The Reason Halo 4's Population is so low.

Advertising.

While yes of course, there are many other reasons that Halo 4 has a fairly low population, Microsoft (343)'s biggest mistake was in advertising, or at least if they actually wanted the game to thrive.

I don’t know if you guys have noticed by now, but practically every ad I see for Halo 4 isn’t for the game itself. It’s all about the Mountain Dew promotion, the Doritos promotion, the 7/11 King of The Hill promotion, etc. In other words, there are hardly any advertisements for the ACTUAL GAME! It seems to me like 343 is just trying to make a ton of quick profit and don’t really care about people buying their game. They must have realized that enough people were gonna buy the game just because it has Halo in the title, and therefore they should just waste advertising on selling someone else’s product.

Just an opinion, but does anyone else agree with me?

Or it could be that the highest rated and selling iteration of the most popular shooter franchise in history was released just a few days after Halo 4. I’m guessing that could have something to do with it.

Nope, ive seen alot of advertisements of HALO 4 in my country. From buses to billboards to Commercials (Trailers) to bus stops (yes we have advertisements on bus stops)

> Or it could be that the highest rated and selling iteration of the most popular shooter franchise in history was released just a few days after Halo 4. I’m guessing that could have something to do with it.

As I said, that was definitely a factor. But still, if you compare Halo 4’s release populations to Reach’s, there were practically half as many players on during the first week, and the numbers of dropped much more quickly. Black Ops 1 came out shortly after Reach. Same thing…

Also, Call of Duty isn’t even close to being the highest rated franchise…

With respect to the far more diverse multiplayer games out there these days, Halo 4’s population is not that low. CoD will always have a large fan base because anybody can pick up the controller and have just as much skill as the next loser playing the game (battle of the campers!)

Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures. These skills are not popular in the gaming community, so Halo games will probably continue to under achieve.

the same goes for the GoW franchise. If you can’t wall bounce, -Yoink- basically.

> With respect to the far more diverse multiplayer games out there these days, Halo 4’s population is not that low. CoD will always have a large fan base because anybody can pick up the controller and have just as much skill as the next loser playing the game (battle of the campers!)
>
> Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures. These skills are not popular in the gaming community, so Halo games will probably continue to under achieve.
>
> the same goes for the GoW franchise. If you can’t wall bounce, Yoink! basically.

I’ve been saying something similar to this since folks back on B.net blamed Reach’s low population on this, that and the other.

I have a 30+ y/o brother, two 50+ y/o parents (dad, step-dad) and an 8 y/o nephew who all play Blops/MWF games and go positive. But when they used to join me in Reach 5-15 was a good game for them.

Let’s face it. We all like handouts … it’s human nature. And society will always ENJOY easier games more. With the Blops/MWF games it’s pathetically easy to pile up kills in comparison to ANY Halo game. That is the reason for your population differences. Blops and MWF aren’t by any stretch of the imagination better games. But they are easier, with a non-existent learning curve, and therefore more enjoyable for most. And last I knew, easier never translated to better. Nor does population translate to better (unless folks really think the Twilight movies are good because of huge populations that flock to see them … LOL)

> > With respect to the far more diverse multiplayer games out there these days, Halo 4’s population is not that low. CoD will always have a large fan base because anybody can pick up the controller and have just as much skill as the next loser playing the game (battle of the campers!)
> >
> > Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures. These skills are not popular in the gaming community, so Halo games will probably continue to under achieve.
> >
> > the same goes for the GoW franchise. If you can’t wall bounce, Yoink! basically.
>
> I’ve been saying something similar to this since folks back on B.net blamed Reach’s low population on this, that and the other.
>
> I have a 30+ y/o brother, two 50+ y/o parents (dad, step-dad) and an 8 y/o nephew who all play CoD games and go positive. But when they used to join me in Reach 5-15 was a good game for them.
>
> Society will always ENJOY easy games, and with the CoD games it’s pathetically easy to pile up kills vs ANY Halo game. That is the reason for your population differences. Blops and MWF aren’t by any stretch of the imagination better games. But they are easier, with a non-existent learning curve, and therefore more enjoyable for most. And last I knew, easier never translated to better. Nor does population translate to better (do folks really think the Twilight movies are good because of huge populations that flock to see them? LOL)

