They should take as much time as necessary to give Halo Infinite the treatment it deserves. Otherwise it is time to get rid of management at 343 and bring in fresh talent that may revitalize the Halo franchise. That and I am still of the strong opinion that they need to give 343 free reign to do a completely new IP. I know that is not a popular opinion, but I think giving them creative freedom on something new to play with new ideas may make Halo better in the long run.
Also I think they should make this a next gen game only.
I know they are big on forward/backward comparability going into next gen, but it is clear the game is being held back. I was one of the people that didn't think the game being scaled to each console in the xbox family would be a problem, because it's Microsoft. They are software wizards. But I can admit that I was wrong.
Game was no where near up to snuff for a showcase launch title for your new most powerful console ever even if the game has to run on the One X and One S. Maybe the game should be strictly an xcloud game for the One X and One S, or at least the One S.
The game just did not look good. And I know people say that Halo was never a looker, but I though Halo 4 and 5 both looked really great graphics wise, even though their scope was much smaller in comparison.
But even then, that is not excuse when a game like Red Dead 2 is out there running on my One X at Native 4K and looks better than what was shown of Halo Infinite. Even when taking under consideration the differing art style, just way Arthur interacts with the world and how the world reacts to Arthur's movements is on another level. I mean the damn warthog didn't leave tire tracks on the ground. Chief stepping in puddles did not create ripples in the water. Grass did not move as Chief walked through it. That simply is not acceptable on your marquee franchise.
Maybe they should drop the slipspace engine and go with Unreal that seems to be far more scalable for future titles?
Just my 2 cents.
Hopefully they can figure out how to fix it all. They should take as much time as necessary to give Halo Infinite the treatment it deserves. Otherwise it is time to get rid of management at 343 and bring in fresh talent that may revitalize the Halo franchise. That and I am still of the strong opinion that they need to give 343 free reign to do a completely new IP. I know that is not a popular opinion, but I think giving them creative freedom on something new to play with new ideas may make Halo better in the long run.
Also I think they should make this a next gen game only.
I know they are big on forward/backward comparability going into next gen, but it is clear the game is being held back. I was one of the people that didn't think the game being scaled to each console in the xbox family would be a problem, because it's Microsoft. They are software wizards. But I can admit that I was wrong.
Game was no where near up to snuff for a showcase launch title for your new most powerful console ever even if the game has to run on the One X and One S. Maybe the game should be strictly an xcloud game for the One X and One S, or at least the One S.
The game just did not look good. And I know people say that Halo was never a looker, but I though Halo 4 and 5 both looked really great graphics wise, even though their scope was much smaller in comparison.
But even then, that is not excuse when a game like Red Dead 2 is out there running on my One X at Native 4K and looks better than what was shown of Halo Infinite. Even when taking under consideration the differing art style, just way Arthur interacts with the world and how the world reacts to Arthur's movements is on another level. I mean the damn warthog didn't leave tire tracks on the ground. Chief stepping in puddles did not create ripples in the water. Grass did not move as Chief walked through it. That simply is not acceptable on your marquee franchise.
Maybe they should drop the slipspace engine and go with Unreal that seems to be far more scalable for future titles?
Just my 2 cents.
Last edited:
They're trying to get this thing out next year. I don't think they can change engines at this stage.
Some of those things are so basic that I pretty much have no doubt they would've made it into the release had the game not been delayed; I think after learning that the demo was literally just a raw ass build instead of something where a team took a build and 2-3 months to polish up just for show, I feel like maybe there is a bit more leeway to say that something missing like a basic feature might just be in the process of being upgraded or was bugged so it was disabled just for the sake of having a build to show. There's no way they'd have an active build in the middle of finishing the game that they would be able to polish up to final levels in just three weeks to show.
Not making an excuse for what they showed, just trying to reason on how something as basic as water reacting even basically could be missing; that doesn't seem like something they'd ship with.
Considering game would be released in November, shouldn't the game be mostly playable today? I mean, wouldn't they have a fresh daily build that run somewhat fine and looked like the finished game graphically at this point? Gameplay wasn't played irl either so if something glitched they should've just replay it?
true, but it’s like the Bermuda Triangle for said three, if they see you worked for the competition they prefer you stick to them, if you’re a local independent contractor
So, Flight Simulator 2020 was designed with Xbox One in mind. In fact they said they were building the PC/Xbox version at the same time. Is anyone getting the impression that the Xbox One held back FS2020? I mean if it did hold it back, would FS2020 look better than real life?
Maybe I just have no idea what I am talking about.
