Campaign/Multiplayer Sold Separately

I think it would be cool if H6 was sold as separate parts. For example let’s say traditionally H6 would launch with campaign and multiplayer as a package for $80 CDN. Instead of this they would sell campaign/multiplayer as separate parts. Maybe $40 for campaign, $40 for multiplayer, something along those lines.

I’m sure there’s many people who only buy Halo for multiplayer and don’t care for the campaign or vice versa, this would benefit them greatly. Maybe they could even sell them both as a single package as they normally have but at a cheaper price. You could get both at the same time for let’s say $70 instead of paying $40 for each separately. This would give you incentive to buy them both as a package if you’re on the fence about one or the other.

Now while this would benefit us I don’t know if it would benefit Microsoft as a business model so who knows if it’s actually something realistic to think about, would they make less or more money by doing this? Anyway, I think it’d be cool if not only they did this for H6 but any game that has a singleplayer and multiplayer component. It kinda branches off of the idea of the new MCC feature that let’s you install which parts you want but exaggerated to actually owning/not owning said parts.

EDIT: There seems to be confusion about the pricing. I wrote there “CDN” which means Canadian dollars. A regular full price AAA game in Canada is $80 CDN. So what I’m saying is campaign would be half price and multiplayer the same. In US dollars it’d be the regular $60 for the full game or $30 for one part.

Wouldnt really matter to me since I usually end up playing both if the game is good overall. Meaning such things as story, gameplay, gamemodes, customization, enemy types/AI etc etc…

Though that could be useful for some players surely.

The best model I’ve seen to date is Halo 5. Base game at one price, all DLC included, microtransactions optional.

That said, I have to wonder if they tried your idea whether it would finally prove once and for all that people don’t care about campaign like they did way back when… it was pretty much the only thing you could do in the game. I used to consider myself a kind of a campaign guy, but I’m not sure I’d pony up for it now. Nothing against 343 campaigns. I’m the one guy who really liked H5 campaign. But I’m over them now. Now I’d pay whatever they want to charge just for forge.

Doesn’t sound like it would really do much in terms of sales. If it made sense to switch to this sort of model, I’m sure developers and publishers would have switched to it years ago.

Obviously, they haven’t done that and continue to either make:
A. single-player, campaign-only games
B. multiplayer games with no campaign
C. games that put an equal emphasis on campaign and multiplayer and contain both within a single package

Having an option to install the Campaign or MP separately, I can get behind.
Forcing players to effectively buy the same game twice however, is redundant, and monetarily punishing those who want the full experience by charging $80 rather than the usual $60 is an appalling idea.

Doing this will only lead to more focus being put on MP and Campaign eventually being dropped altogether, because even in a post God of War world, developers still insist that players don’t want single player experiences; and after the disaster that was Halo 5 and the success of REQ packs, 343 will have plenty of temptation to do just that.

> 2533274873843883;3:
> The best model I’ve seen to date is Halo 5. Base game at one price, all DLC included, microtransactions optional.
>
> That said, I have to wonder if they tried your idea whether it would finally prove once and for all that people don’t care about campaign like they did way back when… it was pretty much the only thing you could do in the game. I used to consider myself a kind of a campaign guy, but I’m not sure I’d pony up for it now. Nothing against 343 campaigns. I’m the one guy who really liked H5 campaign. But I’m over them now. Now I’d pay whatever they want to charge just for forge.

The dlc included was stuff that should have been in the game at launch,I wouldn’t really use that as an example

I don’t really see how it would benefit them to do that. Having the option to install either like H8TRFFC suggested would be the better option. That being said, I would likely still buy/install the campaign even if it was bad since I would want to play it for myself.

This sales model doesn’t make much sense to me at all. It means that people who only play one mode or the other are going to spend half the money they would normally in a full game. For everybody who spent $40 on only the multiplayer, you could have forced them to pay $80 for both that and the campaign even though they only intend to play one.
Basically, where a company could’ve earned $2 million they would only get $1 million instead, 50% cut is a huge drop.

Fight me, but I think Halo 5s system was the best, I only needed to buy the game once and be patient to get all the updates; even if some aspects should have been there since launch. If they did that system again with improved Microtransactions and actual additions as opposed to classic game modes I would be very happy.