People play CoD instead of Halo because CoD is more consistantly fun. Halo doesn’t take any more skill than CoD does. In fact, I’d take the best CoD players of the best Halo players any day. It’s the shield that makes the difference. The shield is the only thing that separates Halo from every other FPS series. That’s the game-changer. In every other game, the person with the best reflexes and aim wins. Because of the shield, that doesn’t really matter as much in Halo. In Halo, it’s all about landing more hits on your enemy while trying to prevent him from landing some on you. It’s less about positioning, aim, and skill, and more about jumping around and throwing elbows. Once you get up into the “competitive” levels, it becomes about so-called “map control” (ie power weapon hording) and exploits.

In series like CoD, the methodology of winning is no different at every level… the ingredients are always the same… the more skill you have, the higher you rank.

A good demonstration of this is SWAT. SWAT favors aim, reflexs, and skill… the guy who shoots first and most accurately wins the firefight. As such, it plays more like other modern shooters than any other mode, and it shouldn’t be surprising that most dedicated Halo players SUCK at it (while my k/d ratio in that mode is about double standard modes… higher even than my ratio in games like CoD and Battlefield).

The reason Halo 4’s population is so low is because they neglected to add in a local only search filter and now only US players can play the game.

> The reason Halo 4’s population is so low is because they neglected to add in a local only search filter and now only US players can play the game.

Yeah because US players never have to deal with crap hosts due to the awful internet that Australia provides to its citizens. Nope, never.

I’m a US player and I would very much appreciate a local only search filter, I can’t stand it anymore.

> > > With respect to the far more diverse multiplayer games out there these days, Halo 4’s population is not that low. CoD will always have a large fan base because anybody can pick up the controller and have just as much skill as the next loser playing the game (battle of the campers!)
> > >
> > > Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures. These skills are not popular in the gaming community, so Halo games will probably continue to under achieve.
> > >
> > > the same goes for the GoW franchise. If you can’t wall bounce, Yoink! basically.
> >
> > I’ve been saying something similar to this since folks back on B.net blamed Reach’s low population on this, that and the other.
> >
> > I have a 30+ y/o brother, two 50+ y/o parents (dad, step-dad) and an 8 y/o nephew who all play CoD games and go positive. But when they used to join me in Reach 5-15 was a good game for them.
> >
> > Society will always ENJOY easy games, and with the CoD games it’s pathetically easy to pile up kills vs ANY Halo game. That is the reason for your population differences. Blops and MWF aren’t by any stretch of the imagination better games. But they are easier, with a non-existent learning curve, and therefore more enjoyable for most. And last I knew, easier never translated to better. Nor does population translate to better (do folks really think the Twilight movies are good because of huge populations that flock to see them? LOL)
>
> People play CoD instead of Halo because CoD is more consistantly fun. Halo doesn’t take any more skill than CoD does. In fact, I’d take the best CoD players of the best Halo players any day. It’s the shield that makes the difference. The shield is the only thing that separates Halo from every other FPS series. That’s the game-changer. In every other game, the person with the best reflexes and aim wins. Because of the shield, that doesn’t really matter as much in Halo. In Halo, it’s all about landing more hits on your enemy while trying to prevent him from landing some on you. It’s less about positioning, aim, and skill, and more about jumping around and throwing elbows. Once you get up into the “competitive” levels, it becomes about so-called “map control” (ie power weapon hording) and exploits.
>
> In series like CoD, the methodology of winning is no different at every level… the ingredients are always the same… the more skill you have, the higher you rank.
>
> A good demonstration of this is SWAT. SWAT favors aim, reflexs, and skill… the guy who shoots first and most accurately wins the firefight. As such, it plays more like other modern shooters than any other mode, and it shouldn’t be surprising that most dedicated Halo players SUCK at it (while my k/d ratio in that mode is about double standard modes… higher even than my ratio in games like CoD and Battlefield).

Much like Swat (which I played something like 1,200 games in on Reach) CoD games are more about who sees who first and filling earholes with lead, than anything else. Hence how kids with neither reflexes, nor thumbs, can pile up kills and squeal with delight.

