So I think that multiplayer DLC is a good idea BUT (don’t kill me) is horribly and greedily implemented by developers.
I think for Halo 5: Guardians that if they want to revive Halo and the Halo community then DLC should come out around 6-8 months after release. I want a Halo 3 style community where the game actually lasts for around 3 years, and if the multiplayer really is great, then it could last indefinitely! Don’t announce a DLC pass or even announce DLC after the release, but give us enough great maps and allow community forged maps to be used like Reach and problem solved.
Sooooo??? Opinions?
I don’t get it, what’s the problem with multiplayer DLC?
you pay for games, you pay for game DLC, don’t have a problem with developers charging money for DLC as long as we know what we get before we buy it.
but yes it would be nice if halo 5 were built for longevity and could last years and years like H1-3 did, however I personally don’t expect them to make a great game on day 1, we don’t need an amazing game we just need a game that is decent in many respects and we can build on it from there.
> I don’t get it, what’s the problem with multiplayer DLC?
It apparently reduces re-playability, because people don’t have enough time to play the game, and explore every aspect of it before they’re bombarded with DLC. Which makes no sense, because if they stayed 6-8 months without DLC (as the OP suggests), people are likely to get bored way quicker, get tired of the same maps for the duration of those 6 months, and quit the game a lot sooner.
> > I don’t get it, what’s the problem with multiplayer DLC?
>
> <mark>It apparently reduces re-playability, because people don’t have enough time to play the game, and explore every aspect of it before they’re bombarded with DLC.</mark> Which makes no sense, because if they stayed 6-8 months without DLC (as the OP suggests), people are likely to get bored way quicker, get tired of the same maps for the duration of those 6 months, and quit the game a lot sooner.
Well that’s hardly an argument.
> > > I don’t get it, what’s the problem with multiplayer DLC?
> >
> > <mark>It apparently reduces re-playability, because people don’t have enough time to play the game, and explore every aspect of it before they’re bombarded with DLC.</mark> Which makes no sense, because if they stayed 6-8 months without DLC (as the OP suggests), people are likely to get bored way quicker, get tired of the same maps for the duration of those 6 months, and quit the game a lot sooner.
>
> Well that’s hardly an argument.
that’s not what he means, he means that games are usually built with DLC in mind which means that the final product is usually made to last a few months with the DLC as a supplement, its also true that DLC kind of throws a grenade into the mix and instead of letting the game develop naturally it can end up really diluting the experience.
DLC does fracture the gaming community and if the game is built unfinished like Destiny, but the game should have enough maps that DLC isn’t necessary for a while.
> DLC does fracture the gaming community and if the game is built unfinished like Destiny, but the game should have enough maps that DLC isn’t necessary for a while.
In any case, I say the map DLC becomes free and Halo start having microtransactions (things like weapon and armor skins, emblems, etc).
As long as no DLC is on the disc I’m fine.
Destiny.
Ha.
I rather have a different model than the standard map pack one. Maybe early access plus skins, and so on.
The problem with DLC today is how much it can fragment a player base/not pay off if implemented properly. All of us who got the map packs in Halo 4 know how poorly it turned out outside the DLC playlist since you never played them. That’s why Halo having forge has been so huge. We’ve been relying on the forge maps for the extra content.
Halo 3 at least got map packs sold (albeit in a very draconian manner that probably won’t ever work again; however, the people who thinks 343 should just make map packs free should think of the costs associated into making that. The most viable option I’ve heard thus far is a hybrid of customizations and maps.
Really though its getting people to adopt DLC nowadays that’s hard I agree with OP though, the game should ship with at least 12 OG maps with another 3-4 forge maps because 10 is not enough as we learned from playing the same maps over and over again in Halo 4.
> > DLC does fracture the gaming community and if the game is built unfinished like Destiny, but the game should have enough maps that DLC isn’t necessary for a while.
>
> In any case, I say the map DLC becomes free and Halo start having microtransactions (things like weapon and armor skins, emblems, etc).
No joke, I can’t tell if your trolling or not. lol i think you are…
> > > DLC does fracture the gaming community and if the game is built unfinished like Destiny, but the game should have enough maps that DLC isn’t necessary for a while.
