One of the features of Halo 4 that I found ingenious was to give us daily and weekly challenges such as playing a specific campaign mission on Legendary or to kill 50 grunts, or get 3 assassinations in Multiplayer, etc… I would really like to see this brought back and reward requisition points. The main reason I ask for this is because there is currently no way to earn Req. points from playing the campaign that I am aware of, which means aside from a personal challenge of my own skill, there is no real reason for me to play the campaign after I have beaten it once. This would also encourage players to play at least once per day/week in order to gain those additional points if they don’t like grinding multiplayer.
Challenges would dissuade people from purchasing REQ packs.
Yes! I’m baffled as to why there’s so little incentive to play the campaign in this game. Not even scoring or anything. I have a feeling we’re in the minority, though.
> 2603643534586909;2:
> Challenges would dissuade people from purchasing REQ packs.
I disagree. The challenges would reward Req. points so players could purchase Req packs.
I agree up until this point it is a missed opportunity. There has always been motivation to play campaign and I frankly dont feel it to nearly the degree as in past Halo titles. Hopefully the implementation of such a system would be an easy fix. Time will tell…
> 2533274829767761;4:
> > 2603643534586909;2:
> > Challenges would dissuade people from purchasing REQ packs.
>
>
> I disagree. The challenges would reward Req. points so players could purchase Req packs.
Not with REQ points, but with actual money.
> 2603643534586909;6:
> > 2533274829767761;4:
> > > 2603643534586909;2:
> > > Challenges would dissuade people from purchasing REQ packs.
> >
> >
> > I disagree. The challenges would reward Req. points so players could purchase Req packs.
>
>
> Not with REQ points, but with actual money.
People are still going to want to use actual money to purchase REQ packs. You can always count on people to want to take the easy route by spending money opposed to the time it would take to do something and essentially get something for free. Most likely the amount of points awarded by completing a challenge would be roughly equal to the amount of points you would earn from spending the same amount of time grinding Arena or Warzone matches. My thought would be for a majority of the challenges to be campaign related, and reward players for continuing to play the campaign which you do not get any benefit from as of now.
Less people will want to pay money for REQ packs if there are challenges that help you acquire REQ points faster, hence dissuading people from buying REQ packs.
Challenges were around for longer than halo 4. I prefer Reach challenges much harder and less rewarding. I saw a halo 4 monthly challenge to kill 400 Spartans in war games when on Reach a weekly challenge was for 500 kills in matchmaking.
> 2603643534586909;8:
> Less people will want to pay money for REQ packs if there are challenges that help you acquire REQ points faster, hence dissuading people from buying REQ packs.
But you can get REQ packs without spending money now by playing multiplayer. So as long as the amount of time spent playing the game to complete the challenge is roughly the same as the amount of time it would take to earn the same amount of REQ points from multiplayer then it doesn’t change anything aside from giving people another method of spending the same amount of time. There are multiple ways that a game is evaluated as successful. The more obvious is how much money they make as a result in sales and micro-transactions. However, a game is also rated as successful if they can accumulate a consistent amount of play and, more importantly, replay time. Even if they don’t make a whole lot in micro-transactions, Microsoft will continue to fund a game that gets huge amounts of gameplay.
> 2533274829767761;10:
> > 2603643534586909;8:
> > Less people will want to pay money for REQ packs if there are challenges that help you acquire REQ points faster, hence dissuading people from buying REQ packs.
>
>
> But you can get REQ packs without spending money now by playing multiplayer. So as long as the amount of time spent playing the game to complete the challenge is roughly the same as the amount of time it would take to earn the same amount of REQ points from multiplayer then it doesn’t change anything aside from giving people another method of spending the same amount of time. There are multiple ways that a game is evaluated as successful. The more obvious is how much money they make as a result in sales and micro-transactions. However, a game is also rated as successful if they can accumulate a consistent amount of play and, more importantly, replay time. Even if they don’t make a whole lot in micro-transactions, Microsoft will continue to fund a game that gets huge amounts of gameplay.
Yes…I know you can get REQ packs without money through multiplayer, but you seem to be missing my point. Challenges have always been a large payout on top of the XP/REQ points you earn helping you unlock REQ packs faster.
Example: Average REQ points per match 1500, 3 matches to open a silver pack. If a challenge is 5000 points, you basically unlock a free REQ pack and over time unlock more “free” REQ packs.
It encourages people not to spend real money on REQ packs.
> 2603643534586909;11:
> > 2533274829767761;10:
> > > 2603643534586909;8:
> > > Less people will want to pay money for REQ packs if there are challenges that help you acquire REQ points faster, hence dissuading people from buying REQ packs.
