Common sense dictates that if you ask a dev to do a MP game for $5M, then ask them after the fact to include a single-player campaign, then say it should be 30 hrs long, they are going to need more money.  That's A LOT of extra work/time that needs to be invested.  As well as extra money that would possibly go towards writers and voice actors.  Bottom line is this is all a result of very poor communication from MS, and there lack of want to invest more money to get more game.

...

Quite honestly, I don't think I believe it. MS aren't some amateurs in the gaming business. Making significantly more content with no extra money doesn't make a lot of sense.

We're just hearing one side of a story. Also, if MS doesn't want to spend money why is the game being moved to another studio? Lets remember the game hasn't been cancelled.

Here's the thing, MS has published many games and worked with many studio. Something really went wrong with this one, there must be more to the story.

No point in bringing Halo into this. That has been a massive success for MS.

TBH MS made a mistake by giving this project to an unknown studio they should have just given the project to Yukio Futatsugi's (the original creator of the game) studio Grounding Inc. I'm pretty sure that they could made the game with that budget and make a better product than Darkside Studios.
I'm glad that they canned Darksides version of the game because the alpha footage looked bad like if they just ported the original game and updated the graphics a little.

We don't exactly know that.  EA only announced Titanfall's sales for the first month, which was only an announcement of 925K for the month of March for the US.  That suggests to me that the WW launch must have not been much higher, so maybe 1.1M-1.2M.  After that, they refused to update sales.  This, plus the fact that the online player count dropped significantly after a few months and the sequel is coming to the PS4, tells me that sales must have dropped quite a bit after the initial launch.  I kinda doubt it has sold the 2.6M that VGC has it listed at for XBO.  And it's definitely not the next COD they were hoping it to be.

So, I think MS was looking at that drop and thinking that maybe a single player campaign might not only help sales of the game among gamers who prefer single-player, but also might help its longetivity with gamers who like both SP and MP. 

Also, the game company only asked for more money after MS decided the campaign should be ~30 hrs, instead of just 6 hrs.  In other words, they were asking for only $2M-3M more for an extra ~24 hrs of gameplay/story.  Not really that bad considering MS probably throws 10x that amount on ad campaigns for Halo.

As would Journey, which was also way over budget and over deadline.  I'll stick with Sony's methods.  Of course, they've also canceled some big projects, so it's hardly a "one size fits all" situation.

As for the OP, without knowing the details and progress of the work, I have no idea how anyone can decide that it was a good or bad move.  It could have been a decision based on money, on quality, or a combination of those two factors.

sad the game has gone the way it has, hopefully the game doesn't fall into limbo status, feel bad for Darkside the tone of the article put MS in a bad light, I do find it odd that MS ask them to put in a single-player component and not give them any additional funds, which seems more ridiculous as if MS has given the project to another studio that's more money they have to spend or the other studio is even on a more tighter budget than Darkside and if they stared where Darkside left off.

If all said is true an extra 1-2 million doesn't seem like an enormous amount(like i handle that kinda money lol) exclusive usually get a boost just for being "exclusive" I'm sure with advertising something MS is really good ay the game could sold well enough to earn the 8 mil back...like 200k which should be doable(has an exclusive sold less than that?)

Wait so we are believing the word of a bunch of angry people that just got fired, that use to work for an unprovened studio that might have had zero talent and be hugely overestimated by MS. And we are to believe MS moved the project after 2million sunk and will lose some money in the process just because they say he said blabla....

I feel more a bunch of butt hurt people that weren't capable to do what they were asked periods.... This isn't a charity, it's business either you deliver in the terms of the customer or just get the fuck out period...

I remember a console maker that had a futuristic vision of the gaming market which was years ahead of the competition with their concept and had a major backlash in sales... I don't see all the whiners and finger pointers complaining about the archaic and has been state of mind of the competition customer choices...

Game looked terrible. I can see why it was cancelled.

That said it, it looked terrible before E3 yet MS used it at E3 as a "big announcement". If it was so terrible why do that.

after reading the article its pretty clear microsoft were massive assholes. they constantly added and changed requests and ideas, they treated the company like shit, and they basically drove the company down to bankruptcy. and here we are people are defending MS. did anybody really real the full article?