Am I the only one who feels like this is the end times for Halo?

Games Halo Infinite
186

Do you mean by rarity?
Or Energy Useage Tier?

Still stacks it in Pay-To-Win then.
Dunno what else to say really.

Yes, teams level up thier energy use by playing the match; but what cards you have to play varies intensely from player-to-player; and paid players have larger decks with extras of each card.

ERGO

Paid
To
Win

No that is not the point, that is the EXCUSE.

The point of War Zone was to gurnatee that Halo 5 was profitable.
When Halo 4 had to scrap 2/3 of the projected DLC content, they had to find a way to ensure that was not the case.
Therefore, they made a mode that was dominated by microtransactions and dumped 99% of the palyer cosmetics into it.

REQ Packs exist because they knew Halo was no longer guaranteed to be profitable.
So they did something that would guarantee more profits than Halo 4 managed.

Thus, War Zone was made.

Had they actually wanted to make it as you described it, they would’ve instead had the REQ system give you access to all weapons and vehicles, but only if you reached their energy tier level to use them.
THEN War Zone could be better than it stands right now.

Good for you.
Now, how many REQ Packs did Daddy’s Money Players earn per hour?
Definitely more than 4.
So they earned War Zone toys faster than you and had more to throw at your team if you played WZ and not WZFF.
My point still stands.
You are less capable than someone buying a $100 REQ Bundle.

Implying that I play Halo 5 Gorbians for anything other than Arena, Forge, and Custom Games.
What kind of fool do you take me for?

Don’t get me wrong, cosmetics wise it was the BEST in gaming because you

RECEIVED NO DUPLICATES

Which unlike LITERALLY every other lootbox system you saw a lot of your draws giving you dupes and then “refunding” a certain amount of points as “compensation” for a bad roll.

Honestly, if Halo Infinite adopted the REQ system for ONLY cosmetics, this would improve the shop system SIGNIFICANTLY.

1 Like
187

Rarity most likely. They seem to be delegated for that very reason.

If it did, it’s minimal.

Not when Warzone matchmakes players based on their prevailing REQ arsenal. Adding onto the point that it’s likely by REQ rarity, which also assumes relative power-scaling, then even if people don’t have the same specific REQ card, they have other REQs relative in strength.

This example is not indicative that Warzone is pay-to-win.

Can you source, like, any of this?

Doesn’t matter because they wouldn’t be able to use it all in one game. The number they would use would be around the same as any player who didn’t pay to exapnd their arsenal.
They wouldn’t have “more” because Warzone matchmakes players based on their prevailing REQ arsenal.

The Dunning-meet-Kruger kind.

188

I go night-night now.

1 Like
189

With the greatest due respect to Rambo this is a fairly common trouble.

190

Lets see . . . Halo 4 sold well to retailers, had a lot of refunds that the retailers had to pay for, player count never passed 420k online and dropped to 20k-9k online daily a year later, 2/3 of DLC content was scrapped, and Season 2 & 3 of Spartan-Ops became comic books.

Does that sound like something that 343 is proud of?
Don’t you think that they would try to guarantee profits with the next game since it would share the same art style that no one likes, has a story that is a 2/10, and had the bare-bone adjustments for Arena multiplayer to appease the target audience?

Honestly, it sounds to me like a recepie for an “Oh C R A P we NEED to succeed the next time. How are we going to do it?”
Then someone in the meeting stands up and says -
“What if we make a super-BTB game-mode where the winners achieve victory through trading cards for weapons, vehicles, perks, and power-ups as they fight a huge enemy team and A.I. enemies as well? And we make these microtransaction packs grindable to not anger the fans too much and also throw in literally 98% of the cosmetics in these packs?”
“YOU’RE A GENIUS BILLY!!!”

Halo 4 was a long-term FAILURE and they needed to guarantee that the next game would be long-term SUCCESSFUL.
How many REQ pack bundles are bought daily to this day I wonder?
I wonder how happy Microsoft is with this constant flow of income?

But the point of the matter is that each LOSS they suffer hurts less so.
Died early with a SPNKR EX or Nornfang in your hands? Don’t worry, you have a few more stocked up!
Meanwhile grind players rarely get those tools and so if you die with your Nornfang in your hands, you likely don’t have a backup Nornfang in your deck.

Lol.
I’m not overestimating my own knowledge on this.
I’m stating that Pay-To-Win, in a triple-A experience, is BAD.
Why do you think Disney threatened to take away EA’s rights to Star Wars Games if they didn’t take out the microtransaction of “renting Star Wars Heroes/Villains for money”?
Because Disney realized that doing so would HURT Battlefront 2 in the long run.
So they threatened EA with an ultimatum - make the game RIGHT or we will revoke your liscencing.

I will admit it is sometimes hard to find a source for information, BUT WHEN I CAN I MAKE USE OF IT AND BOOKMARK IT FOR FUTURE REFERNCE!!

191

Please do not make egregious claims without sourcing them or being able to. Otherwise it may as well be fiction, Rambo.

2 Likes
192

I agree with this statement. I prefer to be credible.
And it is VERY frustrating having to find sources because of the fluff that google is filled with.
I ask for player population maps for Halo Reach to compare to Halo 4 because it is relevent to a conversation, and I can find THIS any day on Halo 4 (https://www.neogaf.com/threads/halo-4-one-year-later-what-happened.709697/)
But when searching for Reach info, I find MCC stats and NOT 2011 stats. I find COD stats of all things! I had to hunt for a LITERAL HOUR to find the chart I was seeking.
(Halo Reach has a player population of around 900k during its first year, with the low being around 300k a year later.)

