I feel like 343 is getting slammed with too much unnecessary hate, and I’m here to clear things up with the community. By all means, I am certainly not defending 343. This thread is simply meant to inform those who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
First of all, 343 wasn’t “lazy” with Halo 5’s content. They didn’t intentionally leave out content from the game at launch due to laziness, they did it for a reason. 343’s plan was to release content each month over the course of half a year in order to keep players busy. For the most part this strategy has worked fairly well. The added REQs, game modes and maps keep the game interesting over six months after release. So in that sense, 343 succeeded.
However, there’s no doubt that this is also a huge cash hole for 343 and Microsoft. With the monthly updates comes a large addition of new REQs. And with new REQs comes new packs that contain the new weapons and gear for about $10. There’s no doubt that this whole “free DLC” scheme was also a big excuse to rake in even more money.
Again, I don’t support 343. Like many others, I believe that Halo 5 should’ve included all of this content at launch; however, the monthly updates have managed to keep me occupied with the game for several months, something that rarely happens with any retail game I’ve ever buy. All I’m asking is that some of you lay off 343 for a change and consider what they’ve done to keep fans intrigued with Halo 5 for this long.
EDIT:
Perhaps I should reinstate that I’m only pointing out the facts. 343 intended to hold off some content that would’ve been in the game at launch in order to keep fans busy months after release. I also pointed out that these free updates are also a cash grab for them, too. I agree with a lot of people that 343 should’ve included Infection, Grifball, and BTB at launch and released gametype variants later on. More maps should’ve been in the game at launch as well. I feel like this would’ve been the best approach and would’ve made the best of both worlds.
> 2535420373165854;1:
> I feel like 343 is getting slammed with too much unnecessary hate, and I’m here to clear things up with the community. By all means, I am certainly not defending 343. This thread is simply meant to inform those who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
>
> First of all, 343 wasn’t “lazy” with Halo 5’s content. They didn’t intentionally leave out content from the game at launch due to laziness, they did it for a reason. 343’s plan was to release content each month over the course of half a year in order to keep players busy. For the most part this strategy has worked fairly well. The added REQs, game modes and maps keep the game interesting over six months after release. So in that sense, 343 succeeded.
>
> However, there’s no doubt that this is also a huge cash hole for 343 and Microsoft. With the monthly updates comes a large addition of new REQs. And with new REQs comes new packs that contain the new weapons and gear for about $10. There’s no doubt that this whole “free DLC” scheme was also a big excuse to rake in even more money.
>
> Again, I don’t support 343. Like many others, I believe that Halo 5 should’ve included all of this content at launch; however, the monthly updates have managed to keep me occupied with the game for several months, something that rarely happens with any retail game I’ve ever buy. All I’m asking is that some of you lay off 343 for a change and consider what they’ve done to keep fans intrigued with Halo 5 for this long.
“Release content each month to keep players busy”…
you do realize that the majority of the population has left the game right? Saying that their strategy worked is laughable
The strategy itself is laughable. You don’t sustain population by intentionally delaying completion of a game, and anyone who is naive enough to think they intentionally delayed the game for the sake of sustain and not simply because they ran out of time…well…I got some stuff I’d like to sell you.
I agree with OP. I think it was a strategy to keep the excitement going. They got off to a rough start but the game is in a good place now. As far as population drop, that would have happened anyway. Gamers have a really short attention span. Also they may went with a scaled back launch in an effort to avoid a repeat of TMCC disaster. Halo 5 HAD TO WORK. Maybe a smaller game at launch was easier to polish.
If what you say is true, that also means 343i completely neglected the fact that other games exist and new games continue to come out. With Overwatch coming out, the Halo population has plummeted yet again. You think people are going to pop Halo back in for more than a day just because a Sword Needler Warthog is a thing? If you get bored of a game with 3 game types and 7 maps (I’m being hyperbolic people, cool your jets) within the first 2 months, guess what? You’re MUCH less likely to stick around for a new release of helmets, armor, stances, visors, emblems, and other things that make zero difference to the replay value of the game.
I know you’re not defending 343i… but your defense of 343i moves them from “unaware what the Halo community wants” to “unaware of how the the entire gaming ecosystem works”. I’m not sure that’s any better.
The “ran out of time” argument doesn’t make sense though. If they took 2-3 years to make the few maps we had at launch, how did they whip up Overgrowth, Stasis, Darkstar, Torque, Noctus, Riptide, plus the two we are getting in June in 6 months? Those maps had to have been ready. If so then they were withheld for a reason. It had to be to market a “free dlc” scheme.
> 2535468812026872;6:
> The “ran out of time” argument doesn’t make sense though. If they took 2-3 years to make the few maps we had at launch, how did they whip up Overgrowth, Stasis, Darkstar, Torque, Noctus, Riptide, plus the two we are getting in June in 6 months? Those maps had to have been ready. If so then they were withheld for a reason. It had to be to market a “free dlc” scheme.
I didn’t make an argument about that. And yes, I also believe that 343 already had all the content completed but just said they were working on it to cover things up.
> 2535420373165854;7:
> > 2535468812026872;6:
> > The “ran out of time” argument doesn’t make sense though. If they took 2-3 years to make the few maps we had at launch, how did they whip up Overgrowth, Stasis, Darkstar, Torque, Noctus, Riptide, plus the two we are getting in June in 6 months? Those maps had to have been ready. If so then they were withheld for a reason. It had to be to market a “free dlc” scheme.
>
>
> I didn’t make an argument about that. And yes, I also believe that 343 already had all the content completed but just said they were working on it to cover things up.
