My worst nightmare has been confirmed

343 just confirmed that Infinite’s multiplayer will be free to play and I don’t see how that could possibly be beneficial to the franchise. The biggest argument that I hear is that it will attract new players to the community. Lets examine that argument for a moment. Halo fans will buy the game regardless of whether multiplayer is free because they want to play the single player as well. But for someone who is new and doesn’t really care about Halo that’s not the case. They might give the multiplayer a try because its free but they’re not going to buy the game just for single player. They won’t care about masterchief’s story. Call of Duty Modern Warfare didn’t sell more copies when it implemented Warzone. Players (like myself) who owned the game started playing it and newcomers simply stuck to battle royale without giving any thoughts to the full game. The exact same thing will happen to Infinite; more people will play the multiplayer, but they won’t care about the rest of the game. This feature will barely have any impact on game sales.

We also have to be honest with ourselves and realise that 343 probably made that decision based on the potential for heavy monetization. In a full price title, you can’t monetize how you want without risking an angry community because people already payed for it. But now that the entire multiplayer is free, 343 can go all in based on the excuse that you don’t have to pay for it. Just because they promised that loot boxes won’t be in the game doesn’t mean the monetization won’t be aggressive. Halo fans really care about customization, 343 could use that as a tool to get people addicted. They could literally paywall any single armor piece or bundle at ridiculous prices. They could also release the multiplayer without any MTX and then add them later with an update. This decision was not made for fans, it was made to give them a long term profit machine that can be updated however they like. F2P multiplayer is an insult to the franchise and anyone who is invested in it. The only thing that could have restrained monetization was the idea that multiplayer is something you already paid for. But now that restrain is completely gone.

It is concerning I agree but I’d like to believe Microsoft has learned their lessons from Halo 5 and Gears 5 that aggressive monetization doesn’t work out too well in the long run. I think having microtransactions for free to play players while giving people who bought the game the content (presumably battle pass) to grind for for free (as well as exclusive challenge stuff) would be a good balance.

Respectfully, data does not support your rationale: article linked below demonstrating Warzone actually did increase Modern Warfare sales.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/72305/call-of-duty-warzone-is-massively-spiking-modern-warfare-game-sales/index.htmlWhile your own experiences may reflect your reasoning, it’s a pretty unfair statement to suggest that no amount of new players who play the free MP for the first time won’t come to love and appreciate Halo. Especially given that they can simply get Xbox Game Pass and gain the full suite of Halo story and experiences found in games.

On one level being free to play is really exciting news because wow you get the multiplayer for free. I wonder if this means forge will be free too.
At the same time this is very concerning. I have a very strong fear of the unknown with Infinite’s multiplayer. There’s no way they are going to just let this be- they are going to monetize the multiplayer somehow. I feel like they have been experimenting with things like this for a little while now with Halo Online and the REQ system.

I am also worried that the multiplayer being free to play will end up being used as a shield against criticism of the multiplayer. In 2016 they released “Halo 5 Forge” on PC, which was a free game that included Halo 5’s forge and custom games. Still to this day the game is awful- it is very unstable and loves to crash, the game does not run well, the keyboard and mouse controls aren’t that great, and the game lacked expected PC features like an FOV slider and unlimited framerate option. If you ever complained about these things the response you would get is “You’re really complaining about a game that didn’t cost you anything? You’re so ungrateful! 343 didn’t have to make this game let alone make it free!” I can just imagine Infinite’s multiplayer launching either being extremely limited at launch, playing poorly, issue ridden, or rife with intrusive microtransactions and everyone excusing this stuff because it was free.

They’ll get to brag about “unique user” log ins (not active players/subscribers) and they’ll make a fortune off of any gaming whales they rope in. And yes, it will be heavily monetized, that’s the point of F2P multiplayer games.

This is why they won’t delay it, they’re going to push it out the door this holiday, ready or not because: micro-transactions!

A few years from now it’ll probably be strictly a F2P pvp game.