> 2533274900668879;5:
> Having an option to install the Campaign or MP separately, I can get behind.
> Forcing players to effectively buy the same game twice however, is redundant, and monetarily punishing those who want the full experience by charging $80 rather than the usual $60 is an appalling idea.
>
> Doing this will only lead to more focus being put on MP and Campaign eventually being dropped altogether, because even in a post God of War world, developers still insist that players don’t want single player experiences; and after the disaster that was Halo 5 and the success of REQ packs, 343 will have plenty of temptation to do just that.

What do you mean by buying the same game twice?

I think there’s confusion about the price. I said $80 CDN (Canadian) which is the regular price for a AAA game, so you wouldn’t be paying extra.

> 2533274882881665;8:
> This sales model doesn’t make much sense to me at all. It means that people who only play one mode or the other are going to spend half the money they would normally in a full game. For everybody who spent $40 on only the multiplayer, you could have forced them to pay $80 for both that and the campaign even though they only intend to play one.
> Basically, where a company could’ve earned $2 million they would only get $1 million instead, 50% cut is a huge drop.
>
> Fight me, but I think Halo 5s system was the best, I only needed to buy the game once and be patient to get all the updates; even if some aspects should have been there since launch. If they did that system again with improved Microtransactions and actual additions as opposed to classic game modes I would be very happy.

Well I figured there’s people out there who want to play one part of a game but don’t think the full 80 is worth it and end up not buying at all. This way they’d only pay half that for what they actually want and it’d seem worth it to them. But you could very well be right, there might be more people who feel it’s worth paying full price even if they just want one part.

> 2533275031939856;10:
> > 2533274882881665;8:
> > This sales model doesn’t make much sense to me at all. It means that people who only play one mode or the other are going to spend half the money they would normally in a full game. For everybody who spent $40 on only the multiplayer, you could have forced them to pay $80 for both that and the campaign even though they only intend to play one.
> > Basically, where a company could’ve earned $2 million they would only get $1 million instead, 50% cut is a huge drop.
> >
> > Fight me, but I think Halo 5s system was the best, I only needed to buy the game once and be patient to get all the updates; even if some aspects should have been there since launch. If they did that system again with improved Microtransactions and actual additions as opposed to classic game modes I would be very happy.
>
> Well I figured there’s people out there who want to play one part of a game but don’t think the full 80 is worth it and end up not buying at all. This way they’d only pay half that for what they actually want. But you could very well be right, there might be more people worth paying full price even if they just want one part.

Don’t get me wrong; as a customer this idea is brilliant. There is undoubtedly many people who want to only pay and play one part of the game; paying $40 for one and $70 for both makes sense.
But from the perspective of a company all it means is less money.

That’s sounds terrible at first, but when you think about it, a lot of players do tend to heavily favor either the campaign or multiplayer.

However, Halo is known to be the full package and there might be more who like both. I just really want campaign and multi-player to have split-screen support.

My concern with such an idea is what would happen in the long run. I have no doubt publishers would use it as a gateway to standardising full price multiplayer only games like Titanfall 1.

> 2533274848539555;13:
> My concern with such an idea is what would happen in the long run. I have no doubt publishers would use it as a gateway to standardising full price multiplayer only games like Titanfall 1.

That’s a good point. If you think about it it really just comes down to how good your game is. Look at Overwatch, that game is only multiplayer but it’s a full price game yet people gave no problem paying it.

> 2533274813444880;12:
> That’s sounds terrible at first, but when you think about it, a lot of players do tend to heavily favor either the campaign or multiplayer.
>
> However, Halo is known to be the full package and there might be more who like both. I just really want campaign and multi-player to have split-screen support.

You’re in luck, H6 will have split screen.

> 2533275031939856;9:
> > 2533274900668879;5:
> > Having an option to install the Campaign or MP separately, I can get behind.
> > Forcing players to effectively buy the same game twice however, is redundant, and monetarily punishing those who want the full experience by charging $80 rather than the usual $60 is an appalling idea.
> >
> > Doing this will only lead to more focus being put on MP and Campaign eventually being dropped altogether, because even in a post God of War world, developers still insist that players don’t want single player experiences; and after the disaster that was Halo 5 and the success of REQ packs, 343 will have plenty of temptation to do just that.
>
> What do you mean by buying the same game twice?
>
> I think there’s confusion about the price. I said $80 CDN (Canadian) which is the regular price for a AAA game, so you wouldn’t be paying extra.

