The f2p model has failed

How often do you see players in the opening lineups who are still wearing the default Cavallino armor?
That’s right, almost never. Almost every single player who is still around has bought battle pass/es, or spent $ on an armor pack from the store, which means they have almost certainly dropped the $10 on a battle pass too.
The free to play model was supposed to make the game way more accessible and buff the player counts, right? Where some strong % would stay truly playing for free. Why aren’t we seeing that?

11 Likes

Imagine how piss poor it would be if it weren’t F2P… We’re talking like 5k people max if it were a paid game. I also think the amount of refunds/cancellations would’ve been far greater, they’re doing the ole fashioned released an incomplete mess of a game then wait 2-3 years to fix it F2P live service ultra special BS that a lot of devs do.

2 Likes

If you’re going to suggest the F2P model failed, it would be better if you don’t use an example that (on paper) supports its financial success.

Alongside that, how many of the ‘non-Cavalino’ armors in the lineups are composed of paid offerings versus unpaid unlocks?

Can you provide an example of a game where the default unlocked default cosmetics are more commonly utilized than the free or paid unlocks? I feel like aside from lower player counts (and higher than median positioning on the XBL top played charts) basing your opinion on default armor configs is a pretty weak position especially without a direct comparison.

1 Like

Failed is definitely up to interpretation. This continual explanation process that’s been ongoing for months is truly like no other Halo experience and it just continues to get frustrating. This new roadmap might be the icing on the cake for me. If it’s not delivered upon them that might be it for me unfortunately.

2 Likes

the F2P model has failed hard and thats something a lot off people have told all before the launch when there told that halo infinite multiplayer become’s a F2P model most off the communety players got a bad feeling all that its was becoming worse then the Pay To Play model there keep using.
since you get a lot off problems with the F2P model then with the Pay To Play model.

Yup.

It’s almost like basing an entire Halo game on selling cosmetics was a poor choice.

@Trand0
The question of whether the model failed is not purely a question of profit. It is a question of how the game is reviewed, what longevity it has, and how the people who played it feel about it.

3 Likes

I been playing since launch, I was gifted the Battlepass in Season 1 and 2. So technically I didnt spend my money on it? lol

Anyway, now with the credits i’ve earned in this Season 2 i have enough to get the Season 3 Battlepass for free.

Also I’ve never purchased any armor/gear/etc. from the store. So technically i’ve been F2P the entire time? :slight_smile:

F2P is just a strategy to trick people into paying for your game anyway when they wouldn’t. Its not about supporting people playing the game for free. Someone who might not have bought the game at all has now spent 10+ bucks to buy something. Thats a win in 343’s book.

The F2P isnt the issue, the issue is 343 lack of actual support and QOL fixes. They said witht he new engine they could push out updates faster and yet we still have de-sync which has been an issue since day 1.

5 Likes

Hey, OP? If the model failed, why is everyone wearing premium armor then?

@Thee_Bluejay You’re mistake here is making the assumption they would’ve launched the game in the state they did just using a different business model. In reality, the only time it’s ‘okay’ to launch AAA titles in this state is when they’re F2P and a “live service”.

When box products launch - especially AAA titles - they are content complete and polished (otherwise they go down as cyberpunk). Live service games don’t really ever launch or become content complete, they just turn the money faucet on and keep adding things.

Based on where infinite is currently, it will take 3-4 more years for this game to contain all the content and polish expected by the IP from launch. If Infinite was a box product, all of the resources spent on their live service would have instead gone into everything that has been cut and is still missing.

Development would’ve gone smoother, and Infinite would’ve likely gone down as one of the best Halo titles ever created, as well as the most successful. Not to mention, if they were able to hit the same release date, they would’ve trampled their competitors.

You may be too young to remember but, there was a time before everything was F2P and loaded with MTX. This was a far superior time for consumers and studios still made tons of money. There’s a reason most new games want to be F2P and “live service” and its not for the benefit of the consumer. This also directly related to why games don’t feel as new/exciting/special as they once did.

3 Likes

Microtransactions just don’t work for Halo. When the core reward for progression and challenges is cosmetics then being able to purchase cosmetics damages the overall experience.

Gone are the days when you see someone with cool armor and think “How did he get that?!” Now you see someone with cool armor and think “How much did that loser spend on that?”

If it was succeeding where’s the content outside of customization and events

Where’s the live service at?

Outside of microtransactions it has failed imo

3 Likes

If it had the content that it should’ve had there in day 1 ie forge, splitscreen, social modes, match xp progression, cross core customization, file share, cgb, working theater, working custom games, few more maps, splitscreen co-op and playable elites it would have wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy more players than it does now

Infinite in the current state is a failure when looking at the game through a f2p game lense

If it was a paid game with this state 95% of the gaming community would say its unacceptable

1 Like

I actually see a lot of players in default armor.

Two of my friends were wearing default armor when they were still playing

I still see default armor when I play but usually it’s Smurf accounts trying to avoid the horrible SBMM.

This is true, but when the argument uses cosmetics to determine popular success of the financial model in question, it’s usually not going to help the adverse position to point out that the financial model actually appears to be quite successful in an argument about popularity.

There’s absolutely more to a product’s success than the money made off of said product, but the argument is trying to suggest that because players aren’t playing purely for free based on default armor configs means that the model has failed, which is a comically bad argument to make.

1 Like

That’s… not evidence of the F2P model. What you need to be looking at isn’t people who spent money on Halo Infinite, but how many are playing Halo Infinite without paying for Xbox Live Gold. Who didn’t buy the Campaign.

2 Likes

Xbox live gold doesn’t matter as its a f2p game and microdoft changed it to where you don’t need gold to play the multiplayer in f2p games

1 Like