Yeah, I still get a kick out of checking my speed.  Seeing how much things have increased, over the ~20 years I've had net access at home...it's freakin nuts.   But, I'm more than aware that these speeds just aren't accessible (or affordable) by everyone.  Devs and Console makers really need to take that into account when they have these massive updates.  Not that I don't appreciate the extra effort, I'm sure all gamer's do.  It's just...well, many of those gamer's won't have the option to, and it's extremely unfair to those individuals to have day 1 updates of this size.

zero129 said: I dont even know why people are complaining about this. Most likely this is just for multi player content something someone with no internet couldnt use anyways, and for everyone else just play the campaign until the download is finished or maybe you can play whats already on the disc online while you wait for the rest to download?. and if you have a real slow internet multiplayer must suck anyway with the lag .

You hit the nail right on the head.

jlmurph2 said: zero129 said: I dont even know why people are complaining about this. Most likely this is just for multi player content something someone with no internet couldnt use anyways, and for everyone else just play the campaign until the download is finished or maybe you can play whats already on the disc online while you wait for the rest to download?. and if you have a real slow internet multiplayer must suck anyway with the lag . You hit the nail right on the head.

Not really, MP gaming doesn't require a massive amount of bandwidth, if you're not hosting (and even if you are, it's still not that big of a bandwidth hog).  Now, if it's as Zero suggest, and it's simply MP content and it's not a required Day 1 update, that's ok.  I still think it'd be a good move for them to come up with an alternative for folks who don't have high bandwidth/cap at their disposal.  On the other hand, not to denigrate the SP (I'm sure it's great), but wasn't the MP the bigger aspect of it's popularity (could be wrong, of course)?

So even if i buy this games in the near future let say 6 years from now, do I still have to download 20 gb? If i have to download the game then, thats mean if the server is going down, then this games is probably failed before it's even sale it  to the gamers.

Then why not span the game over two disks instead? If it was definitely done prior to going to print, then forcing people to download a 20 GB patch just to save 40 cents on another disk is pretty petty. Given that it runs off the HDD you'd only need to put the second disk in for the install, once thats done it would be like every other game from a usability point of view, so I don't get your point about two disks ruining the unified interface.  

I have FIOS and it won't take me anywhere close to 3-4 hours.

Anyway, interesting to see some people twist this as a negative. It's just a shitload of content. It doesn't seem like it affects anyone not interested in online play and if you have bad data caps you probably aren't playing online much anyway.

No it's 4 games, it wouldn't all fit on one disc. They didn't cheap out on the game, that's what this says. The disc is full.

It's 4 games, it won't fit.

daredevil.shark said: From twitter.   David Scammell ‏@VG_Dave Halo: The Master Chief Collection will have a 20GB day one "content update".     Source: Halo: The Master Chief Collection will have a 20GB day one "content update". — Dave Scammell (@VG_Dave) October 17, 2014

Dude add this to the forum or all you're doing is allowing people to make up random ideas to Trash XBOX.

343 Industries have revealed that players will need to download a day one patch of 20GB in order to play Halo: The Master Chief Collection when it launches this November exclusively for the Xbox One, because they've already utilised all of the space on a standard Blu-ray disc.

A horrible disease which makes you bleed all over and has a high mortality rate = a 20 gb patch.

Man.