> >
> > In any case, I say the map DLC becomes free and Halo start having microtransactions (things like weapon and armor skins, emblems, etc).
>
> No joke, I can’t tell if your trolling or not. lol i think you are…
I’m really not…
The money from the microtransactions would basically pay for the cost of the map DLC.
> > > > DLC does fracture the gaming community and if the game is built unfinished like Destiny, but the game should have enough maps that DLC isn’t necessary for a while.
> > >
> > > In any case, I say the map DLC becomes free and Halo start having microtransactions (things like weapon and armor skins, emblems, etc).
> >
> > No joke, I can’t tell if your trolling or not. lol i think you are…
>
> I’m really not…
>
> The money from the microtransactions would basically pay for the cost of the map DLC.
My only problem with microtransactions is offering really cool armor that you can just buy instead of earn. Halo 3 had it right where every cool piece of armor had to be earned through skill.
Maybe just for like emblems or other minimal things… I just hate the idea of microtransactions in general.
> I think that multiplayer DLC is a good idea
I don’t.
When was the last time it actually worked? Now examine why that is.
> DLC should come out around 6-8 months after release.
I at least prefer this to First Day / First Month DLC, where it’s obvious they just cut and repackaged content
> the people who thinks 343 should just make map packs free should think of the costs associated into making that.
I still think they should be free or dirt cheap, and nothing is going to convince me otherwise unless you show me proof of AAA developers with a sub-par quality of life.
Other companies continuously update and support their games for free. It’s a dwindling amount that still do, but I won’t forget the ones that do.
SP DLC is something I really like to see in Halo at some point, the map pack model that they use now is practically worthless because we can just forge our own (usually better) maps and so the value of giving us more maps is just not there, so yeah SP dlc along with micro transactions makes the most sense for the future of halo IMO.
I hope they would just stop following that disturbing trend of selling DLC which is nothing more than completely overpriced disc cut-outs, especially when it comes to multiplayer DLC.
Instead I would hope they rather focus on improving and advancing forge on a technical as well as aesthetic level, so the devs as well as the community could simply create and deliver proper maps via forge and hence keep the multiplayer experience fresh with that on a quite frequent basis.
Perhaps even add a custom games browser on top of it to better support the community’s maps and gametypes.
I think Multiplayer DLC needs to go. With a proper Forge map creator, both the community and the devs will be able to support the game to infinity without issue. If 343i has a whole team responsible for adding maps to multiplayer through Forge 3.0 (whether community maps or internal ones) and release an free in game downloadable map pack- NOT through the Xbox Marketplace, but through the File Share/Browser (maybe a “featured maps” list). Basically, let go of paid internal map packs.
DLC for the game should be new side stories (maybe three Arbiter missions, or a short Thorne campaign) or massive improvements to Forge. The co-op mode (whatever it will be) could also be worthy of DLC, but I think Forge should sustain the multiplayer in Halo 5 or at the very least by Halo 6. I also don’t mind skins and armors releasing through micro transactions, as long as it’s not one of the fan favorite ones that they just cut out of the game.
I’m not a fan of DLC most of the time, and I hate when it’s released close to the game’s launch, that said the only way this “problem” can be dealt with is by understanding it’s cause. The reason DLC is released close to launch isn’t so they can cut bits out of the game, though that is often an unfortunate side effect. The reason is simply to do with sales. DLC ALWAYS sells more closer to launch. For the business folks involved with the game that basically means DLC loses its value as time goes on. The best way to send them a message is with sales, don’t buy DLC when it comes out, wait a while and then buy it, if you plan to buy it at all. If they launched DLC a month after the game and sales were low until four months later that would give them a clear indication regarding demand and influence how they supplied it. Unfortunately you’d need almost everyone to do that and good luck making that happen.
> As long as no DLC is on the disc I’m fine.
>
> Destiny.
> Ha.
There’s actually no evidence that Destiny’s DLC is on the disc. According to DeeJ, the expansions aren’t finished yet, which means that the nodes that appear in the Director are possibly only placeholders. We’ll know for sure by the download size of the expansions.