> >
> >
> > But you can get REQ packs without spending money now by playing multiplayer. So as long as the amount of time spent playing the game to complete the challenge is roughly the same as the amount of time it would take to earn the same amount of REQ points from multiplayer then it doesn’t change anything aside from giving people another method of spending the same amount of time. There are multiple ways that a game is evaluated as successful. The more obvious is how much money they make as a result in sales and micro-transactions. However, a game is also rated as successful if they can accumulate a consistent amount of play and, more importantly, replay time. Even if they don’t make a whole lot in micro-transactions, Microsoft will continue to fund a game that gets huge amounts of gameplay.
>
>
> Yes…I know you can get REQ packs without money through multiplayer, but you seem to be missing my point. Challenges have always been a large payout on top of the XP/REQ points you earn helping you unlock REQ packs faster.
> Example: Average REQ points per match 1500, 3 matches to open a silver pack. If a challenge is 5000 points, you basically unlock a free REQ pack and over time unlock more “free” REQ packs.
> It encourages people not to spend real money on REQ packs.
I have literally addressed both of those points by saying that the challenges would mostly be geared toward the campaign which currently awards ZERO XP/REQ points, and that the amount of REQ points awarded would need to be adjusted to be equivalent to the amount of points earned from multiplayer matches. Are you even reading my comments??
> 2603643534586909;6:
> > 2533274829767761;4:
> > > 2603643534586909;2:
> > > Challenges would dissuade people from purchasing REQ packs.
> >
> >
> > I disagree. The challenges would reward Req. points so players could purchase Req packs.
>
>
> Not with REQ points, but with actual money.
Maybe if the rewards weren’t large. Say…maybe 500 points, and there are only three per day? 1,500 req points.
> 2603643534586909;11:
> > 2533274829767761;10:
> > > 2603643534586909;8:
> > > Less people will want to pay money for REQ packs if there are challenges that help you acquire REQ points faster, hence dissuading people from buying REQ packs.
> >
> >
> > But you can get REQ packs without spending money now by playing multiplayer. So as long as the amount of time spent playing the game to complete the challenge is roughly the same as the amount of time it would take to earn the same amount of REQ points from multiplayer then it doesn’t change anything aside from giving people another method of spending the same amount of time. There are multiple ways that a game is evaluated as successful. The more obvious is how much money they make as a result in sales and micro-transactions. However, a game is also rated as successful if they can accumulate a consistent amount of play and, more importantly, replay time. Even if they don’t make a whole lot in micro-transactions, Microsoft will continue to fund a game that gets huge amounts of gameplay.
>
>
> Yes…I know you can get REQ packs without money through multiplayer, but you seem to be missing my point. Challenges have always been a large payout on top of the XP/REQ points you earn helping you unlock REQ packs faster.
>
> Example: Average REQ points per match 1500, 3 matches to open a silver pack. If a challenge is 5000 points, you basically unlock a free REQ pack and over time unlock more “free” REQ packs.
>
> It encourages people not to spend real money on REQ packs.
To an extent, but I’m sure that the REQ pack sales won’t drop terribly low after implementing the challenges. People will always want more, so after they actually get the challenge done and the REQ packs over with, they’ll still buy the REQ packs with real money. They’ll probably lose out on a few sales of REQ packs, but it will probably give the game itself put in a better light with reviews.
The REQ challenge doesn’t have to be so much as 5,000, I think that’s a bit much anyways. It will most definitely deter some people from buying REQ packs, but usually the people who are impatient enough to buy REQ packs will buy more regardless of whether or not they just got a “free” pack.
> 2603643534586909;11:
> > 2533274829767761;10:
> > > 2603643534586909;8:
> > > Less people will want to pay money for REQ packs if there are challenges that help you acquire REQ points faster, hence dissuading people from buying REQ packs.
> >
> >
> > But you can get REQ packs without spending money now by playing multiplayer. So as long as the amount of time spent playing the game to complete the challenge is roughly the same as the amount of time it would take to earn the same amount of REQ points from multiplayer then it doesn’t change anything aside from giving people another method of spending the same amount of time. There are multiple ways that a game is evaluated as successful. The more obvious is how much money they make as a result in sales and micro-transactions. However, a game is also rated as successful if they can accumulate a consistent amount of play and, more importantly, replay time. Even if they don’t make a whole lot in micro-transactions, Microsoft will continue to fund a game that gets huge amounts of gameplay.
>
>
> Yes…I know you can get REQ packs without money through multiplayer, but you seem to be missing my point. Challenges have always been a large payout on top of the XP/REQ points you earn helping you unlock REQ packs faster.
>
> Example: Average REQ points per match 1500, 3 matches to open a silver pack. If a challenge is 5000 points, you basically unlock a free REQ pack and over time unlock more “free” REQ packs.
