So would that include game pass?
If it is true I think it is a bad call, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
I have no Clue!! Sorryt 
I sure in the hell won’t pay a penny till 343i fixes this game! 
This is why they need a monthly/yearly Subscription with Everything included.
*Forge
*New maps
*Armor
*Cosmetics
*New Campaigns
*New Menu themes/Backgrounds
All for a monthly subscriptions seems much more reasonable than the current system. It’s **Simple, no confusion, and Makes life easier for everyone.
If I may say, some people here seem hard headed on the idea that it will cost money
like they want to hate 343, which fair enough if you do, but then why be here?
Like…if it costs money than yeah we will hate it
I mean, games existed in the past without this sort of structure. So far we’re 3 months in and there has been no major addition to the game, so live service seems like a bit of farce. The F2P asset is BS, since the campaign was still sold for $60. That $60 was supposed to include live service aspects, and many argued that the $60 was justified by co-op and forge. To then charge for those components would be a major violation of community trust.
-Yoink!- for MSFT won’t get you far in these forums. Bottom line, 343 has been intentionally vague about what exactly they’ll charge for and when, because if they admitted on day one how much they expected us to pay for campaign expansions, forge, etc., they would have flopped even harder. Look around on these forums at how many people are expecting those things to have been included in the price of the game.
343 might make it part of the campaign, as in it’ll be bundled with it. However, if there’s a price tag to it, the player base is going to dropped massively. The best thing they could do is release Forge as part of multiplayer for free otherwise they’ll make a lot of people angry.
1 Like
29.99 £€$
Retail price
This is almost a given, 343 has taken away everything the player had except for the ability to play the game and put a price tag on it, if forge doesnt cost money, the assets will.
Gonna be a brutal one when they release that news, might even be enough to kill the franchise entirely
I’m not okay with that.
They’ve already monetized colors, armors, etc. and charged full-price for a subpar campaign with what’s likely a gargantuan amount of cut content.
If I’m correct, this was a rumor and was said to be false.
Even if it hadn’t been false, looking at the game, I’d say there’s no way they used $500M to make it.
However, I could see if the budget wasn’t entirely used, or they squandered it.
I wouldn’t pay for that.
You’re basically renting everything, and they can increase the price, include less additions or remove content whenever they want.
Typically, half of the budget for a triple-A game goes to marketing. Trailers, bill-boards, TV slots, Web Ads, and cross-promotional material.
You know, like putting the Master Chief in the Soda, Potarts, Chips Ahoy, Nail Polish, Monster, Pringles, etc.
It sort of seems like nonsense to put so much into marketing like that.
Halo’s not some new series that needs to be everywhere for people to know about it.
Just the trailers, TV ads and web ads seem like they should be enough.
Billboards, food and drinks, nail polish, etc. isn’t very needed.
There are a lot of games that aren’t as well-known as Halo, yet they had much less marketing and still became popular.
Also, even $250M doesn’t seem right with how much content there isn’t in Infinite’s campaign and multiplayer.
1 Like
If trailers and such aren’t announced, then most people will think any actual announcements are just rumors and nothing more.
And if trailers don’t happen often enough, then people think the game gets cancelled or in development hell; which sometimes happens in some franchises.
Star Wars 1313 for example.
Still ads need to be made post-release to announce new content coming up.
How often do you see Fortnite ads whenever a new season is about to drop or has just dropped?
Rainbow Six Seasons and Events give me ads on occasion on Youtube and such.
Plus ads aren’t exactly cheap productions. Especially when it comes to the amount of people you need to pay. Voice actors for example. Does the trailer have someone speaking? Well now you have to pay a localization agency and a voice actor to do the voice-over translation for a new region.
Does an Ad need to be tweaked to specifically meet guidelines in another country? That is more money spent on production and release.
1 Like
ads are only worthwhile if there is enough content or changes to warrant it. I’d personally rather they just wait til they come out with Campaign DLC. It can’t just be 1 map or something, it has to be something big otherwise people willl look at the ad and go “what’s new?”
That’s what ads on TV and the internet are for.
Not sure.
Halo 3 had quite a few ads with people speaking, and it seems that the “Starry Night” trailer was even a Super Bowl commercial, yet it supposedly only had a marketing budget of $30M ($40-60M in 2022).
As for voice overs for other regions, I’m not sure they did that in the ads for Halo 3 or Infinite.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they just subtitled them.
For getting the ads to follow the rules of other countries, I’d say it depends on what they are.
Most changes would likely be minimal, while others would likely be enough to make them just not release an ad there, in which case I doubt the game itself would fare well in those places.
You gotta pay for those TV timeslots and for your ads to be posted on websites. And you have to keep paying them to keep your ads in the rotations.
Marketing budgets also increase in cost because CGI is now more expensive due to the skill required to make it convincing. The Starry Night trailer was live action with some CGI touch-ups here and there.
Compare that to the trailers for Infinite itself and you see it being pretty much entirely CGI.
Starry Night
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MapTlW80f6Y
Carry On
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUD1IxXhfHQ
It doesn’t seem to cost that much going by Halo 3, other games and even other things.
Starry Night looked quite realistic, but I’d say it wouldn’t cost much more than the live-action trailers like Landfall.
Not only that, but technology has improved a lot in the decade between Starry Night and Infinite’s trailers.
A lot easier to use and make things look better than before.
Tech wise yes… but skill wise there is more to learn than there was a decade ago.
It was difficult even learning the basics back then, and some things weren’t easy to do.
Learning the basics and advanced stuff isn’t that difficult now, and I doubt they’re being paid much more.
Somehow I really doubt that since the Marvel Movies get bigger budgets and have been featuring more and more realistic CGI implementations with every release.
I’d say movies cost more mostly because of the actors and marketing.