> 2535411561717249;2:
> It is concerning I agree but I’d like to believe Microsoft has learned their lessons from Halo 5 and Gears 5 that aggressive monetization doesn’t work out too well in the long run. I think having microtransactions for free to play players while giving people who bought the game the content (presumably battle pass) to grind for for free (as well as exclusive challenge stuff) would be a good balance.

Aggressive monetisation? You were considered a fool if you bought req packs as they did more harm than good by forcing you to match against harder and harder opponents since matchmaking is based on requisitions and not your Spartan Rank. Also firefight commendations was a thing and you got loads of requisition packs.

There are only 2 actual reasons why people get buy requisitions.

  1. To prop up a new Xbox account.
  2. To stock up on requisitions even though you already have 50 of each requisitions.

Paying was a bait, all it really did was cut down game time needed to reach max requisitions but it caused serious short term losses in warzone. You were massively ripped off statistically.

Now to the topic at hand for Halo Infinite I would have requisition packs disabled to be purchased for real money for the first month after release, after that it will be back and also have firefight commendations requisition packs there at the start.
I would keep it like the Halo 5 system cause it worked.

Where was this confirmed that multiplayer is free to play?

Edit: Nvm I found the thread

Gonna be real here, monetization was confirmed to be in the game ages ago. Id rather multiplayer be free and have them then be paid for and have them

> 2533274967369999;6:
> Aggressive monetisation? You were considered a fool if you bought req packs as they did more harm than good by forcing you to match against harder and harder opponents <mark>since matchmaking is based on requisitions</mark> and not your Spartan Rank.

Where in the world did you hear this? Matchmaking systems in Halo 5 pair teams and matches based on your MMR, which is a hidden number. No game mode within Halo 5 matches you based on what REQs you have

Hmm. Not neccessarily " doomsday" kind of news.

I bet theres gonna be -Yoink!-. But then again thats one sacrifice to keep it all up and running in ten years. Well, one way indeed.
Could they have done it any other way with no -Yoink!- of any kind, including loot boxes ( great those are not in, kudos ) and so on? Possible but which sacrifices?
Classic 60 bucks a game and done, possible adding dlc/ expansion down the way until a new games in the series? Which might need a remaster etc in the future? Not the most resource friendly business model I guess.

As long as microtransactions$ stay to things like MP related skins and cosmetics. its kinda okay. But NO thanks to Halo 5 kind of nonsense, no, just hard NO.
And no paywall for awesome custmization options for armor, weapons and such. Campaign and MP customizations could be shared ( some only fitting for either of course, still ) but MP custoimization along with just cosmetic -Yoink!- for MP might be the way to go. unique to that part of the game. Just brainstorming here.

As long as it dosent take away REWARDING gameplay, classic unlocks, like halo Reach as they are mentioning, at least for Campaign. Its good news I think. Clean progression and rewarding gameplay should be core, if " kinder " microtransactions are nedded for the survival of the game for whopping then years, so be it. As long as its an addition and not an replacement of any kind regarding rewarding gameplay, to strive for. Like challenges in Halo MCC. Season pints is okay but there we all hoped for Reach kind of progression, guess 343 saves that for Halo Infinite???

No excuse for -Yoink!- that prey of kids and suspectible adults minds and innocence. Corporate greed and recklessness knows no bound. Big companies should know better, for the betterment in the long run in any aspect. Fanbase, thriving devs and general income. Its common sense, its just logical.

MTX are going to be important for Halo going forward. All games really.

I don’t think we can all marvel at the wonders of game-pass and the possibility of Halo Infinite being a 10 year project… without the harsh reality that someone has to pay for it.

As long as it’s not pay to win… and that nothing is locked behind the paywall… I’m all for it.

