In Reach, I maybe have played the map packs I PAYED FOR maybe 3 times at ALL n BTB or super slayer, infection, snipers, swat. They Just don’t show up! So why did I even buy them?
They were only fun when There was a premium playlist, and people didn’t even play that because the casuals (people that didn’t go on the forum and just hopped online to shoot ppl), didn’t even know what premium slayer was!
Not to mention More than half the time I played on boring forged maps -.-.
In HALO 4, How will this be sorted? 
I won’t buy maps if I can’t play on them in MM
If I pay for maps I want to be able to play them WITHOUT having to go to a DLC playlist
They should be required after a certain amount of time.
> If I pay for maps I want to be able to play them WITHOUT having to go to a DLC playlist
>
> They should be required after a certain amount of time.
This
In most of the playlists, it should be mandatory to have all DLC. It’s a so much better experience.
It shouldn’t be mandatory, it should force you into games with other DLC owners instead of putting in a weak algorithm that had little to no effect in Reach.
> It shouldn’t be mandatory, it should force you into games with other DLC owners instead of putting in a weak algorithm that had little to no effect in Reach.
If not mandatory, how does it work then??
> It shouldn’t be mandatory, it should force you into games with other DLC owners instead of putting in a weak algorithm that had little to no effect in Reach.
oops i meant this
PS It never really worked that much for me in reach. I still ended up getting Forge maps.
> It shouldn’t be mandatory, it should force you into games with other DLC owners instead of putting in a weak algorithm that had little to no effect in Reach.
It should be mandatory, it encourages players to buy the map packs and makes matchmaking more enjoyable.
‘Social Big Team’ was one of the main reasons I bought the map packs in Halo 3.
> > If I pay for maps I want to be able to play them WITHOUT having to go to a DLC playlist
> >
> > They should be required after a certain amount of time.
>
> This
> It should be mandatory, it encourages players to buy the map packs and makes matchmaking more enjoyable.
Making the game good is just as encouraging.
People didn’t buy Reach’s map packs because Reach was the low point of the series. Even those who enjoy it can’t deny that its changes were the most controversial in the history of the franchise. People didn’t buy the map packs because they didn’t feel Reach was worth the investment.
Halo 4, on the other hand, has a chance to evade that problem by being… well, better than Reach. If people like Halo 4, then they’ll get its map packs.
Asking for global or near-global DLC requirements is no different from jamming one’s hands into other wallets and spending their money on one’s own enjoyment. No one should have to buy ancillary add-ons to access basic functions in the game, like Matchmaking – and they certainly shouldn’t have to do it against their own will, out of some perceived (yet nonexistent) obligation to DLC owners.
> > It should be mandatory, it encourages players to buy the map packs and makes matchmaking more enjoyable.
>
> Making the game good is just as encouraging.
>
> People didn’t buy Reach’s map packs because Reach was the low point of the series. Even those who enjoy it can’t deny that its changes were the most controversial in the history of the franchise. People didn’t buy the map packs because they didn’t feel Reach was worth the investment.
>
> Halo 4, on the other hand, has a chance to evade that problem by being… well, better than Reach. If people like Halo 4, then they’ll get its map packs.
>
> Asking for global or near-global DLC requirements is no different from jamming one’s hands into other wallets and spending their money on one’s own enjoyment. No one should have to buy ancillary add-ons to access basic functions in the game, like Matchmaking – and they certainly shouldn’t have to do it against their own will, out of some perceived (yet nonexistent) obligation to DLC owners.
Bad thing is… halo 4 is more similiar to reach than any other halo game. It took those changes and went even further with them. But the jump height/speed/strafe/BR does look promising to bring some people back.
The more people that get the Limited Edition of Halo 4, they less we have to worry about people not having map packs. End of Story.
> > It should be mandatory, it encourages players to buy the map packs and makes matchmaking more enjoyable.
>
> Making the game good is just as encouraging.
>
> People didn’t buy Reach’s map packs because Reach was the low point of the series. Even those who enjoy it can’t deny that its changes were the most controversial in the history of the franchise. People didn’t buy the map packs because they didn’t feel Reach was worth the investment.
