: But that's the general impression I've gotten from the studio over the past
: five or so years. They (broadly speaking, as a company) see Microsoft as a
: hostile entity that unfairly took over their little game development
: company and enslaved them for ten years -- they've said as much on their
: website in job postings. I also heard that they used Reach as a testing
: ground for potential gameplay mechanics for Destiny, like bloom, AAs, and
: loadouts, all of which didn't really fit in the Halo sandbox . . .

Obviously, I can't really speak to the veracity of any of that, because I wasn't there. However, I don't really get that feeling at all, at least not to the extent you seem to see it.

Whatever they feel and say behind closed doors, I don't think Bungie has really given the impression of being anything but appreciative of everything Microsoft has done for them, and allowed them to do while they were there.

We'll never know where Bungie would have ended up without Microsoft, but with the amount of talent at the studio, I think they'd still be successful. But it's hard to argue that the route they took didn't given them a jumpstart to that, and I would think they all know that, and I haven't seen any of them say otherwise.

Everything they've ever said about breaking away from Microsoft seemed to be more in a joking tone to me, just making light of the situation. Just relief to not have to be making Halo and nothing but Halo anymore.

As for Reach being a Destiny test bed: I'm okay with it. Reach is one of my favorite Halo games, if not in the top slot. There's honestly not a single thing I dislike about it, story retcons included. I'd even disagree that things they added (bloom, loadouts) don't belong in Halo. I thought they worked fantastically, certainly much better than the route 343i has taken (not that I'm trying to start that debate again).

Granted, I've made a lot of assumptions about things I know basically nothing about, so who knows. I just don't really see what you see, I guess.