> 2533274807672834;10:
> Hmm. Not neccessarily " doomsday" kind of news.
>
> I bet theres gonna be -Yoink!-. But then again thats one sacrifice to keep it all up and running in ten years. Well, one way indeed.
> Could they have done it any other way with no -Yoink!- of any kind, including loot boxes ( great those are not in, kudos ) and so on? Possible but which sacrifices?
> Classic 60 bucks a game and done, possible adding dlc/ expansion down the way until a new games in the series? Which might need a remaster etc in the future? Not the most resource friendly business model I guess.
>
> As long as microtransactions$ stay to things like MP related skins and cosmetics. its kinda okay. But NO thanks to Halo 5 kind of nonsense, no, just hard NO.
>
> As long as it dosent take away REWARDING gameplay, classic unlocks, like halo Reach as they are mentioning, at least for Campaign. Its good news I think. Clean progression and rewarding gameplay should be core, if " kinder " microtransactions are nedded for the survival of the game for whopping then years, so be it. As long as its an addition and not an replacement of any kind regarding rewarding gameplay, to strive for. Like challenges in Halo MCC. Season pints is okay but there we all hoped for Reach kind of progression, guess 343 saves that for Halo Infinite???
>
> No excuse for -Yoink!- that prey of kids and suspectible adults minds and innocence. Corporate greed and recklessness knows no bound. Big companies should know better, for the betterment i nthe long run in any aspect. Fanbase, thriving devs and general income.

You don’t want this mess running 10 years, just trust me, I wouldn’t worry about supporting it. Why people say cosmetics are a good thing to lock behind a paywall is beyond me, they make up a core part of Halo’s reward system which is what makes it a game. Halo was so good when you just unlocked stuff and could showcase it. Paying for something means nothing and is a ridiculously cheap way speaking development wise of getting tons of cash out of people.

Thank god the UK atleast is banning loot boxes in under 18 rated games so I don’t have to worry about that with the T rating. I think cause its free to play the monetisation will be rammed though.

If it was 343’s or Microsoft’s decision I don’t know, either way it comes with a positive, more intrest and more players and a negative, bringing hackers and microtransactions. I hope If you buy the campaign you can unlock everything through challenges, but we will just have to wait and see.

> 2533274916415091;4:
> On one level being free to play is really exciting news because wow you get the multiplayer for free. I wonder if this means forge will be free too.
> At the same time this is very concerning. I have a very strong fear of the unknown with Infinite’s multiplayer. There’s no way they are going to just let this be- they are going to monetize the multiplayer somehow. I feel like they have been experimenting with things like this for a little while now with Halo Online and the REQ system.
>
> I am also worried that the multiplayer being free to play will end up being used as a shield against criticism of the multiplayer. In 2016 they released “Halo 5 Forge” on PC, which was a free game that included Halo 5’s forge and custom games. Still to this day the game is awful- it is very unstable and loves to crash, the game does not run well, the keyboard and mouse controls aren’t that great, and the game lacked expected PC features like an FOV slider and unlimited framerate option. If you ever complained about these things the response you would get is “You’re really complaining about a game that didn’t cost you anything? You’re so ungrateful! 343 didn’t have to make this game let alone make it free!” I can just imagine Infinite’s multiplayer launching either being extremely limited at launch, playing poorly, issue ridden, or rife with intrusive microtransactions and everyone excusing this stuff because it was free.

I’m sorry I really don’t see how getting multiplayer for free would be exciting news if you already planned to buy the full game. What difference does it make? You would have still gotten the multiplayer by purchasing the game. I would argue its actually underwhelming because it removes significant value to the game. Why should I spend 90$ (full retail price in Canada) only for a campaign?

> 2535410495741102;13:
> If it was 343’s or Microsoft’s decision I don’t know, either way it comes with a positive, more intrest and more players and a negative, bringing hackers and microtransactions. I hope If you buy the campaign you can unlock everything through challenges, but we will just have to wait and see.

343 are Microsoft, when you blame one you blame both parties unless you are name and shaming developers specifically.

