GTAV's 5 years of development vs Halo 4's 5 years in developme

[IDredMan]

I just thought of something, I was talking to my friend about GTAV and said it was in development for 5 years, so it's been refined, and he brought up Halo 4 and said look how that turned out, and it got me thinking.

Grand Theft Auto V's 5 years of development is completely different than Halo 4's 5 years in development.

So I thought I'd compare, so here we go.

 

In 5 years, Rockstar took the time to bring back many and most of the fan favorite and beloved weapons from the older Grand Theft Auto games. And give us lots and lots of extra weapons.

In 5 years, 343I brought back only a small percentage of the weapons, leaving out many fan favorites, and left Halo 4 with a UNSC and Covenant weapon count so low, it's only beaten by Halo 1, a 2001 game. And only add 10 new weapons, with only 3 not hated by everyone.

 

In 5 years, Rockstar has managed to bring back dozens upon dozens of infamous and beloved vehicles from older Grand Theft Auto games, and not be restricted to those, but create tons more, ranging from pedestrian vehicles to sport vehicles to military equipment.

In 5 years, 343I removed many many useful and fun vehicles and replaced them with an OP Mech, while making the long awaited Pelican and making it better than anyone ever imagined, but putting it in a short 'Go from A to B' section.

 

In 5 years, Rockstar has created a lengthy campaign filled with diverse and (Hopefully) fun missions.

In 5 years, 343I has managed to make the shortest and most linear Halo campaign ever.

 

In 5 years, Rockstar actually listened to the community, carefully thinking and listening before adding any element.

In 5 years, 343I decided to add every aspect the Halo community didn't like.

 

In 5 years, Rockstar has been working hard constantly on GTAV to finish it and polish it enough in time, not scared of delaying it or pushing it back.

In 5 years, 343I managed to release an unfinished product that has less features than Halo 1, a game released in 2001 without even being run on the best technology around.

 

 

 

Now, I'm not hating on Halo 4, I quite enjoy it from time to time, but I'm just saying that the Halo 4 Game Of The Year edition is the ACTUAL finished product that should have launched last November. And that Rockstar's last 5 years have been nothing like 343I's.

[Kihz]

Kay.

[Pizza-Kun]

I wouldn't play Halo 4 if you payed me any amount of cash.

[twigs2001]

[IDredMan]

 

 

 

tl;dr : Halo 4's development time isn't worth a year of GTAV's development time.

[Showstopper 26]

What about Skyrim?

[QuietSundayLibrary]

 

 

 

 

tl;dr : Halo 4's development time isn't worth a year of GTAV's development time.

 

You wonder how they manage to find their way around a message board, much less a wet paper bag.

[Mr. Rocko]

I heard Halo 4 flopped. When it came out there was alot of people on its tip, then a month or 2 later, I haven't heard anything about it. Shame because I was a big Halo 2 fan.

[IDredMan]

I heard Halo 4 flopped. When it came out there was alot of people on its tip, then a month or 2 later, I haven't heard anything about it. Shame because I was a big Halo 2 fan.

As a Halo fan, I'd recommend the Halo 4 Game Of The Year Edition, it comes with all the pre-order bonuses, full SpOps (Which only started being good after episode 6) all the DLC, Force Island and all the patches that made the game playable, and it's only $50.

That's what should have been released last Nov, not the vanilla Halo 4.

[Magic_Al]

L.A. Noire took 7 years but in a bad way, due to changing goals and mismanagement. As a linear adventure game it's wonderful, but it's haunted by a huge open world map that feels unfinished without more interactivity.

 

And nothing need be said about Duke Nukem Forever.

[Hakosuka]

Halo 4 isn't a bad game; it's actually pretty fun. I play it from time to time mainly because I could hardly find matches in 3 or Reach. My only complaint with Halo 4 was that it just didn't feel like, well, Halo. You can't compare the two development times because GTA V is a bigger and more diverse game while Halo is a linear shooter. The 5-year time for each game was spent on different things. Plus, GTA V, from my knowledge, had a bigger development team.

Edited September 9, 2013 by Hakosuka

[Hodor Hodor]

I played Halo 4 ay a mates house it was horrible compared to number 3, it was very short and restricted and Halo 5 is coming out soon.

 

I'm happy that rockstar actually listen to their fans and take their time making brilliant games.

[m00n_Chaser]

I must say, Halo 4 was the first game I actually preordered, but I was quite disappointed. The game was way too short and didn't even capture the main gameplay I so loved from reach. In fact, it felt like a downgraded clone. Reach was very good times, long commendations, great multiplayer, and the gameplay finally felt just right, but 4 mostly just shortened everything, the ranking is way quicker, less armour customisation, all- in- all it was just a much shorter game. And they also messed up the balance in multiplayer by adding custom load- outs.

 

I hope R* did better on GTA V than 343 did on Halo 4.

[IDredMan]

L.A. Noire took 7 years but in a bad way, due to changing goals and mismanagement. As a linear adventure game it's wonderful, but it's haunted by a huge open world map that feels unfinished without more interactivity.

 

And nothing need be said about Duke Nukem Forever.

Yeah, but I still enjoyed every second of L.A. Noire, it was amazing, it wasn't GTA, but it was still amazing.