Halo Infinite’s campaign should have been delayed and released alongside its co-op feature and instead prioritize a sooner release date for Forge if not alongside the launch of Halo Infinite’s multiplayer.
I’m aware that 343 would never do this and it’s too close to the release date for them to even consider this but just wanted to see what other people thought about this.
I believe that if 343 went this route, not only would more people be happier, but this could help get more people interested in playing the campaign. As of right now, Halo Infinite’s campaign has a hefty price tag of $60. Unless you are a long time halo fan who has played all the campaigns prior, you are most likely not going to be buying the campaign yourself. A price tag of $60 for only a campaign is (in my opinion) asking too much from your consumers. It also doesn’t help that for the longest time, 343 advertised split-screen returning in Infinite but co-op won’t even be an option for those who use split-screen at launch.
Now imagine instead, 343 staggered the release of multiplayer and campaign releasing multiplayer first. Yes, there would be an outrage from long-time Halo fans who have waited almost 6 years to play as Master Chief again. But a way to compensate this would be to have a 1-3 month marketing strategy that hypes up the Halo campaign up until its full release with co-op included. This could include hidden hints and teaser WITHIN the f2p multiplayer that will leave die-hard Halo fans speculating and anticipating the campaign release and at the same time, allow for newcomers to Halo to gain some interest in a campaign that they probably weren’t planning on playing. It is A LOT easier to market a campaign to an audience that is already playing and enjoying a part of your game. There has been little to no marketing done for Halo’s campaign so if they gave themselves more time to do that and properly hype up their story, it could help encourage more people to buy it and play it.
How does forge fit into this? Well by delaying the campaign, you can put more resources into trying to get Forge out sooner rather than half a year later. Forge is such a staple and defining aspect of Halo that it boggles my mind that 343 are willing to delay it as long as they say they are. With the constant discussion of Battle Royale being in Halo, I strongly believe that Forge/custom games could be the answer to this debate that no one would expect. Those who argue for BR always point out longevity of the game and how it’ll “die” after a couple of months if Halo doesn’t have one. While I strongly disagree with this statement, I do believe that longevity can be an issue for Halo if Forge is not there from the start. Forge is Halo’s answer for longevity and if 343 aren’t able to show that to these close-minded individuals from the get go, they will lose a lot of players before they have a chance to prove it.
I’m not saying that Halo is gonna fail (at least I hope it doesn’t) but my hope is that these delays of co-op campaign (not that big of a deal imo) and forge (very big deal imo) don’t hurt the game in it’s first year.
It’s something that’s been discussed a lot here because a lot of players are understandably emotional about it.
I don’t see the point of delaying anything that is finished. Before anyone argues that campaign is not finished, it is. Single player campaign is finished.
If we look at the stats of co-op based achievements in previous games, it is a smaller % of the community. I imagine if you could see the metadata of those that play co-op within the first quarter this would be even lower numbers. Realistically the user’s it affects a lot, are the minority. It truly sucks for them that if they want to play the game in coop first they will have to go dark and miss the buzz at the start. I feel bad for them.
Most people won’t care so the best thing to do would be to release it alongside the multiplayer. This is where they will get their most amount of players and you’ll find gamers that transition from campaign to multiplayer and vice versa, it would be a poor business decision not to release them alongside each other. Especially as it is the holiday slot, the best time for a company to release a big game.
Loads of people will play campaign because it’s being released on game pass.
> 2533274883642798;1:
> **Halo Infinite’s campaign should have been delayed and released alongside its co-op feature and instead prioritize a sooner release date for Forge if not alongside the launch of Halo Infinite’s multiplayer.**I’m aware that 343 would never do this and it’s too close to the release date for them to even consider this but just wanted to see what other people thought about this.
>
> I believe that if 343 went this route, not only would more people be happier, but this could help get more people interested in playing the campaign. As of right now, Halo Infinite’s campaign has a hefty price tag of $60. Unless you are a long time halo fan who has played all the campaigns prior, you are most likely not going to be buying the campaign yourself. A price tag of $60 for only a campaign is (in my opinion) asking too much from your consumers. It also doesn’t help that for the longest time, 343 advertised split-screen returning in Infinite but co-op won’t even be an option for those who use split-screen at launch.