> 2533274836729203;12:
> > 2533274807672834;10:
> > Hmm. Not neccessarily " doomsday" kind of news.
> >
> > I bet theres gonna be -Yoink!-. But then again thats one sacrifice to keep it all up and running in ten years. Well, one way indeed.
> > Could they have done it any other way with no -Yoink!- of any kind, including loot boxes ( great those are not in, kudos ) and so on? Possible but which sacrifices?
> > Classic 60 bucks a game and done, possible adding dlc/ expansion down the way until a new games in the series? Which might need a remaster etc in the future? Not the most resource friendly business model I guess.
> >
> > As long as microtransactions$ stay to things like MP related skins and cosmetics. its kinda okay. But NO thanks to Halo 5 kind of nonsense, no, just hard NO.
> >
> > As long as it dosent take away REWARDING gameplay, classic unlocks, like halo Reach as they are mentioning, at least for Campaign. Its good news I think. Clean progression and rewarding gameplay should be core, if " kinder " microtransactions are nedded for the survival of the game for whopping then years, so be it. As long as its an addition and not an replacement of any kind regarding rewarding gameplay, to strive for. Like challenges in Halo MCC. Season pints is okay but there we all hoped for Reach kind of progression, guess 343 saves that for Halo Infinite???
> >
> > No excuse for -Yoink!- that prey of kids and suspectible adults minds and innocence. Corporate greed and recklessness knows no bound. Big companies should know better, for the betterment i nthe long run in any aspect. Fanbase, thriving devs and general income.
>
> You don’t want this mess running 10 years, just trust me, I wouldn’t worry about supporting it. Why people say cosmetics are a good thing to lock behind a paywall is beyond me, they make up a core part of Halo’s reward system which is what makes it a game. Halo was so good when you just unlocked stuff and could showcase it. Paying for something means nothing and is a ridiculously cheap way speaking development wise of getting tons of cash out of people.
>
> Thank god the UK atleast is banning loot boxes in under 18 rated games so I don’t have to worry about that with the T rating. I think cause its free to play the monetisation will be rammed though.

Yes, 100% agree. Customization is at the heart of Halo, its meaningful, its not just something that you can lock behind a pay wall. Treating it like a cash cow is disrespectful to the franchise and fans.

> 2533274836729203;15:
> > 2535410495741102;13:
> > If it was 343’s or Microsoft’s decision I don’t know, either way it comes with a positive, more intrest and more players and a negative, bringing hackers and microtransactions. I hope If you buy the campaign you can unlock everything through challenges, but we will just have to wait and see.
>
> 343 are Microsoft, when you blame one you blame both parties unless you are name and shaming developers specifically.

Microsoft owns 343, they were made to take the place of bungie, I blame the Microsoft since it has the final say, but what do you mean by “name and shaming developers”

> 2533274903814187;16:
> > 2533274836729203;12:
> > > 2533274807672834;10:
> > >
>
> Yes, 100% agree. Customization is at the heart of Halo, its meaningful, its not just something that you can lock behind a pay wall. Treating it like a cash cow is disrespectful to the franchise and fans.

Potentially treating it like a cash cow. We have no confirmation on that all of customization will be locked behind a paywall.

Worst part is they’ve finally brought back reach customisation. Now if we want all the cool stuff we have to get a damn game pass or pay for it. Let’s hope they allow us to earn it.

> 2535410495741102;17:
> > 2533274836729203;15:
> > > 2535410495741102;13:
> > > If it was 343’s or Microsoft’s decision I don’t know, either way it comes with a positive, more intrest and more players and a negative, bringing hackers and microtransactions. I hope If you buy the campaign you can unlock everything through challenges, but we will just have to wait and see.
> >
> > 343 are Microsoft, when you blame one you blame both parties unless you are name and shaming developers specifically.
>
> Microsoft owns 343, they were made to take the place of bungie, I blame the Microsoft since it has the final say, but what do you mean by “name and shaming developers”

Well ultimately with any form of programming or artistic design the decisions can come down to a few or even one specific dude or they could make a bad PR move. Ultimately this would fall on them personally, people will usually blame 343 as in a blanket statement for these issues which is wrong. Microsoft pushes 343 around and as you understand created 343, they only exist to make Halo and follow the Microsoft corporate agenda, there is no sole vision for the studio as people mostly come and go frequently and they will never make any other game than Halo as a studio. Microsoft and 343 are the same entity, when you blame one you blame both unless you are naming specific people. That’s what I’m getting at, most of the time it doesn’t matter to make a distinction between the corporation and the studio.