Team Throwdown didn't die...

…it was stillborn.

Team Throwdown launched Fed 18th. It is Fed 26th, 5 PM PST, a Tuesday night. A little over a week since Team Throwdown launched.

Team Throwdown’s population: 1672.

If you expect me to be busting out the champagne, balloons, party hats and streamers, you would be surprised. I feel sad for those who honestly expected this gametype to “save” Halo. I feel sad for those who long for a gametype they can enjoy. And this overall is a sign of things to come: That Halo is a dying franchise.

It’s dying not because Bungie killed it with their “gimmick loaded casual friendly” game Reach, nor 343 for their “gimmick loaded casual friendly” game that cut out large swaths of options and features. Halo is dying simple because another studio reinvented the wheel that is the FPS and captured the attention of the millions of true “casual” gamers to make untold billions of money with every yearly release of the title.

I’m straying off topic.

Is this latest failure of “competitive” Halo to lure players back to the game finally the enough proof to end the arguments of how a ‘real’ and ‘competitive’ Halo would bring back tens of thousands and invigorate the franchise? New CoD-esque Halo isn’t doing it either but it’s maintaining a better population than Old Halo. The franchise is dying and at this point all we can hope for is for the series to at least maintain a high enough level of quality for H6 and to end on a positive.

I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.

should have been around since day one, also a week later 3 more options opened up.

Only 1000 people? Then end is nigh!

No but seriously, it is a competitive playlist. What on earth did you expect the population to be? Not only that, but it is a competitive playlist with no ranks and a bad quitting problem because people are used to JiP, which is part of what kills this game.

Halo Reach MLG had less than 800 people on a day.

Halo 3 MLG was never the most popular, but it did have a lot more players (cough ranks cough).

Will a Halo game exactly like Halo 2 save the franchise?

No, but they need to realise WHY Halo 2-3 were as popular as they were. For a lot of people it was visible ranks. For other people, it was equal starts. For some, it was the maps and the weapons.

Now we have no ranks, no equal starts, bad maps and horrible weapons. And while the maps are subjective, they aren’t near as popular as previous maps have been.

I don’t want a carbon copy of Halo 2, but that doesn’t mean half of the stuff that Halo 4 implemented was a step in the right direction either.

People are also forgetting that the Majestic Map pack just came out.

If you are allowed to say “Halo 4 has a low population because Black Ops 2” then I am allowed to say “throwdown has a low population because of Majestic”.

But honestly, I would attribute it most to the mediocre selection of maps and gametypes coupled with BR starts only.

> I don’t want a carbon copy of Halo 2, but that doesn’t mean half of the stuff that Halo 4 implemented was a step in the right direction either.

Why this is such a hard concept for people to grasp is beyond me.

> Why was Halo 3 so popular?

Because it was the better game, regardless of what community you belonged to. It was more competitive. It was more social as well. Infection was infinitely more varied than Flood is now. It had Rocket Race. BTB was actually interesting, now vehicles aren’t worth -Yoink-. And Random Ordnance didn’t plague every playlist.

Halo 3 was better for everyone, not just competitives. The sooner people realize this, the sooner we can start fixing the game for EVERYONE.

> I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.

That’s what I get for not proof reading before I post.

How about now?

> > I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.
>
> That’s what I get for not proof reading before I post.
>
> How about now?

Competitive players asked for Supreme.

343I went half way and gave them Pepperoni.

It’s like if you asked for Infection to return and I gave you Flood as it is now with only a single map and a player limit of four people. You complain, I come back with "BUT 343i GAVE YOU WHAT YOU WANTED DIDN’T THEY?

Except they didn’t give you what you wanted.

> People are also forgetting that the Majestic Map pack just came out.
>
> If you are allowed to say “Halo 4 has a low population because Black Ops 2” then I am allowed to say “throwdown has a low population because of Majestic”.

H4 has a low population for a number of reasons.

That is one of them but not the only one I would list.

> Competitive players asked for Supreme.
>
> 343I went half way and gave them Pepperoni.
>
> It’s like if you asked for Infection to return and I gave you Flood with only a single map and a player limit of four people. You complain, I come back with "BUT 343i GAVE YOU WHAT YOU WANTED DIDN’T THEY?

I was under the impression that since this playlist had gametypes tailored by Bravo, who was picked by 343 and MLG, that this playlist was Supreme.

> > > I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.
> >
> > That’s what I get for not proof reading before I post.
> >
> > How about now?
>
> Competitive players asked for Supreme.
>
> 343I went half way and gave them Pepperoni.
>
> It’s like if you asked for Infection to return and I gave you Flood with only a single map and a player limit of four people. You complain, I come back with "BUT 343i GAVE YOU WHAT YOU WANTED DIDN’T THEY?