You sure about that? Seems like they primarily made the game for PC in mind first. There is no release date for an xbox version. I expect it to be on Series X only to be honest.
Either that or then Asobo is a far more talented studio than 343.
Microsoft issues update on Flight Simulator 2020 Xbox One release
While Flight Simulator's Xbox One release appears a while out, it's already aided with PC optimizations.
www.windowscentral.com
The company has outlined plans to bring Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 to the Xbox console family but continues to stress its latest as a "PC-first" project. The studio initially serves an established PC following its first iteration, while remaining tight on when Xbox players will be ready for take-off. But already promised for Xbox One, with the next-gen Xbox Series X console scheduled to ship this holiday, the title has a clear opening on the platform. In the meantime, the studio continues to reiterate more to come "at a later date."
Q&A touched on its Xbox One development, and whether the near decade-old hardware has held back the scope of the project.
"No. We are trying to have the best visuals on every single platform, and it's another layer of optimization," said Martial Bossard, lead software engineer at Asobo Studio. "By the way, the Xbox will help us to optimize the product, so it will also be a benefit for PC. There is nothing PC will lose from the Xbox. It's basically the opposite. We're doing the work to have a better experience on the Xbox family, then we will improve the PC version at the same time."
I could be reading it wrong.
Microsoft issues update on Flight Simulator 2020 Xbox One release
While Flight Simulator's Xbox One release appears a while out, it's already aided with PC optimizations.
The company has outlined plans to bring Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 to the Xbox console family but continues to stress its latest as a "PC-first" project. The studio initially serves an established PC following its first iteration, while remaining tight on when Xbox players will be ready for take-off. But already promised for Xbox One, with the next-gen Xbox Series X console scheduled to ship this holiday, the title has a clear opening on the platform. In the meantime, the studio continues to reiterate more to come "at a later date."
Q&A touched on its Xbox One development, and whether the near decade-old hardware has held back the scope of the project.
"No. We are trying to have the best visuals on every single platform, and it's another layer of optimization," said Martial Bossard, lead software engineer at Asobo Studio. "By the way, the Xbox will help us to optimize the product, so it will also be a benefit for PC. There is nothing PC will lose from the Xbox. It's basically the opposite. We're doing the work to have a better experience on the Xbox family, then we will improve the PC version at the same time."
I could be reading it wrong.
Nice. I still expect the xbox one version to be dropped and it being ported strictly for Series X.
And if they are able to port it to xbox one, then give them the halo franchise because it would be in far better hands than 343 with half the developers.
I can't argue that. But my point was that FS2020 hasn't been held back. Or if it has been, it's pretty damn impressive for being held back. The Xbox One would have to be online only of course, in order to get the entire earth and bing map and flight updates. FS2020 shows me that they can build a game for PC/XSX and down port. Maybe some companies are just better at porting...maybe Asobo > 343
Asobo seems to have a s*** load of talent. MS should swipe them up.
Maybe the difference with Halo Infinite is that it was built for Xbox One and scaled up to Series X where as FS2020 was built PC first and is being scaled down?
That WC article says that FS2020 was treated as a PC first project.
Yes....and it sucks. Lol
However all large tech companies do it. Obviously managing it, specifically the transitional stuff is key. The AAA game industry specifically does it a lot. The point is its not something new for them. In of itself, its not the problem. Managing it and the reasons why they scaled so much are more important causes.
Playable, yeah. The game is more than likely playable from start to finish I would bet.
Bugs are hammered out until the title goes gold and that likely wouldn't have been about 2 more months; until then things are usually in a constant state of being broken/fixed.
Most graphical features are likely in place but being fine tuned, but according to what they said afterwards, some of them were currently still WIP/bugged, so they weren't on.
I've personally seen some disastrous stuff in active builds in some of the QA testing I've done; I'm not going to name any names but some massive AAA stuff I've tested, just months from launch were still crashing left and right, graphical glitches galore, placeholder art still, players falling through geometry and accidentally teleporting into broken areas etc etc.. like so messed up that you'd think that the Halo Infinite reactions were all overreactions in comparison. I never saw late late builds of the game, but I was legit baffled it didn't get delayed and even more surprised when it launched mostly fine for the most part, though it did have some graphical downgrades from the initial showing, but they absolutely killed it with squashing all of the bugs.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Halo delay is actually for pushing the graphics further than the past demo (2018.), rather than just meeting lower expectations.
Last edited:
So... basically every 3d fallout game ever released... in finished state.
I couldn't imagine a Bethesda game without jank, that'd be life changing probably.
Seems like he isn’t willing to give a source. Dubious at best.