But we got all that in Halo 5 for a one-time fee.
To be fair, if the seasons are quarterly and you pay for the premium battle passes the price is comparable to what you’re suggesting.
2 Likes
Battlefield 2042’s Season 1 content drop has been pushed back to I think June or July. Battlefield 4 at that same point in its lifespan had 3 of its 4 Season Pass Map Packs.
Map packs aren’t ideal, but this whole “live service” thing is being used as early access excuses to release a half-done game and get as many microtransaction sales with as little effort as possible. Its a shame because live service can be done so much better than what Infinite has generally been getting. Infinite should’ve hit the ground running with its content and fixes and left its mediocre competitors in the dust.
3 Likes
If the game can’t survive on game sales alone it shouldn’t be made. How about make enough maps at launch or even better yet have forge on launch so that map packs would never be an issue
2 Likes
I didn’t say the game couldn’t survive on sales alone. I’m talking about the ongoing production cost of creating maps and new content.
To which I said that the game should launch with over 20 - 30 unique maps.
And/or forge at launch
That should be the goal
1 Like
The problem with game sales is the introduction of Game Pass which isn’t sufficient to cover the game cost/revenue, hence the “live service model”, so we are kinda either stuck with them generating revenue JUST on Cosmetics/Armor or have a subscription model.
Maybe other Systems exist but those are the two most likely options.
OP don’t give the marketing team any ideas.
The last thing we need is WoW Halo.
Shoulda been 16 maps on Launch and 20 total by the end of the first Season.
2 Likes
If players are gonna get -Blammed- with high store prices I’d rather have the monthly subscription as the lesser of two evils since at least then All Armor and Cosmetics would be available to all players at a more reasonable total price and 343 still gets their earnings.
If all Store Items bought separately cost something like $1000 as people say they do, I’d much rather that they give the option to get an all inclusive package for a Monthly Price so the cost is distributed throughout more players at a more fair price.
1 Like
Do you not understand what “ongoing production cost of creating maps and new content” means? I’m talking about post launch. You know how the people have to stay employed and keep working? That’s what I’m talking about.
Release actual expansion packs not just maps. Whole experiences like a revamped spartan ops or a updated warzone. An entirely sepreate experience that you could buy for $20 bucks. Imagine an expansion pack that took all the versions of firefight from all the halos.
Expansion packs should be rich and brimming with content so that it can be sold around the $20 or $30 range and it’ll accomplish giving them money while also giving the customer something worth of value.
No one should feel left out either because the hyoptiecal launch would have 20 or so map and forge.
Complete products will win a lot of people over.
1 Like
Lol
NÖ
Buddy I’m a grown -Yoink!- man at this point in my life with a steady income. I lived through the $15/month subscription era of games when I didn’t have a steady income, and I’m not eager to return to it
3 Likes
No
Non
Nein
Нет
ਨੰ
Não
Tsis muaj
رقم
br
Chan eil
Tidak
The UN has spoken.
2 Likes
Price gated content does exclude players though, and historically so in the Halo franchise.
The current F2P model should ideally encompass free content drops for everyone regardless of personal monetary investment. Similar to how Halo 5 worked, except without the initial cost of entry.
2 Likes
Oh so you’re talking about increasing the user base? Here’s a question. Which do you think increases the user base more: A $60 game that releases $30 packs every few months with maps and new content like you described? Or a free game that doesn’t require you to spend a single dime?
2 Likes
As long as the base game was complete with ALL the features like custom games browser, forge etc. Then yes that is that model that will bring in more players. A lot of people will respect a complete game and if they buy the game it’s more than likely they would buy the expansions too. People already spend ten dollars on skins. I don’t see why it can’t be a $20 to $30 price for an expansion.
2 Likes
Absolutely wrong. Like, you’re simply just wrong. Halo Infinite’s free multiplayer brought in more players than any other Halo game.
Wrong again. You’re actually sitting here telling me that more people are willing to pay $60 to try a game out than there are people who will try a game out for free. You are just so hilariously wrong.
And this is why drip fed content is a thing and will always be a thing. I end up playing the game less because the content is staggered and then when it finally all gets here I’m already burnt of the game. This game is lucky its ganna have forge otherwise there is no point to play this game
1 Like
Yet it’s loosing players like an anchor being dropped into the sea.
Ummm yeah. They did. With the campaign that it is $60. If they can pay for the campaign they can definitely pay for a complete game. I’m pretty sure a complete game is something we all want and I’m willing to bet many people had $60 bucks just waiting for Halo infinite as a complete game. I didn’t buy the campaign because the game wasn’t complete and there are many like me. If the game was complete it would’ve had more sales.
No we’re not talking about player retention. We’re talking about player count. Player retention has nothing to do with whether or not a game costs $60. We’re talking about user base.
Who did what? What are you talking about? I literally cannot understand what you’re trying to say.
Wait… You’re playing Halo Infinite though. You literally just defeated your entire point because you’re admitting to being a free player that wasn’t willing to commit to a $60 purchase hahahaha. You just made my point for me.
1 Like