>
> Halo 4, on the other hand, has a chance to evade that problem by being… well, better than Reach. If people like Halo 4, then they’ll get its map packs.
>
> Asking for global or near-global DLC requirements is no different from jamming one’s hands into other wallets and spending their money on one’s own enjoyment. No one should have to buy ancillary add-ons to access basic functions in the game, like Matchmaking – and they certainly shouldn’t have to do it against their own will, out of some perceived (yet nonexistent) obligation to DLC owners.
I will agree that making all playlists require DLC is not a good thing but making some or a few off the more popular ones LIKE HALO 3 had it worked really good in my mind .
They should pull the Halo 2 card and have ranked and social play lists, if you play ranked you need the DLC, if you don’t want to pay for them, then you can play social
> They should pull the Halo 2 card and have ranked and social play lists, if you play ranked you need the DLC, if you don’t want to pay for them, then you can play social
That might work. An option to search only for those with DLC would be better, IMO.
> > They should pull the Halo 2 card and have ranked and social play lists, if you play ranked you need the DLC, if you don’t want to pay for them, then you can play social
>
> That might work. An option to search only for those with DLC would be better, IMO.
No, social playlists shouldn’t even exist. Playlists with loose or no TrueSkill matching are only good for two things: trashing worse players, and getting trashed by better players.
People shouldn’t have to pay for ancillary items just to have even a minimal chance at getting even matches.
> > > They should pull the Halo 2 card and have ranked and social play lists, if you play ranked you need the DLC, if you don’t want to pay for them, then you can play social
> >
> > That might work. An option to search only for those with DLC would be better, IMO.
>
> No, social playlists shouldn’t even exist. Playlists with loose or no TrueSkill matching are only good for two things: trashing worse players, and getting trashed by better players.
>
> People shouldn’t have to pay for ancillary items just to have even a minimal chance at getting even matches.
I hate not having ranked and social playlists. I get so tired of being on teams with guests, or players that aren’t trying/don’t care.
I don’t think people only get ‘trashed on’ by other players in social lists. From what I remember in Halo 2 was it was basically all guests. Why should there be only one playlist where the bad and good are going to be mixed together no matter what.
> I hate not having ranked and social playlists. I get so tired of being on teams with guests, or players that aren’t trying/don’t care.
>
> I don’t think people only get ‘trashed on’ by other players in social lists. From what I remember in Halo 2 was it was basically all guests. Why should there be only one playlist where the bad and good are going to be mixed together no matter what.
If your TrueSkill is high enough, players that aren’t trying or don’t care shouldn’t be an issue for you. As for guests, I’m sure that the matching algorithm can be tweaked to handle them appropriately.
In any case, forcing people to buy DLC in order to have access to playlists that offer some chance of an even match – that’s even worse than just making DLC requirements global. It leads people to try and manage without the DLC at first, essentially baiting them into an endless cycle of being carried and then being completely dumped on.
> > It should be mandatory, it encourages players to buy the map packs and makes matchmaking more enjoyable.
>
> Making the game good is just as encouraging.
>
> People didn’t buy Reach’s map packs because Reach was the low point of the series. Even those who enjoy it can’t deny that its changes were the most controversial in the history of the franchise. People didn’t buy the map packs because they didn’t feel Reach was worth the investment.
>
> Halo 4, on the other hand, has a chance to evade that problem by being… well, better than Reach. If people like Halo 4, then they’ll get its map packs.
>
> Asking for global or near-global DLC requirements is no different from jamming one’s hands into other wallets and spending their money on one’s own enjoyment. No one should have to buy ancillary add-ons to access basic functions in the game, like Matchmaking – and they certainly shouldn’t have to do it against their own will, out of some perceived (yet nonexistent) obligation to DLC owners.
Your theory is out of bias, not because of evidence.
I do like the “forced DLC” for certain playlists idea. At least I’ll get to play the maps I paid for. In Reach BTB, all I get is Forge World and the crappy Invasion maps (Spire and Boneyard). After a while, certain DLC needs to start being required in certain playlists (especially BTB). About a year back, 343i said they added an algorithm that made it to where DLC owners would get matched up more often, but that proved to be a failure. I don’t want the same thing happening in Halo 4.