I’m not following your logic at all.

Jumping around and using a DMR to plant 5 headshots on another jumping/moving target will always be more difficult than spraying bullets at a player who just ran by your camping spot, and getting the insta-kill.

> Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures.

It USED to

> > > > With respect to the far more diverse multiplayer games out there these days, Halo 4’s population is not that low. CoD will always have a large fan base because anybody can pick up the controller and have just as much skill as the next loser playing the game (battle of the campers!)
> > > >
> > > > Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures. These skills are not popular in the gaming community, so Halo games will probably continue to under achieve.
> > > >
> > > > the same goes for the GoW franchise. If you can’t wall bounce, Yoink! basically.
> > >
> > > I’ve been saying something similar to this since folks back on B.net blamed Reach’s low population on this, that and the other.
> > >
> > > I have a 30+ y/o brother, two 50+ y/o parents (dad, step-dad) and an 8 y/o nephew who all play CoD games and go positive. But when they used to join me in Reach 5-15 was a good game for them.
> > >
> > > Society will always ENJOY easy games, and with the CoD games it’s pathetically easy to pile up kills vs ANY Halo game. That is the reason for your population differences. Blops and MWF aren’t by any stretch of the imagination better games. But they are easier, with a non-existent learning curve, and therefore more enjoyable for most. And last I knew, easier never translated to better. Nor does population translate to better (do folks really think the Twilight movies are good because of huge populations that flock to see them? LOL)
> >
> > People play CoD instead of Halo because CoD is more consistantly fun. Halo doesn’t take any more skill than CoD does. In fact, I’d take the best CoD players of the best Halo players any day. It’s the shield that makes the difference. The shield is the only thing that separates Halo from every other FPS series. That’s the game-changer. In every other game, the person with the best reflexes and aim wins. Because of the shield, that doesn’t really matter as much in Halo. In Halo, it’s all about landing more hits on your enemy while trying to prevent him from landing some on you. It’s less about positioning, aim, and skill, and more about jumping around and throwing elbows. Once you get up into the “competitive” levels, it becomes about so-called “map control” (ie power weapon hording) and exploits.
> >
> > In series like CoD, the methodology of winning is no different at every level… the ingredients are always the same… the more skill you have, the higher you rank.
> >
> > A good demonstration of this is SWAT. SWAT favors aim, reflexs, and skill… the guy who shoots first and most accurately wins the firefight. As such, it plays more like other modern shooters than any other mode, and it shouldn’t be surprising that most dedicated Halo players SUCK at it (while my k/d ratio in that mode is about double standard modes… higher even than my ratio in games like CoD and Battlefield).
>
> Much like Swat (which I played something like 1,200 games in on Reach) CoD games are more about who sees who first and filling earholes with lead, than anything else. Hence how kids with neither reflexes, nor thumbs, can pile up kills and squeal with delight.
>
> I’m not following your logic at all.
>
> Jumping around and using a DMR to plant 5 headshots on another jumping/moving target will always be more difficult than spraying bullets at a player who just ran by your camping spot, and getting the insta-kill.

Halo and COD take the same amount of skill to play. You can ACTUALLY kill people even if they see you first in cod. 343 likes COD, where do you think these improvements to halo 4 came from. Also, COD has a staff of people that actually know what they’re doing in regards to multiplayer.
I love halo, but this game is never gonna hold as many players as it did in CE, 2, and halo 3.

Call of Duty takes more skill, lol. Look up my CoD stats, I just started playing that franchise when MW3 came out and bought the previous titles later. I have a 3.00 k/d ratio in Team Deathmatch. You are saying controlling power weapons on a map isn’t skill but in CoD it’s about camping for kill streaks.

Halo is by far a more skill based game and even most CoD players will tell you that. Battlefield takes far more skill than CoD, even.

As far as pro CoD players, it’s about spawn control and killing (spawn trapping).

It’s definitely not from a lack of advertising. I’d see commercials and promotions on TV. Even ESPN was doing a Halo 4 promotion.

And could I get a link for where you’re getting your population statistics from?