Yeah I forgot to quote Ramir3z77, it was his point I believe.
> 2533274819302824;3:
> The strategy itself is laughable. You don’t sustain population by intentionally delaying completion of a game, and anyone who is naive enough to think they intentionally delayed the game for the sake of sustain and not simply because they ran out of time…well…I got some stuff I’d like to sell you.
I’m just a little confused with what your saying, do you think they held back content for population, or do you think they just ran our of time?
> 2533274800701473;5:
> If what you say is true, that also means 343i completely neglected the fact that other games exist and new games continue to come out. With Overwatch coming out, the Halo population has plummeted yet again. You think people are going to pop Halo back in for more than a day just because a Sword Needler Warthog is a thing? If you get bored of a game with 3 game types and 7 maps (I’m being hyperbolic people, cool your jets) within the first 2 months, guess what? You’re MUCH less likely to stick around for a new release of helmets, armor, stances, visors, emblems, and other things that make zero difference to the replay value of the game.
>
> I know you’re not defending 343i… but your defense of 343i moves them from “unaware what the Halo community wants” to “unaware of how the the entire gaming ecosystem works”. I’m not sure that’s any better.
You’re right, new weapons and armor won’t keep the community playing; however, gametypes such as Infection, Grifball, BTB, and Fiesta will. Not to mention that the addition of new maps keeps players interested. Some people just have a short attention span and grow bored of games quickly. I think most of the updates have had enough to keep things fresh for a little while at a time.
Running out of time is the only logical conclusion I can come up with.
No one competent would think delaying basic content is a good sustain plan.
> 2533274819302824;11:
> Running out of time is the only logical conclusion I can come up with.
>
> No one competent would think delaying basic content is a good sustain plan.
If you think about it, it makes complete sense financially.
Nope, can’t accept it.
You make the launch product less appealing.
You ensure those who don’t get what they want at launch grow bored, quit the game and only come back when what they want is actually in the game.
Better Sustain Plan: Have infection at launch, release new infection maps and infection variants each month so infection fans constantly have a new experience and incentive to keep coming back.
343I’s Sustain Plan: Launch without infection, wait half a year to add it. Watch as people who buy Halo for infection quit in droves.
I don’t see any financial benefit to that.
I’d buy the sustain plan if Halo 5 wasn’t essentially playing catch-up with previous Halo games while pumping out a blend of new content nestled on top of a bigger mound of recycled content.
> 2533274792820475;2:
> > 2535420373165854;1:
> > I feel like 343 is getting slammed with too much unnecessary hate, and I’m here to clear things up with the community. By all means, I am certainly not defending 343. This thread is simply meant to inform those who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
> >
> > First of all, 343 wasn’t “lazy” with Halo 5’s content. They didn’t intentionally leave out content from the game at launch due to laziness, they did it for a reason. 343’s plan was to release content each month over the course of half a year in order to keep players busy. For the most part this strategy has worked fairly well. The added REQs, game modes and maps keep the game interesting over six months after release. So in that sense, 343 succeeded.
> >
> > However, there’s no doubt that this is also a huge cash hole for 343 and Microsoft. With the monthly updates comes a large addition of new REQs. And with new REQs comes new packs that contain the new weapons and gear for about $10. There’s no doubt that this whole “free DLC” scheme was also a big excuse to rake in even more money.
> >
> > Again, I don’t support 343. Like many others, I believe that Halo 5 should’ve included all of this content at launch; however, the monthly updates have managed to keep me occupied with the game for several months, something that rarely happens with any retail game I’ve ever buy. All I’m asking is that some of you lay off 343 for a change and consider what they’ve done to keep fans intrigued with Halo 5 for this long.
>
>
> “Release content each month to keep players busy”…
>
> you do realize that the majority of the population has left the game right? Saying that their strategy worked is laughable
Please enlighten me with the server population if alot of people left i wonder why it only takes me 10 seconds to find a match.
All I get from you Op is Halo 5 is a cash grab.
> Better Sustain Plan: Have infection at launch, release new infection maps and infection variants each month so infection fans constantly have a new experience and incentive to keep coming back.
Eh, I’d argue that an even better sustain plan would be to have the full suite of game modes, i.e, everything from Halo 3 onward, and then launch variants of those game modes, or actually new game modes, as the “Free DLC”. Instead of what we have currently.
But your point still stands.
Their monthly updates sounded good on paper but once again 343 execution of said plan wasn’t good. First off first impressions mean a lot! To release H5 as a bare bones game after that face plant of a release that was MCC. Most didn’t seem informed that some basic playlist and features wouldn’t be there and seems may not ever be here. H5 is a good game it’s just not nearly as good as previous titles.
> 2533274915643658;17:
> > Better Sustain Plan: Have infection at launch, release new infection maps and infection variants each month so infection fans constantly have a new experience and incentive to keep coming back.
>
>
> Eh, I’d argue that an even better sustain plan would be to have the full suite of game modes, i.e, everything from Halo 3 onward, and then launch variants of those game modes, or actually new game modes, as the “Free DLC”. Instead of what we have currently.
> But your point still stands.
Well yeah, but I was just using one random mode as an example.
But basically yeah. Launch with the modes, then add new forge maps and mode variants month by month for those modes, with skins and other trinkets and candy as well. That’s a far better sustain plan.
I think 343 just ran out of time… And to be honest im not sure they have what it takes to make a flagship game… I have not been impressed… But maybe I hold them at to high of standards… They really need to kick it in gear!!