Someone explain to me the $60 price tag of Campaign

I would love an explanation for this one. The last 15 years Halo has been $60 which included Forge, Coop, Multiplayer, Campaign. With MP going “free” this is a huge part of that previous $60.

To top it off coop and forge will not be out for months after launch.

Where the hell do they think they can charge us $60 for a single player campaign that is missing numerous features.

I am getting real tired of companies trying to pull this F2P crap. Halo had enough recognition to easily have not been F2P. This would have lessened the amount of hackers, quitters, and boosters.

Was going to get the campaign until I saw what they are trying to pull.

7 Likes

Probably something to do with the fact it’s the biggest Halo campaign we have ever had.

Game design ain’t what it used to be fella. You cant just ask Martin to work some overtime on Saturday so he can build the entire multiplayer the weekend before launch by himself.

Don’t forget they can only charge what consumers will pay. Expect a rapid price drop like all game pass games.

3 Likes

They are missing key features removed MP from it to heavily monetize. If the size of games and difficulty it was to make indicated the pricing, then many games would be under and over that $60. They are trying to milk their fans it is as simple as that.

2 Likes

The only reason games can still cost $60 with inflation and production costs is the way they are monetised. Most games are turning to free to play because the competition is otherwise too fierce and the longevity of the game suffers without the playerbase.

2 Likes

Games can absolutely still survive without the f2p monetization. They just wont be getting those sweet sweet early 2000’s profits they used to.

1 Like

Survive, rarely thrive.

Halo is MS’ flagship game so the success benchmark is much higher. I believe most consoles lose money on hardware sales.

Halo is a known name that absolutely could have prospered without this predatory F2P monetization. Of all games Halo is one that could have.

1 Like

The truth of the matter is we’re still not sure if the campaign, by itself, will be worth $60. That’s something that we’ll learn when the game comes out.

We don’t have a rough estimate of how long the campaign is and we also know that there are no armor unlocks for multiplayer in campaign. It all depends on what you believe is worth $60 and we all will just have to wait and see if it is worth it.

1 Like

$60 for me is absolutely chump change. My issue is them removing the MP to heavily monetize but keeping the same price tag for the campaign. The removal of MP from the purchase has introduced a lot more hackers, boosters, and griefers then previous games.

1 Like

According to those youtuber that got early access to the campaign. They really enjoy the campaign and said it was worth the delay.
There are also some rumors that it can take you 30-50 hours to 100% the campaign. not sure if its true, but we will see once the game is out.
There is also a rumor that there is a speedrun of the game that is 8 hours if i remember it correctly (Speedrun the older halo games was under 3 hours).

I guess we all have to wait and see if the campaign is fully worth the 60$ price tag

Facts.

Games today with their high def graphics and high spec audio design (that all of you demand every generation) should actually cost $80-$90+ dollars. It’s actually a miracle the price barely moved over the last 20yrs while every other industry product did.

Have perspective.

I said this just a few days ago but the only real reasons people harp about $10 season passes (every 3 months) and $60 games and $20 skins (that cost more than 20 to create) is because A) They are probably not in control of their purchases or B) They don’t consider video games as a product to be worth the ask-for prices despite ‘loving games’.

That’s not to say some monetization schemes aren’t scummy, insulting, or just kinda dumb (coatings); but we are the only sub culture that refuses to invest in something we claim to love. If you guys could just download a game for free, and free content just uploads into it, none of you would ask or care how exactly are the devs eating. lol

4 Likes

> I would love an explanation for this one. The last 15 years Halo has been $60 which included Forge, Coop, Multiplayer, Campaign. With MP going “free” this is a huge part of that previous $60.

I’ll inform 343 on your behalf that they need to work for free, provide their own resources/equipment, skip the insurance, and kill opossums for food.

On a more serious not games cost money to make and games are made to make a profit (shocking I know); game prices have remained largely static for well over a decade despite costing more and more to make. There have to be changes made to the system if games are going to continue to be profitable and continue to be made.

Multiplayer used to be primarily a tacked on experience to single player games. Things have switched around so more people buy things for the ‘add-on’ than the campaign/story. If single player campaigns don’t make money for the people funding their creation, then they’ll stop making them. That’s not someting I want to see.

To top it off coop and forge will not be out for months after launch.Where the hell do they think they can charge us $60 for a single player campaign that is missing numerous features

Forge/Co-op will come and if you want to delay your purchase till then you can. Co-op is a single feature. Forge isn’t part of the campaign, it’s a diversion that benefits artists and custom games. They are part of the package, it’s just the delivery date you’re not fond of.

