Disable/Enable DLC.
Rather than giving us a limited amount of playlists to play because of lack of DLC, simply toggle/untoggle DLC enabled/disabled so you can search a playlist with the ability to play on the DLC maps allowed.
Why not?
Personally I’d prefer an AK-47, and of course have it customized to shoot depleted uranium rounds.
Or we could just make it like reach, where if you decide to play the game more than a month after the DLC comes out, you never even get to play any of the new maps unless you go specifically into one playlist with no population, just to play bad gametypes on Tempest.
Also Anniversary.
Yeah, I’d like to play on DLC maps when in matchmaking. Some of the DLC-map-specific achievements on reach are still missing for me because I cant find a game with people who use the map packs in matchmaking.
DLC required
I’m sorry, but Reach has pissed me off with this. I’m sick of paying for decent maps and never playing them because little Timmy can’t afford £6 to buy them.
Well little Timmy should -Yoink- off then, simple. Either you play with or without, there shouldn’t be an in between.
> DLC required
>
> I’m sorry, but Reach has pissed me off with this. I’m sick of paying for decent maps and never playing them because little Timmy can’t afford £6 to buy them.
>
> Well little Timmy should -Yoink!- off then, simple. Either you play with or without, there shouldn’t be an in between.
If this gets implemented, people will know that others can play.
> > DLC required
> >
> > I’m sorry, but Reach has pissed me off with this. I’m sick of paying for decent maps and never playing them because little Timmy can’t afford £6 to buy them.
> >
> > Well little Timmy should -Yoink!- off then, simple. Either you play with or without, there shouldn’t be an in between.
>
> If this gets implemented, people will know that others can play.
Like what they did with BTB and Slayer playlists? So that “Map packs are more likely to turn up” No thanks
People with DLC should play with others who have it, the people that won’t get them or can’t afford them should have a less than premium service within the game.
The 1 thing I want from CoD:
Keep the game the same with minimal changes.
We need to stick to what our game is designed for instead of venturing into other sub-genres of FPS’s we don’t belong to.
> > > DLC required
> > >
> > > I’m sorry, but Reach has pissed me off with this. I’m sick of paying for decent maps and never playing them because little Timmy can’t afford £6 to buy them.
> > >
> > > Well little Timmy should -Yoink!- off then, simple. Either you play with or without, there shouldn’t be an in between.
> >
> > If this gets implemented, people will know that others can play.
>
> Like what they did with BTB and Slayer playlists? So that “Map packs are more likely to turn up” No thanks
>
> People with DLC should play with others who have it, the people that won’t get them or can’t afford them should have a less than premium service within the game.
Uh-huh.
Here, let me explain.
I play MW3, and while I have to say it isn’t the best CoD game (Although it is much more inviting than the current Reach), it has a big community. At first, I wanted to be part of this community, play it and have fun with it alongside Halo. So I bought a map-pack, hoping it would be awesome.
Well, I bought it, but the problem was, nobody could play it. As you said, only players with ALL DLC could play, and I did not have ‘all’.
So I wasted 1600 MSP for nothing. I could not play, and the amount of players playing DLC would be around 1 percent of the entire community online.
And then, they introduced the new enable/disable DLC. Suddenly, I could go into ANY playlist, flip a button, and I could play with other players who had DLC. There still was DLC only playlists which required all, but nobody decided to flock over there and play now that they could play in normal playlists - with LOTS of others.
And the thing is, even though I didn’t have all the playlists, I still could play. It was suddenly worth the money I put in it, and a lot more people than I expected seemed to be playing on the DLC maps too.
This means that when DLC enable/disable was released, people were given incentive to actually play. With Halo, it could work the same. I feel sorry for you if you think Money is everything, and you deserve some ‘premium service’ for paying.
I mean, look. You probably bought Reach, and you probably have a map pack. When you play on the dlc-required playlists, there are much less players actually playing. I go on, and while on BTB there are thousands of players, on the dlc required playlists there are less than 100. This happened just like in CoD. Somebody was dedicated enough to pay, but didn’t have enough and as a result suffered due to not having all the maps. If you could simply play the maps with others as long as others had the same map and voted for it, then you would have more chances to play on the maps than on DLC required playlists.
> Keep the game the same with minimal changes.
>
> We need to stick to what our game is designed for instead of venturing into other sub-genres of FPS’s we don’t belong to.
To me, it seems more realistic. In Halo 2, there were no equipments, only weapons and shields and radars and invisibility and overshield.
In Reach there were armor abilities. While they, gameplay-wise, were unbalanced, they were realistic (At least in the Halo universe) and they didn’t change much about the prominent Halo gameplay. It just seemed to create more ‘noobs way out’. The only thing I liked about AA’s were that you could create new gametypes with it, and you could sprint.
Dude this isn’t a call of duty forum
> DLC required
>
> I’m sorry, but Reach has pissed me off with this. I’m sick of paying for decent maps and never playing them because little Timmy can’t afford £6 to buy them.
>
> Well little Timmy should -Yoink!- off then, simple. Either you play with or without, there shouldn’t be an in between.
Well maybe they should of made Reach better, then I would of bought the maps. People aren’t going to buy extra things for a crud game.