> > A good demonstration of this is SWAT. SWAT favors aim, reflexs, and skill… the guy who shoots first and most accurately wins the firefight. As such, it plays more like other modern shooters than any other mode, and it shouldn’t be surprising that most dedicated Halo players SUCK at it (while my k/d ratio in that mode is about double standard modes… higher even than my ratio in games like CoD and Battlefield).
>
> I don’t know which “dedicated Halo players” you’re talking to…but I’ve never heard of anyone who’s good at Halo who “SUCKS” only at SWAT…

> > With respect to the far more diverse multiplayer games out there these days, Halo 4’s population is not that low. CoD will always have a large fan base because anybody can pick up the controller and have just as much skill as the next loser playing the game (battle of the campers!)
> >
> > Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures. These skills are not popular in the gaming community, so Halo games will probably continue to under achieve.
> >
> > the same goes for the GoW franchise. If you can’t wall bounce, Yoink! basically.
>
> I’ve been saying something similar to this since folks back on B.net blamed Reach’s low population on this, that and the other.
>
> I have a 30+ y/o brother, two 50+ y/o parents (dad, step-dad) and an 8 y/o nephew who all play Blops/MWF games and go positive. But when they used to join me in Reach 5-15 was a good game for them.
>
> Let’s face it. We all like handouts … it’s human nature. And society will always ENJOY easier games more. With the Blops/MWF games it’s pathetically easy to pile up kills in comparison to ANY Halo game. That is the reason for your population differences. Blops and MWF aren’t by any stretch of the imagination better games. But they are easier, with a non-existent learning curve, and therefore more enjoyable for most. And last I knew, easier never translated to better. Nor does population translate to better (unless folks really think the Twilight movies are good because of huge populations that flock to see them … LOL)

Your argument is nonsense. OBVIOUSLY if your family plays cod more than they play halo, then they’re probably gonna suck at halo. Also, reach’s low population was due to the fact that it was a bad game.

We will see how winter break/the holidays turn out.

> Call of Duty takes more skill, lol. Look up my CoD stats, I just started playing that franchise when MW3 came out and bought the previous titles later. I have a 3.00 k/d ratio in Team Deathmatch. You are saying controlling power weapons on a map isn’t skill but in CoD it’s about camping for kill streaks.
>
> Halo is by far a more skill based game and even most CoD players will tell you that. Battlefield takes far more skill than CoD, even.
>
> As far as pro CoD players, it’s about spawn control and killing (spawn trapping).

True that!
COD every one plays for the easy kills and zombies.
Halo is about fun competitive play and a good (if hilarious) time.
Battlefield is more slowly building skills, skill shots, tactical strategies and a solid and slowly expanding loyal fan base (though EA is testing that faith).
DayZ Nothing given nothing gained old style gaming.

(this is just from my experience)