Flood were also our replacement for Elites in multiplayer. Or, as david ellis said it in his tweet to Bumper Jumps: “Something to scrath that itch”

Well their after-bite bit them, seeing as how they practically ruined Infection custom games with their replacement…

@Methew, as for Halo 4’s population, it’s dieing for many reason. But I can almost garuntee that if there was a Ranked and Social segregation, it would be more popular than it is now.

What if Bravo had to make sacrifices in order to attempt to appeal to a wider audience?

BR starts are not the most competitive setting out there, and GoldPro is infinitely better than Deluxe is.

I don’t particularly care about a more “competitive” game anyways. Well, I do and I don’t at the same time. I just want a game with even remotely balanced settings. Infinity Ordnance Cluster–Yoink- shouldn’t be the core of the game.

Many others feel the same way even if it isn’t obvious. I can guarantee PRO settings are voted for about as much as Infinity ones are when the option comes up.

Those 20k playing infinity slayer might not even like or favor all the changes but simply tolerate those changes. Casuals might not even care if weapons on the map are randomly placed or timed. They might not even care if Ordnance is tiered instead of Random.

> Because it was the better game, regardless of what community you belonged to. It was more competitive. It was more social as well. Infection was infinitely more varied than Flood is now. It had Rocket Race. BTB was actually interesting, now vehicles aren’t worth Yoink!. And Random Ordnance didn’t plague every playlist.
>
> Halo 3 was better for everyone, not just competitives. The sooner people realize this, the sooner <mark>we can start fixing the game for EVERYONE</mark>.

Another person who want’s the game to be playable and fun for everybody?

I think I’m in love, no -Yoink!-. I could really have sword I was the only one.

> What if Bravo had to make sacrifices in order to attempt to appeal to a wider audience?
>
> BR starts are not the most competitive setting out there, and GoldPro is infinitely better than Deluxe is.
>
> I don’t particularly care about a more “competitive” game anyways. Well, I do and I don’t at the same time. I just want a game with even remotely balanced settings. Infinity Ordnance Cluster–Yoink!- shouldn’t be the core of the game.
>
> Many others feel the same way even if it isn’t obvious. I can guarantee PRO settings are voted for about as much as Infinity ones are when the option comes up.

You pretty much hit the nail on the head.

When Ghostayame (who made most of the gametype originally) had released MLG V1, it was all BR’s, no ordinance or anything. In fact, I’d say it was almost identical to Halo 2.

However, people were worried it was too stripped down, that it wouldn’t attract a wider crowd.

So, when Team Throwdown was implemented, Bravo had to make it so that people who played infinity but wanted to get competitive could understand what was going on.

Hence ordinance drops in Throwdown. It’s so that people starting out in competitive Halo know what to do, but it’s balanced unlike the usual game.

> @Methew, as for Halo 4’s population, it’s dieing for many reason. But I can almost garuntee that if there was a Ranked and Social segregation, it would be more popular than it is now.

Doubtful.

I see Ranked being ghost towns, intially filled by expectant players looking for good games, yet not comparable in size to the masses playing Social. Thus because of wait times and inability to find quality matches due to population, players leave, creating a vicious cycle that ends when the population is gone.

> What if Bravo had to make sacrifices in order to attempt to appeal to a wider audience?

That I think is the issue.

What good is having your perfect competitive settings if nobody wants to play them? By compromising you at least get part of what you want instead of nothing.

> > @Methew, as for Halo 4’s population, it’s dieing for many reason. But I can almost garuntee that if there was a Ranked and Social segregation, it would be more popular than it is now.
>
> Doubtful.
>
> I see Ranked being ghost towns, intially filled by expectant players looking for good games, yet not comparable in size to the masses playing Social. Thus because of wait times and inability to find quality matches due to population, players leave, creating a vicious cycle that ends when the population is gone.

Yes, because Halo 3 takes so long to find games right.

I play Halo 3, and even now still find games fairly quickly, despite low population.

On another note, feel free to reply to any of my other posts. This topic is very subjective, and can’t really be quantified.

We’d need to have actually had a good ranked playlist in Halo 4 to be able to gauge ranked success.

EDIT: Also, ranks tend to drive people to play, as everyday they think “I want to rank up, I want to get better.” Which brings more quality games to ranked playlists. Without ranks, nobody cares because at the end of the day, they still rank up.

Compromising should be the overall game.

Perfect Competitive Settings should be a niche playlist.

