Agreed, i just can’t believe this stuff wasn’t in the game in the first place.
3 Likes
can you guys add in mulptiple races with customization?
YES. This argument definitely needs more attention. Everybody complained about the progression system and 343 changed it in THREE DAYS. If enough people shout about these customization issues, I think (hope) 343 will do something about it soon.
3 Likes
And just to be clear, I do also think segregating unlockables by “cores” is awful and distressingly arbitrarily limiting when it comes to the player’s end. Especially since it seems there is evidence this is not due to any technical limitations. But I wanted this post to mainly focus on one easy thing, and perhaps find a good ratio of likely:impactful change we could get.
2 Likes
I don’t see how Microsoft would sit down and tell them to remove custom colours and only have preset colours. I really don’t see why they would care. The decision was made entirely by the studio.
1 Like
More profit = more money in Microsoft’s pocket. Saying Microsoft isn’t behind it is like pinning the devs of EA, and Activision games as money hungry. The devs aren’t the problem.
Warframe proves you can monetise a colour system while allowing player expression at the same time.
The base colour pallet for that one for example allow you to choose the basic colours to put on your warframe, a system like this for Infinite’s armour would be perfect.
4 Likes
i don’t understand why they changed what wasn’t broken. The old customization system was perfect. But what they’ve done with colors as well as emblems… I just wish I was in on the meeting where they justified this to themselves. It was a bad choice.
3 Likes
Rn we need to shine a light on Warframe, since that game proves you can monetise the colour system while allowing us to choose the colours we have, encourage 343 to take influence from that for the armour to help guide to a good compromise.
Something to show that it doesn’t have to be this way.
3 Likes
"Halo 3 was so successful due to a lack of competition… " that is blatantly false
Call of Duty Modern Warfare
The Orange Box
Just to name some off the top of my head, one of them being the start of the hugest series ever, you are getting less for more, at 60 dollars you get more content and customization at this point. “The population stats that old halo wasn’t quite doing the trick” I feel you never once played halo before 4 or 5
1 Like
that and Halo 3 was still exclusive on one system, not PC like nowadays.
Halo 3 sold 12 million copies, compare that to a game like Fortnite now that has over 350 million accounts registered. At any one time you may see 3+ million players online.
Apex averages about 140k players a month, MCC averages about 7k on Steam. The Halo population is extremely low, of course they needed to do something to change it up.
Players have got a myriad of new and old games to play. You’ve got people playing pretty much every Call of Duty population split across at least 2-3 titles at any one time, GTA, Apex, Fortnite, Valorant, Rainbox Six, DOOM, Battlefield, Splitgate, Halo, Warzone, Game Pass games, free MOBAs, you have crossplatform games and so many free games. The quality of free games is exceptional at this point. There are so many games. Halo 3 was in a bubble as for most it was their first taste of online gaming.
Back in 2007 you had Gears, Halo, CoD, some other games but the population wasn’t as highly split. People couldn’t just go play anything else. There were no free alternatives, not many high quality multiplayer games in general.
I have played over 10,000 games of the original Halo 3. I played a little Halo 2 online before that and I also played a little Halo CE on PC before that. But I started with Halo 3. I’m just talking realistically, my aim isn’t to offend. The Halo brand was in definite need of a shake up, competition bar is far higher now, much harder to pull other gamers away.
Fortnite being a FTP game, Halo 3 being a console exclusive title that you paid for.
That is entirely my point. I’m not downplaying Halo’s success. I’m saying the changes made are necessary for a game to prosper in today’s environment.
People saying “well Halo 3 did it”, need to consider that Halo 3 did it in a completely different time period and set of circumstances that would be unlikely to succeed today.
I know you’re not downplaying, im just saying keep in mind the contexts of success for the times that they were in.
just to make sure, we still on about the coatings?
cause if so, an alternative way exists, Warframe’s Pallet system, give me the base colours to mess with and charge me for more variety rather than restrictive combinations that have a 50/50 chance of being on the armour core I use.
what im saying is “A better way exists to keep players happy and making buck, it exists, its out there, its in a FTP title.”
1 Like
Yeah sorry have crossed over replying to someone else a bit there.
Correct me if I’m wrong as I’m not a Warframe player, but the colour pallette isn’t the most marketable thing they sell right? Because of resources. Compared to Halo where it is pretty much one of the few major sales points right now.
As bad as it is to say, the more stuff we get, the less they can monetise. It’s probably why stuff is locked to kits as well.
The Kits really annoy me.
and thats fine, sometimes we all have multiple convos at once.
It isn’t the most marketable thing no, but I feel its a good compromise between monetisation and player expression, since it at least allows the decency to let us choose our colours, the pallets I also believe are roughly 20 plat, though im gonna have to double check that notion.
this can be expanded on with colour types, ie “Matte, Metallic etc”. something which Anthem oddly had, and while that game was abysmal due to a messy dev cycle and lack of focus, that was one of the best parts of the game.
Doom 2016 is actually a perfect Blueprint for colour customisation, if the game wasn’t FTP most likely.
I just refuse to accept the current system due to knowing that a better way exists, also from a FTP title.
1 Like
I get ya, that makes sense. I know they are juggling the attempt to retain some semblance of artistic design too but I feel that may fall to the wayside if sales aren’t performing within their desired metrics.
All I can say is to anyone unhappy with the current setup, vote with your wallets.
I was so keen to get eSports stuff day one. But as it is kit restricted I’ve held my ground.
I actually like the armour core system as is, just not the restrictiveness of colour customisation, nor visors, especially when armour effects are universal, I don’t like how technically all armour cores in their parts have been monetised so aggressvely.
im also ok with weapon and vehicle skins being paid, thats fine, thats gimmicky stuff for temporary tools in combat, helps their base design looks good by default, but armour? especially with how the matches emphasise showing your look? thats where I draw the line.
1 Like
I think it’s wildly unrealistic to assert that Halo Infinite will not make enough money to maintain their game’s service with something which is even slightly less aggressive. Based on the success of other AAA titles, and even the pre-sales of Halo Infinite’s campaign, it’s clear the service could be supported with even a small fraction of the post-launch monetization they are going for. It’s obvious they aren’t going for money to pay the workers, they are going for maximum amounts of pure profit.
Please understand that all profitability is not equal, and in this case and many others, profitability in the short terms does not equal “success” if it detracts from profitability in the long term. The values involved with maintaining a free-to-play economy in the competitive market of online shooters extends beyond simply currency; extends beyond making every conceivable cent, especially in a way which appears hostile to consumers and alienates members of the player-base. Even unpaid players are valuable to the economy of free-to-play games. Every day the customization and progression system is available in it’s current state, 343/Microsoft is bleeding social capital which could otherwise be sold for profit in some more measured way down the line. I hate talking about us fans and members of the Halo community in such cold economic terms of course; we are not cattle who only exist as profit engines. But my point is that even in your cold economic terms, the logic for these decisions is not sound. Because many players also feel like they’re being treated as profit engines, and this is an alienating sensation which causes other people to move on to other, more strategically monetized games with greater longevity (and therefore ultimately more “successful” in the capitalist sense) games.
Saying “vote with your wallets” completely misses all that, and of course wholly misrepesents the concept of “voting”; If a person literally cannot afford to pay $20 for a “white” armor coating, they are not “voting with their wallets”, they are simply barred from participating in part of the designed experieince.
1 Like