Halo Reach Co-op can't be played on 4GB Slims

Avatar image for nintendoll
#1 Edited by nintendoll (26 posts) -
Avatar image for jakob187
#2 Edited by jakob187 (22924 posts) -

LULZ? 
 
That's definitely messed up.  I wonder why that's happening.

Avatar image for liquidprince
#3 Posted by LiquidPrince (16846 posts) -

That... sucks...

Avatar image for prolix
#4 Posted by Prolix (189 posts) -

Welcome to mycrosoft.  lol  
 
Great way to get people to buy shit.

Avatar image for nintendoll
#5 Posted by nintendoll (26 posts) -

It's really weird, since the multiplayer works fine...how can you have a working multiplayer but not co-op? I don't know enough about games/memory/technology in general to know :/

Avatar image for re_player1
#6 Posted by RE_Player1 (8007 posts) -

That sucks. I was thinking about picking up a 4GB model but if this is an example of what's to come than no thank you. 

Avatar image for inf225
#7 Posted by Inf225 (513 posts) -

Thats pretty lame, I don't see how anything in reach could cache 4gbs, the disc itself is capped it 6.8gbs

Avatar image for rockaholica
#8 Posted by Rockaholica (23 posts) -

If the article is accurate the worst part is that 16GB of USB storage would not help...that's more usable space than you get out of the O.G. 20GB 360 HDD

Avatar image for nintendoll
#9 Posted by nintendoll (26 posts) -

Also, if you bought a copy in the UK you're extra screwed, as the Slim hard drives don't go on sale until the end of the month. 
 
Gives you enough time to play through the single player campaign I guess.

Avatar image for empirepaintball
#10 Posted by Empirepaintball (1466 posts) -

Why would you only have a 4GB Anything?
Avatar image for sethphotopoulos
#11 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5777 posts) -

That is fucked.

Avatar image for baron_calamity
#12 Posted by baron_calamity (246 posts) -

A patch better be coming. Atleast allow the use of USB drives.
Avatar image for soylentgreen
#13 Posted by SoylentGreen (278 posts) -
@baron_calamity said:

" A patch better be coming. Atleast allow the use of USB drives. "

@Rockaholica said:

" If the article is accurate the worst part is that 16GB of USB storage would not help...that's more usable space than you get out of the O.G. 20GB 360 HDD "

 I think the limiting factor there might be the data transfer rate on USB 2.0, not the amount of space available.
 
Still, this is shitty. Was this ever a problem with Halo 3 and the old Arcades?
Avatar image for rockaholica
#14 Posted by Rockaholica (23 posts) -
@SoylentGreen: I boot servers off usb flash based storage so it cant be that bad :)
Avatar image for soylentgreen
#15 Posted by SoylentGreen (278 posts) -
@Rockaholica: No offense, but continuously caching environment data, any and all art assets in the area the player is in, scripts, and whatever else a game might feel like caching is a bit different than booting a server. A boot only happens once every while and can take as long as it needs to; a game needs to store/retrieve data thousands of times a second.
Avatar image for r3qui4m
#16 Posted by R3Qui4M (494 posts) -

I know why, 4GB console reads the 4gb as memory unit. Halo Reach requires a xbox 360 hdd for theatre fileshare and coop. I'm getting screwed cuz i have a arcade with 16gb usb drive, and that doesn't work as a hard drive in halo 3, odst and reach. Please take this bungie attention i've already posted a couple of times i hope they fix it

Avatar image for ford_prefect
#17 Posted by Ford_Prefect (27 posts) -

Major bummer.

Avatar image for nintendoll
#18 Posted by nintendoll (26 posts) -

They could have at least put a note on the box saying that some features require the HDD. :/

Avatar image for jeffsekai
#19 Posted by Jeffsekai (7159 posts) -

I'm pretty sure Burnout needed a hard drive to play online as well.

Avatar image for efwefwe
#20 Posted by wefwefasdf (6730 posts) -

Ouch. That is pretty sucky. Hopefully Bungie will get a patch out for it soon.