> > > > > With respect to the far more diverse multiplayer games out there these days, Halo 4’s population is not that low. CoD will always have a large fan base because anybody can pick up the controller and have just as much skill as the next loser playing the game (battle of the campers!)
> > > > >
> > > > > Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures. These skills are not popular in the gaming community, so Halo games will probably continue to under achieve.
> > > > >
> > > > > the same goes for the GoW franchise. If you can’t wall bounce, Yoink! basically.
> > > >
> > > > I’ve been saying something similar to this since folks back on B.net blamed Reach’s low population on this, that and the other.
> > > >
> > > > I have a 30+ y/o brother, two 50+ y/o parents (dad, step-dad) and an 8 y/o nephew who all play CoD games and go positive. But when they used to join me in Reach 5-15 was a good game for them.
> > > >
> > > > Society will always ENJOY easy games, and with the CoD games it’s pathetically easy to pile up kills vs ANY Halo game. That is the reason for your population differences. Blops and MWF aren’t by any stretch of the imagination better games. But they are easier, with a non-existent learning curve, and therefore more enjoyable for most. And last I knew, easier never translated to better. Nor does population translate to better (do folks really think the Twilight movies are good because of huge populations that flock to see them? LOL)
> > >
> > > People play CoD instead of Halo because CoD is more consistantly fun. Halo doesn’t take any more skill than CoD does. In fact, I’d take the best CoD players of the best Halo players any day. It’s the shield that makes the difference. The shield is the only thing that separates Halo from every other FPS series. That’s the game-changer. In every other game, the person with the best reflexes and aim wins. Because of the shield, that doesn’t really matter as much in Halo. In Halo, it’s all about landing more hits on your enemy while trying to prevent him from landing some on you. It’s less about positioning, aim, and skill, and more about jumping around and throwing elbows. Once you get up into the “competitive” levels, it becomes about so-called “map control” (ie power weapon hording) and exploits.
> > >
> > > In series like CoD, the methodology of winning is no different at every level… the ingredients are always the same… the more skill you have, the higher you rank.
> > >
> > > A good demonstration of this is SWAT. SWAT favors aim, reflexs, and skill… the guy who shoots first and most accurately wins the firefight. As such, it plays more like other modern shooters than any other mode, and it shouldn’t be surprising that most dedicated Halo players SUCK at it (while my k/d ratio in that mode is about double standard modes… higher even than my ratio in games like CoD and Battlefield).
> >
> > Much like Swat (which I played something like 1,200 games in on Reach) CoD games are more about who sees who first and filling earholes with lead, than anything else. Hence how kids with neither reflexes, nor thumbs, can pile up kills and squeal with delight.
> >
> > I’m not following your logic at all.
> >
> > Jumping around and using a DMR to plant 5 headshots on another jumping/moving target will always be more difficult than spraying bullets at a player who just ran by your camping spot, and getting the insta-kill.
>
> Halo and COD take the same amount of skill to play. You can ACTUALLY kill people even if they see you first in cod. 343 likes COD, where do you think these improvements to halo 4 came from. Also, COD has a staff of people that actually know what they’re doing in regards to multiplayer.
> I love halo, but this game is never gonna hold as many players as it did in CE, 2, and halo 3.

I just about stopped reading when you said improvements.

I love Halo to death, but the game has not improved at all since H2 or even H3.

Loadouts are not Halo. We used to fight for things like Camo but now we start with them … this is laughable.

And ordinance certainly is not Halo. We have always fought for Power Weapons … never were they delivered to us specifically.

Infinity Slayer is so far from the Halo that we all originally played, it’s almost not worth comparing anymore. It’s like discussing the differences between apples and oranges these days. Nothing has improved.

> > > With respect to the far more diverse multiplayer games out there these days, Halo 4’s population is not that low. CoD will always have a large fan base because anybody can pick up the controller and have just as much skill as the next loser playing the game (battle of the campers!)
> > >
> > > Halo takes practice, competitive nature, and the will to overcome disappointment at your failures. These skills are not popular in the gaming community, so Halo games will probably continue to under achieve.
> > >
> > > the same goes for the GoW franchise. If you can’t wall bounce, Yoink! basically.
> >
> > I’ve been saying something similar to this since folks back on B.net blamed Reach’s low population on this, that and the other.
> >
> > I have a 30+ y/o brother, two 50+ y/o parents (dad, step-dad) and an 8 y/o nephew who all play Blops/MWF games and go positive. But when they used to join me in Reach 5-15 was a good game for them.
> >
> > Let’s face it. We all like handouts … it’s human nature. And society will always ENJOY easier games more. With the Blops/MWF games it’s pathetically easy to pile up kills in comparison to ANY Halo game. That is the reason for your population differences. Blops and MWF aren’t by any stretch of the imagination better games. But they are easier, with a non-existent learning curve, and therefore more enjoyable for most. And last I knew, easier never translated to better. Nor does population translate to better (unless folks really think the Twilight movies are good because of huge populations that flock to see them … LOL)
>
> Your argument is nonsense. OBVIOUSLY if your family plays cod more than they play halo, then they’re probably gonna suck at halo. Also, reach’s low population was due to the fact that it was a bad game.

lol, so using this brilliant logic I should suck at Blops because I play it once or twice a month (as often as I go home to visit my parents) right?

Then why am I going 18-6 in a shooter game that I don’t even own? (sidenote: lol @ everyday Blops kids getting ruined by guests)