>
> Now imagine instead, 343 staggered the release of multiplayer and campaign releasing multiplayer first. Yes, there would be an outrage from long-time Halo fans who have waited almost 6 years to play as Master Chief again. But a way to compensate this would be to have a 1-3 month marketing strategy that hypes up the Halo campaign up until its full release with co-op included. This could include hidden hints and teaser WITHIN the f2p multiplayer that will leave die-hard Halo fans speculating and anticipating the campaign release and at the same time, allow for newcomers to Halo to gain some interest in a campaign that they probably weren’t planning on playing. It is A LOT easier to market a campaign to an audience that is already playing and enjoying a part of your game. There has been little to no marketing done for Halo’s campaign so if they gave themselves more time to do that and properly hype up their story, it could help encourage more people to buy it and play it.
>
> How does forge fit into this? Well by delaying the campaign, you can put more resources into trying to get Forge out sooner rather than half a year later. Forge is such a staple and defining aspect of Halo that it boggles my mind that 343 are willing to delay it as long as they say they are. With the constant discussion of Battle Royale being in Halo, I strongly believe that Forge/custom games could be the answer to this debate that no one would expect. Those who argue for BR always point out longevity of the game and how it’ll “die” after a couple of months if Halo doesn’t have one. While I strongly disagree with this statement, I do believe that longevity can be an issue for Halo if Forge is not there from the start. Forge is Halo’s answer for longevity and if 343 aren’t able to show that to these close-minded individuals from the get go, they will lose a lot of players before they have a chance to prove it.
>
> I’m not saying that Halo is gonna fail (at least I hope it doesn’t) but my hope is that these delays of co-op campaign (not that big of a deal imo) and forge (very big deal imo) don’t hurt the game in it’s first year.
Achievement unlocked for Normal to Legendary on any Halo game within Halo MCC is 30% and less, so over 70% of the community is unmoved that Co-Op is going late.
Hefty price tag of $60…
Hold on, so your plan to accommodate to 30% or less of the community (assuming 100% of the 30% actually care) is to delay the entire campaign -Yoink!- off 80%+ of the community… this is a very flawed way of ‘fixing’ the current Co-Op problem…
Release the campaign along side the multiplayer.
Hard disagree. Co-op players are a minority, and ultimately they have the choice now of playing on release or waiting. It’s not a great choice, but it’s better to give the majority the game when they release and give the minority a choice, rather than delaying the whole game. I also think that staggered release would hurt both sides of the game, the multiplayer launch eouldn’t have the same feel of a launch “event” without campaign, and the campaign would launch outside of the holiday season after a lot of people have moved on from the game.
As for the price tag, I don’t see it. We don’t know yet if the game will be worth it, but saying a single player only game shouldn’t release at full price seems to ignore all the amazing games, not always even that long, that fit this criteria. Ratchet and Clank, Resident Evil 7 and 8, control, there are plenty of games that comfortably sit in the 10-15 hour ranges for length and most people don’t bat an eye-lid at the price.
For forge, I don’t see it either. Battle royale games have proven that you don’t need a variety of gameplay experiences to keep a playerbase around. You just need to do one or two things, and do them well. Add to that a constant drip of additional content, weapons, maps, modes, characters, customisation, that’s what keeps people playing. Halo was the king before forge, other games are king now without it. Its an amazing tool to have, but it isn’t essential for the game to have.
Finally, you mention having an extended marketing campaign as a bonus? People seem to be under this impression that 343 are doing something out of the ordinary with their marketing strategy, but that simply isn’t true. Halo 3 got its first story trailer just over a year before release, and no one saw campaign gameplay until just about 2 months out from release. In total there was 2 campaign cinematic trailers, and one gameplay trailer. Then about two weeks before the game launched we got the believe marketing campaign. It’s too early to say that 343 are doing anything specifically right or wrong with the marketing, but what they don’t want to have to do is market the game once when MP comes out to drum up hype, then do it again 3 months later, doubling the cost and time effort just to achieve the same result as releasing them at the same time.