Avatar image for sn1per
#21 Posted by Sn1PeR (153 posts) -

I'm fairly sure ODST was the same way.  I do agree that a USB drive should have worked -- I'm surprised that it doesn't.  With that said if you are in the market for a new xbox you really should get one with a big hard drive -- installing your games is the way to go for silent gameplay.

Avatar image for helushune
#22 Posted by Helushune (214 posts) -
@Sn1PeR said:
"I'm fairly sure ODST was the same way.  I do agree that a USB drive should have worked -- I'm surprised that it doesn't.  With that said if you are in the market for a new xbox you really should get one with a big hard drive -- installing your games is the way to go for silent gameplay. "

It's a much bigger security risk to have cache files sit on a USB drive that can be removed and decrypted than to have it stored on a hard drive.
Avatar image for andrewb
#23 Posted by AndrewB (7814 posts) -
@Helushune said:
" @Sn1PeR said:
"I'm fairly sure ODST was the same way.  I do agree that a USB drive should have worked -- I'm surprised that it doesn't.  With that said if you are in the market for a new xbox you really should get one with a big hard drive -- installing your games is the way to go for silent gameplay. "
It's a much bigger security risk to have cache files sit on a USB drive that can be removed and decrypted than to have it stored on a hard drive. "
And again: USB 2.0 speeds are pathetic. Not enough for the game to run properly.
Avatar image for spazmaster666
#24 Posted by spazmaster666 (2111 posts) -
@Helushune said:
It's a much bigger security risk to have cache files sit on a USB drive that can be removed and decrypted than to have it stored on a hard drive. "
That would make sense, except for the fact you can install games to USB drives as well. I would think that would be more of a security risk than cache files. ;)
Avatar image for helushune
#25 Posted by Helushune (214 posts) -
@spazmaster666 said:
" @Helushune said:
It's a much bigger security risk to have cache files sit on a USB drive that can be removed and decrypted than to have it stored on a hard drive. "
That would make sense, except for the fact you can install games to USB drives as well. I would think that would be more of a security risk than cache files. ;) "

Not really.  Installed games don't give people who manage to decrypt the files a method of editing values that would be read by the game in a later state.  Saving cached files to a drive that can be removed, decrypted, edited, then put back in is an insanely easier way to hack a game and potentially expose buffer overflows.  And, like AndrewB said, USB 2.0 speeds suck compared to a SATA connection.
Avatar image for daveyo520
#26 Posted by Daveyo520 (7747 posts) -

This makes no sense.

Avatar image for andrewb
#27 Edited by AndrewB (7814 posts) -

And you're kidding yourself if you don't think that hackers wouldn't just open up their drives and hook them up to a PC to do their hacking in the first place. The hard drive in any 360 is just a 2.5" drive; the same as you'd find in or buy for any laptop. That information is one broken warranty and one bit of software away from anyone wanting to get at the installed game files stored on them.
 
Anyway, I'd like to see some actual investigative journalism on this one. Microsoft's stance (that they're "looking into the issue") makes it seem like an actual bug. Sounds like it was like that in ODST too, so it could very well be an actual limitation of the game engine. If that's the case, I'd like to hear the technical reasoning why. I'm interested in stuff like this.

Avatar image for helushune
#28 Posted by Helushune (214 posts) -
@AndrewB said:
"And you're kidding yourself if you don't think that hackers wouldn't just open up their drives and hook them up to a PC to do their hacking in the first place. The hard drive in any 360 is just a 2.5" drive; the same as you'd find in or buy for any laptop. That information is one broken warranty and one bit of software away from anyone wanting to get at the installed game files stored on them. Anyway, I'd like to see some actual investigative journalism on this one. Microsoft's stance (that they're "looking into the issue") makes it seem like an actual bug. Sounds like it was like that in ODST too, so it could very well be an actual limitation of the game engine. If that's the case, I'd like to hear the technical reasoning why. I'm interested in stuff like this. "

It's sad because I know why but I can't say.  =P
Avatar image for joeyia
#29 Posted by JoeyIA (666 posts) -

Why didn't they just mark this on the box?  I just looked at my Xbox 360 games and some of them get very specific like, how much free space you need to save, if its 720p or 1080p etc.  To me, the shitty thing isn't that you need a HDD for co-op, its that they should have just labeled the box as such to inform people but didn't.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.