Extremely chaotic settings should be a niche playlist. Infinity is the equivalent of fiesta.

Would you honestly be opposed to static weapons, the removal of overpowered items from loadouts, tiered ordnance, and balanced starting weapons? I find it hard to believe most people would.

Dual Wielding and Equipment wasn’t competitive orientated, but it was still tolerable. People running around with shotguns and rockets every 30 or sooner seconds isn’t. Winning because a power weapon just happened to spawn next to me isn’t.

I’m being literal with the shotguns by the way. Ordnance hands out shotguns and needlers left and right.

> Yes, because Halo 3 takes so long to find games right.

If I’m recalling correctly, lengthy search times is what made Bungie drastically loosen TrueSkill’s resctriction for Reach and add on an optional Skill search parameter.

> I play Halo 3, and even now still find games fairly quickly, despite low population.

I might argue that it’s because of the “Go Back to H3” Movement.

> EDIT: Also, ranks tend to drive people to play, as everyday they think “I want to rank up, I want to get better.” Which brings more quality games to ranked playlists. Without ranks, nobody cares because at the end of the day, they still rank up.

To a point, and not for everyone.

I tried my hand at the competitive game back in H3. Got as high as a 25 in Team Slayer before getting pissed off at my teamates loosing games for me. Placed a 35 in Lone Wolves before finally just getting fed up and leaving.

Tried again in Reach. Scored Iron? Bronze? first season. Did substantially better after the Rating System was ditched. Got up to 25% Gold before I started getting angry and frustrated that I was loosing to Onyxs.

Gave up again.

> Would you honestly be opposed to static weapons, the removal of overpowered items from loadouts, tiered ordnance, and balanced starting weapons? I find it hard to believe most people would.

Did you expect any answer besides “Of course not?”

> > Would you honestly be opposed to static weapons, the removal of overpowered items from loadouts, tiered ordnance, and balanced starting weapons? I find it hard to believe most people would.
>
> Did you expect any answer besides “Of course not?”

Based on the constant replies I get on these forums, or the way people with a similar mindset to mine are replied to, I actually did expect people to be opposed.

I’m sure if Active Camo and Boltshot were removed from loadouts a lot of people would complain.

If they wouldn’t be opposed the question is now “Why hasn’t it been done already?”

> > Yes, because Halo 3 takes so long to find games right.
>
> If I’m recalling correctly, lengthy search times is what made Bungie drastically loosen TrueSkill’s resctriction for Reach and add on an optional Skill search parameter.

Yup. And yet the search times aren’t that long at all. Still. With low population.

> > I play Halo 3, and even now still find games fairly quickly, despite low population.
>
> I might argue that it’s because of the “Go Back to H3” Movement.

And I’d argue that this was before and during the release of Halo 4 info.

> > EDIT: Also, ranks tend to drive people to play, as everyday they think “I want to rank up, I want to get better.” Which brings more quality games to ranked playlists. Without ranks, nobody cares because at the end of the day, they still rank up.
>
> To a point, and not for everyone.

This is true, but for a large majority.

> I tried my hand at the competitive game back in H3. Got as high as a 25 in Team Slayer before getting pissed off at my teamates loosing games for me. Placed a 35 in Lone Wolves before finally just getting fed up and leaving.

Play with a full team. I barely touched TS. Think I got to 33 before I couldn’t go further.

Got to 45 in lone wolves before it ranked locked me. I can no longer go any farther in ranks, which annoys me deeply. Doesn’t matter how well I play, or how many games I win. I feel it may be due to how fast I got there, but that’s a different story.

> Tried again in Reach. Scored Iron? Bronze? first season. Did substantially better after the Rating System was ditched. Got up to 25% Gold before I started getting angry and frustrated that I was loosing to Onyxs.
>
> Gave up again.

Onyx was the best rank, hence why you lost to them. Arena was horrible though. I think I got to gold before getting absolutely fed up with team mates, but had I played witha full team I’d have been fine.

The competitive players are simply not getting what they/we want. Throwdown is a terrible playlist. It is not “more competitive” simply because of the BR starts
and no enemy radar.

The numbers are low because the game types are bad, trueskill is pathetic with no
actual rank on top of it. H4 was way worse when it first came out and turned many
people off right away probably never to return, why would they?

And people wonder why there is a low population for almost all of the playlists? lol. Many things should have been in the game from the beginning…

-Social / Ranked playlist and at least a working 1-50 CSR even if only on waypoint.

-Smaller map pack to start it off instead of all that was big team.

-Double team, Team Snipers and lonewolves playlist in both social and ranked.

And of course much much more as we all know. 343 and many people on this site just dont get it.