I am getting real tired of companies trying to pull this F2P crap. Halo had enough recognition to easily have not been F2P. This would have lessened the amount of hackers, quitters, and boosters.
You’d have a much lower population. I doubt that would reduce the number of hackers, quitters, or booster. The latter two have been an issue since day one and there are punitive responses in place to help deal with them. The fist one is unfortunately an issue again (which it really hadn’t been since 4 till mcc hit pcc) that the game has returned to pc and while there have and will continue to be attempts to deal with those that do cheat and to prevent those things from working it’s always going to be an ongoing battle and the game being f2p doesn’t change that.

Was going to get the campaign until I saw what they are trying to pull.
yes, charging the normal price for a game for a normal game is utterly devious.

1 Like

This argument is fallacious… First off, Devs never see a single dime of the extra profits in games, many devs that work on a game are under contract and are almost always terminated after the game is finished. Second, while it’s true that the cost of game production is going up, the price to distribute said games as well as word of mouth being cheaper and often more effective than expensive marketing has also had a sizeable effect on how much money can be saved…

Lastly, games already ARE costing more, but people still believe 60 USD nets you the full game when it is merely a shell price these days, the complete edition+season passes will usually range between 100-200 USD easily which is outright ludicrous.

Most companies want to have their cake and eat it too… there is no guarantee that them increasing the prices straight up to 100 USD will suddenly mean no microtransactions or greedy business practices implemented into their games out of the kindness of the companie’s hearts… Anyone who genuinely believes this is honestly fooling themselves.

the AAA gaming industry is probably the only industry on the planet that can get away with selling incomplete products at full or higher prices with little to no consequence, and many of us are just frustrated at having to deal with this every single time a new title launches, it’s a genuine meme…

3 Likes

Games have never been as cheap as they are now. $60 Dollars was the price for games more than 25 years ago. If you only take inflation into consideration videogames should cost $100 or more. But inflation is not all. Game companies are way bigger than they were 25 years ago. So you have to add these costs as well. A campaign with the length and quality of Halo Infinite should cost $120 if they don’t want to lose money. $60 is super cheap in the year 2021, we shouldn’t complain but instead be glad they don’t go Sonys route with raising game prices up to $80. Videogames are the only product that got cheaper during the decades.

2 Likes

I’m going to wait and see what they actually offer. Don’t worry, all the streamers that need to pay their bills will show you the entire campaign.

Right now this game is a huge red flag.

1 Like

Now If we had to play 60 for campaign and 60 for multiplayer, that would be worth complaining about. Be we dont. And we dont complain about other single player games being 60, so why is this an exception? And saying “theyve always been together” isnt a valid argument because by that logic, single player only games with no mm should be cheaper. Or online only games should also be cheaper. And usually thats not the case. Maybe in odd situations, yes. But 60 is the norm for games reguardless.

Which to be honest im surprised games are still 60! I remember starting to pay 60 for games around the og xbox era, and im still playin 60 for games. So honeslty im not complaining

Obviously it costs more then $20 to create, but you are not gauging that off of a single purchase. A single skin should not cost that much.

A) Most of the Halo players now a days are well old enough to pay for their own items.

B) Wrong.

Games have been extremely popular for a very very long time. We are nowhere near the point where the increase in production costs beats out the $60 price tag and having 0 profits.

Charging the same price for a game that is missing literally HALO defining features.

Again they are still making a ton of money with the $60 price tag.

Absolutely, the shareholders want money and do not give a -Yoink!- about the integrity of games now a days. that is why we have constantly seen disasters with recent releases. I honestly might just go back to Indie games for a few months. I am getting sick and tired of how -Yoink!- the AAA games have been.

There absolutely should be a difference in price considering we are losing defning feature in MP because of it going G2P. Yall can argue and shill all you want, but they are being scummy.

4 Likes

Thing is, I would pay $90 dollars to have campaign and full customization multiplayer. Right now with the battle pass I can’t even get colors I like for any of the armor cores, and hey, the armor core I like MK V [B], they aren’t even selling any coatings for it. So what’s the point of not having colors?

I would also pay for extra colors/textures if we got some color customization by default, but I won’t pay for the current system. Seriously, $10 for two knifes? That’s asking for too much. I truly believe they could make money and give us a better product.

3 Likes

You know exactly why. Because **** you, give me money.

2 Likes

It’s cheap man, you can only get like 4 armors for that price and this is a whole game.