193

I had to hop out of bed because holy crap.

So do you have a reputable source, or is it all your speculation? Your reasoning makes it sound like a post hoc.

Hurts less? So what does that have to do with Warzone being “pay-to-win”? This also ignores the point about “quantity” eariler.
Also, you need to build REQ energy again to requisition another Nornfang or SPNKR EX. Not something you’d be able to do outright if you die “early”.

Are you insinuating that Disney is the ethical one in this scenario? If anything, they’re unhappy with EA monetizing Battlefront 2 sloppily, not because it wasn’t consumer-friendly.

You’re also comparing Halo 5, which had an ethical microtransaction model (relative to the gaming market at large), to Battlefront 2 which was lambasted for its ubiquitously offensive approach to microtransactions.

194

Actually, they kinda’ don’t. Disney’s gone and contracted various other studios and publishers now - the exclusivity contract ended right around the time Squadrons released.

195

Then I take that back.

I’m not involved in anything Star Wars, so I didn’t have the wherewithal.

Sorry.

1 Like
196

No, no, you’re fine. I used to play Squadrons at a professional level and I’m a huge Star Wars fan so, I keep my ear very very much to the ground. You’re good. It might be good to get some sleep though.

197

I’m absolutely screwed for tomorrow lol.

In for a penny, in for a pound.

1 Like
198

Let’s not get too into sunken fallacy. Though, I can’t say much while bopping to the Cowboy Bebop soundtrack with my wife, while she plays Starbound and I play Star Trek: Online… and we have somewhere to be at 1:00PM tomorrow. ; _ ;

199

Speculation.
What, you expect me to be at every meeting ever of 343 Industries and Microsoft?
Or do you expect for the company to spill EVERY detail about development out to the world? Because let me tell you what, they certainly didn’t do that. No company does that.

This is speculation based on a business standpoint.
343 promised that Halo 4 would sell well.
It did to retailers, not to consumers.
So the retailers bought Halo 4 and consumers refunded a LOT of copies.
343 also promised that Halo 4 would have three years of DLC planned.
Then they had to scrap Years 2 and 3.
Take that information from Micorsoft’s standpoint.
You know Halo sells REALLY well.
Halo 4’s reviews tanked and now the remaining 2/3 of post-launch profits you were expecting didn’t show up.
So now your profits are lower than you planned.
What do you do?
Well, considering that 343 Industries didn’t immediately change course; Microsoft likely told them that they have ONE more chance to not screw it up.
So Halo 5 Gorbians now has microtransactions to ensure that profits are constant.
This gets them out of hot water with their parent company and probably nets them quarterly bonuses thanks to REQ Pack sales.
It works so well in fact that the ACTUAL DLC content was just turned into content-update content.

This is THE most likely reason REQ Packs and War Zone came to be.
A means to gurantee profit WITHOUT hurting the main gameplay. Wanna play Arena or regular BTB? It’s available WITHOUT Microtransactions.
You want Cosmetics? Every level will give you a Promotion REQ Pack that guarantees a cosmetic unlock.
OR
You could just buy them.
Judging by the fact that even though Halo 5 was heavily criticized, it was doing well enough to not see the hammer brought down on 343 Industries.

Though I gotta wonder, with how Halo Infinite is looking; is the Hammer being wound up again?

No it doesn’t ignore the quantiy.
I am saying that a player who pays for REQ Packs has STACKS of the very good stuff on demand.
Meanwhile the grind players are lucky to have the really good REQ that are more rare.
So if a Grind player loses one of their best tools, they have to go with something less effective.
Meanwhile a Paying Player gets to just summon up a replacement from their deck for the very item they lost.

HENCE WHY DISNEY TOLD THEM TO DO IT MORE CONSUMER-FRIENDLY !
Disney wants profits, I am not saying that they are the “ethical” one.
I am saying that they have the business smarts to realize that having Star Wars Battlefront II’s original plan of making the Hero/Villain characters be something you rent with ACTUAL IRL money was VERY MUCH NOT Consumer-Friendly, ergo it would push players away rather than draw them in.
Players get pushed away = you have less of a population of people who would actually spend money on the MTX the game offered.

And so, Disney forced EA to change their design so that it was much more consumer friendly, which is something that I hope Microsoft does soon with Halo Infinite because as it is right now, the shop is not consumer-friendly with how little players get with their money.

Pay-To-Win is something that Mobile Games do because hardly anyone is going to pay actual money for a mobile game to be allowed to be downloaded onto their phone.
Buyers Remorse would lead to the death of said mobile game if it is a unlikable experience.
So they do Pay-To-Win often in order to get the profits to keep the smalltime company afloat while also making a fun game . . . most of the time. Then you have those mobile games that are just one-star-outta-five experiences that everyone dislikes.

But my point is that a FULL PRICE GAME having Pay-To-Win IS NOT A GOOD BUSINESS MODEL !
It leaves players unhappy.
So thankfully for Halo 5’s case it was isolated to WZ/WZFF and not required for the regular multiplayer.

1 Like
200

Since when is anything in life free?

201

I have made counter points. You just don’t agree with them.

With that, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

203

It’s been like this since 4. Halo will continue to have a niche community but it will never be big like it was during 2, 3 or Reach again.

204

I think you’re being a little melodramatic, just like the rest of the community. Take a break from all Halo community content and you’ll realise just how bubbled this place is. You’d think this is the worst game ever made if you spent 5 minutes on Reddit.

205

TLDR
Are you done yet?

206

TLDR -
nah