: To throw my words in my face, basically calling me an idiot for accepting it
: . . . kinda pisses me off. Why should I care if multiplayer isn't working?
: That's not the reason I bought it. I played one match of Halo 3, said,
: "Wow, that's neat," and never touched it again. I don't care;
: it's not why I own the MCC. I've played through three Halo games with zero
: problems. It's proved well worth sixty bucks from me, so I don't care
: about any of it's problems and how pissed everyone else is.

There's nothing wrong with only caring about campaign, but offering it as a defense is kind of banal.

In an alternate universe, 434 Productions releases a version of the MCC that is literally just a Halo-skinned version of this. That's all the game is--you pop in the disc or select the game from your library, and it's just that screen. No campaign, no multiplayer. It was supposed to be an easter egg, but a bug made everything else about the game inaccessible, so it's just that graphic and that music.

On the Ringworld.Jingle.Net forums, Schooly B pens a rousing, full-throated defense of 434:

I don't care that campaign and multiplayer aren't accessible. That's NOT the reason I bought the game. I bought it because I want my Halo game collection to be complete and because the box art is sick. THAT'S IT. I never intended to play it, and even if I wanted to I wouldn't have the time, so I don't care about any of its problems or what the whiners say.

Is Schooly B correct? Certainly. He enjoyed what he got, and you can't prove otherwise. But at the same time, you know something is wrong about the whole thing.