>
> It encourages people not to spend real money on REQ packs.
bro did you read his comments its called daily/weekly challenges for a reason
> 2533274829767761;1:
> One of the features of Halo 4 that I found ingenious was to give us daily and weekly challenges such as playing a specific campaign mission on Legendary or to kill 50 grunts, or get 3 assassinations in Multiplayer, etc… I would really like to see this brought back and reward requisition points. The main reason I ask for this is because there is currently no way to earn Req. points from playing the campaign that I am aware of, which means aside from a personal challenge of my own skill, there is no real reason for me to play the campaign after I have beaten it once. This would also encourage players to play at least once per day/week in order to gain those additional points if they don’t like grinding multiplayer.
i agree with you bro
> 2603643534586909;2:
> Challenges would dissuade people from purchasing REQ packs.
sad but true
> 2533274822820920;14:
> > 2603643534586909;11:
> > > 2533274829767761;10:
> > > > 2603643534586909;8:
> > > > Less people will want to pay money for REQ packs if there are challenges that help you acquire REQ points faster, hence dissuading people from buying REQ packs.
> > >
> > >
> > > But you can get REQ packs without spending money now by playing multiplayer. So as long as the amount of time spent playing the game to complete the challenge is roughly the same as the amount of time it would take to earn the same amount of REQ points from multiplayer then it doesn’t change anything aside from giving people another method of spending the same amount of time. There are multiple ways that a game is evaluated as successful. The more obvious is how much money they make as a result in sales and micro-transactions. However, a game is also rated as successful if they can accumulate a consistent amount of play and, more importantly, replay time. Even if they don’t make a whole lot in micro-transactions, Microsoft will continue to fund a game that gets huge amounts of gameplay.
> >
> >
> > Yes…I know you can get REQ packs without money through multiplayer, but you seem to be missing my point. Challenges have always been a large payout on top of the XP/REQ points you earn helping you unlock REQ packs faster.
> >
> > Example: Average REQ points per match 1500, 3 matches to open a silver pack. If a challenge is 5000 points, you basically unlock a free REQ pack and over time unlock more “free” REQ packs.
> >
> > It encourages people not to spend real money on REQ packs.
>
>
> To an extent, but I’m sure that the REQ pack sales won’t drop terribly low after implementing the challenges. People will always want more, so after they actually get the challenge done and the REQ packs over with, they’ll still buy the REQ packs with real money. They’ll probably lose out on a few sales of REQ packs, but it will probably give the game itself put in a better light with reviews.
>
> The REQ challenge doesn’t have to be so much as 5,000, I think that’s a bit much anyways. It will most definitely deter some people from buying REQ packs, but usually the people who are impatient enough to buy REQ packs will buy more regardless of whether or not they just got a “free” pack.
You are probably right, but missing out on sales for any business, is definitely frowned upon.
> 2533274812443594;15:
> > 2603643534586909;11:
> > > 2533274829767761;10:
> > > > 2603643534586909;8:
> > > > Less people will want to pay money for REQ packs if there are challenges that help you acquire REQ points faster, hence dissuading people from buying REQ packs.
> > >
> > >
> > > But you can get REQ packs without spending money now by playing multiplayer. So as long as the amount of time spent playing the game to complete the challenge is roughly the same as the amount of time it would take to earn the same amount of REQ points from multiplayer then it doesn’t change anything aside from giving people another method of spending the same amount of time. There are multiple ways that a game is evaluated as successful. The more obvious is how much money they make as a result in sales and micro-transactions. However, a game is also rated as successful if they can accumulate a consistent amount of play and, more importantly, replay time. Even if they don’t make a whole lot in micro-transactions, Microsoft will continue to fund a game that gets huge amounts of gameplay.
> >
> >
> > Yes…I know you can get REQ packs without money through multiplayer, but you seem to be missing my point. Challenges have always been a large payout on top of the XP/REQ points you earn helping you unlock REQ packs faster.
> >
> > Example: Average REQ points per match 1500, 3 matches to open a silver pack. If a challenge is 5000 points, you basically unlock a free REQ pack and over time unlock more “free” REQ packs.
> >
> > It encourages people not to spend real money on REQ packs.
>
>
> bro did you read his comments its called daily/weekly challenges for a reason
Yes, bro, I read his comments. Perhaps you should read my response a little more carefully.
Also, don’t spam triple post.
How about an alternative? What if there were Challenge REQ cards? You get these cards from REQ packs. The campaign related challenge cards would be about as common as the current boost cards at all ranges of rarity and award RP in accordance, and Arena/Warzone related challenges would be rare or greater. Campaign challenges which will grant the awarded REQ points once the challenge is completed in accumulation from the time that pack was opened (like an additional commendation), or Arena/Warzone challenges which will only grant additional XP and/or RP if the challenge is completed in a game when the boost is applied from the matchmaking page. This would work the EXACT same way as the current XP/RP boosts that currently exist in the game, however failing to complete the challenge would not net the reward, or at least not as great of one. I feel this would allow for greater XP/RP rewards because you are risking the card and may not be able to complete the challenge.