If the game is split into SP and MP, then people who want the full game will have to purchase two titles. It’s minor compared to my main concern regarding the focus being taken away from Single Player, but it’d still be redundant. Was mistaken about the price though, sucks that a game costs that much up there.

> 2533274900668879;16:
> > 2533275031939856;9:
> > > 2533274900668879;5:
> > > Having an option to install the Campaign or MP separately, I can get behind.
> > > Forcing players to effectively buy the same game twice however, is redundant, and monetarily punishing those who want the full experience by charging $80 rather than the usual $60 is an appalling idea.
> > >
> > > Doing this will only lead to more focus being put on MP and Campaign eventually being dropped altogether, because even in a post God of War world, developers still insist that players don’t want single player experiences; and after the disaster that was Halo 5 and the success of REQ packs, 343 will have plenty of temptation to do just that.
> >
> > What do you mean by buying the same game twice?
> >
> > I think there’s confusion about the price. I said $80 CDN (Canadian) which is the regular price for a AAA game, so you wouldn’t be paying extra.
>
> If the game is split into SP and MP, then people who want the full game will have to purchase two titles. It’s minor compared to my main concern regarding the focus being taken away from Single Player, but it’d still be redundant. Was mistaken about the price though, sucks that a game costs that much up there.

I did say you could buy them as a bundle, it would be like buying H5.

Yeah games used to be $60 last gen. This gen they were bumped up to $80, I almost never buy games new these days lol

I don’t like the idea personally,games should be sold with everything in a package regardless if you don’t play one aspect of the game

> 2533274830166194;6:
> > 2533274873843883;3:
> > The best model I’ve seen to date is Halo 5. Base game at one price, all DLC included, microtransactions optional.
> >
> > That said, I have to wonder if they tried your idea whether it would finally prove once and for all that people don’t care about campaign like they did way back when… it was pretty much the only thing you could do in the game. I used to consider myself a kind of a campaign guy, but I’m not sure I’d pony up for it now. Nothing against 343 campaigns. I’m the one guy who really liked H5 campaign. But I’m over them now. Now I’d pay whatever they want to charge just for forge.
>
> The dlc included was stuff that should have been in the game at launch,I wouldn’t really use that as an example

Respectfully disagree. No Halo (except CE) ever launched with all maps available on launch day. That this game added them in over time is not a break with precedent. What breaks precedent is that no one had to pay one red cent extra for them. No dlc-have, dlc-have-not population split. My point with non-map DLC isn’t whether it was late to the table or not - every player has to decide for himself whether that slow roll out was acceptable or not. But one way in which it was indisputably a win is that none of it was behind a pay wall as it would have been, and is, with almost every other triple-A title these days.

> 2533274873843883;19:
> > 2533274830166194;6:
> > > 2533274873843883;3:
> > > The best model I’ve seen to date is Halo 5. Base game at one price, all DLC included, microtransactions optional.
> > >
> > > That said, I have to wonder if they tried your idea whether it would finally prove once and for all that people don’t care about campaign like they did way back when… it was pretty much the only thing you could do in the game. I used to consider myself a kind of a campaign guy, but I’m not sure I’d pony up for it now. Nothing against 343 campaigns. I’m the one guy who really liked H5 campaign. But I’m over them now. Now I’d pay whatever they want to charge just for forge.
> >
> > The dlc included was stuff that should have been in the game at launch,I wouldn’t really use that as an example
>
> Respectfully disagree. No Halo (except CE) ever launched with all maps available on launch day. That this game added them in over time is not a break with precedent. What breaks precedent is that no one had to pay one red cent extra for them. No dlc-have, dlc-have-not population split. My point with non-map DLC isn’t whether it was late to the table or not - every player has to decide for himself whether that slow roll out was acceptable or not. But one way in which it was indisputably a win is that none of it was behind a pay wall as it would have been, and is, with almost every other triple-A title these days.

I’m not talking about just maps,btb wasn’t even in the game at launch.And say what you will about paid dlc maps,at least they are good and not these ugly non dev made forge maps