> 2535422275901409;14322:
> > 2533274795123910;14320:
> > > 2535422275901409;14316:
> > > > 2547348539238747;14311:
> > > >
> >
> > Hyped up release and vague sales figures aside, where has Halo 5 placed on the Xbox most played list compared to other games? To other older games?
>
> How did my quote from a different thread even get in here? This thread is about sprint
Because you posted it in this thread, quoting a post in this thread.
> 2533274825830455;14323:
> > 2533274817408735;14321:
> > > 2533274825830455;14319:
> > > > 2533274906476574;14313:
> > > > it also opens up new mechanics (see Spartan Abilities)
> > >
> > > None of these mechanics require sprint to work, even though some make use of it. In fact, I challenge you to describe me such a mechanic which is only possible with sprint, and for which I can’t describe a functionally identical mechanic which works without sprint.
> >
> > Spartan Charge? Pressing melee button during normal results in a basic melee; holding that button during normal speed is used to initiate assassinations in the proper context. Activating sprint seems like a necessary precursor for the controls to recognize that the melee button should do something different.
>
> You could push it onto a double press if you wanted. Alternatively you could use the now vacant sprint button for it. After all, the only reason we contextually associate Spartan Charge with melee is because it’s on the same button. In a different world with different mechanics Ground Pound could be activated by holding down melee in the air, and we’d have a similar association with it and melee.
Ah, yes, I see now.
> 2535422275901409;14316:
> One week after launching worldwide on October 27th, 2015, Halo 5: Guardians made history as the biggest Halo launch and fastest-selling Xbox One exclusive game to-date, with more than $400 million in global sales of Halo 5: Guardians games and hardware, pushing the franchise to over $5 billion lifetime.
This really isn’t the tread for numbers discussion, but this figure is biased in more than just one way.
Microsoft deliberately made the press release sound as vague as possible so it can still be marketed as a success, without people actually being able to piece together any relevant data from it. And while it’s probably true from a certain point of view (like Darth Vader “killing” Anakin Skywalker is true “from a certain point of view”) and we’ll most likely never be able to fully disprove it, there are fortunately other sources for sales figures, that paint a completely different picture:
Halo 5 Is the Least Selling Main Halo Game in UK History.
Halo 5 Sold Fewer Xbox Consoles Than Any Other Game in the Main Halo Series.
H5G’s average playtime in 2015 is lower than Tomb Raider (an offline game) and Gears (a remake) in spite of earlier release
> 2535422275901409;14316:
> > 2547348539238747;14311:
> > > 2535432010167589;14308:
> > > > 2533274944267503;14307:
> > > > > 2535432010167589;14306:
> > > > > I have zero problem with sprint coexisting with halo and I hope to see it in the next game.
> > > >
> > > > There’s more to this as well. Classic Halo brought in non-MP FPS players, and even non-gamers. Because the gameplay was so simple, so easy to understand, and was, get this, more accessible to the larger audience (and casual gamers are the larger audience). With the addition of all these unwanted mechanics 343i not only pushed out Halo veterans but also Halo casuals. That is why Halo 4 and Halo 5 have been so unpopular compared to older Halos and other shooters on the platform.
>
> except for that not really being true:
> One week after launching worldwide on October 27th, 2015, Halo 5: Guardians made history as the biggest Halo launch and fastest-selling Xbox One exclusive game to-date, with more than $400 million in global sales of Halo 5: Guardians games and hardware, pushing the franchise to over $5 billion lifetime.
Halo sales.So I see where you got that information. Check the total sales for each of those games. Even though Halo 4 and 5 made more money they sold less units than Halo 3. A bigger focus on accessories like Halo themed consoles and controllers, and also REQs and overpriced collector editions helped push those numbers up.
So what you are seeing is less players paying more money for the game.
Halo 3 sold over 5 Million units in the U.S. in the first 2 months. It made $300 Million at launch and DIDN’T include hardware. Halo 5 does. Halo 5 sold 5 Million copies in 3 months world wide. After 3 months Halo 3 had sold 8 Million copies. Sales are down, by quite a bit. It appears it took Halo 5 3 months to do what Halo 3 did in 2 weeks.
> 2533274801176260;14326:
> H5G’s average playtime in 2015 is lower than Tomb Raider (an offline game) and Gears (a remake) in spite of earlier release
Where is this picture from anyway? It kind of rubs me off the wrong way because in this context, when you’re comparing games with vastly varying levels of popularity, average (as in mean, which I assume these to be) playtime numbers seem kind of strange. I’d expect that a more popular game will have have a larger portion of players just buying the game because they’ve heard about it without knowing much about what they’re getting into. Coincidentally, more players will end up just quitting the game immediately shortly after their purchase, giving the game an abysmal average play time.
I find it hard to believe that if you factored out everyone who played, say, less than 10 hours (ie.g., who didn’t even complete the game), the numbers would still look the same. Not because I think Halo 5 is particularly engaging or anything (I’d be equally skeptical if it was whatever CoD came that year in place of Halo 5), but because I strongly believe that multiplayer games, unless they’re a complete disaster, are played more by players who have more than a passing interest in the game than single player games. But if you do take players with only a passing interest into account, then less popular games will usually trump more popular games in mean playtime, and median playtime would tell more about how players are responding to the game.
> 2533274825830455;14328:
> Where is this picture from anyway?
It’s from Major Nelson’s “Year in Review 2015”.
> 2533274825830455;14328:
> I find it hard to believe that if you factored out everyone who played, say, less than 10 hours (ie.g., who didn’t even complete the game), the numbers would still look the same. Not because I think Halo 5 is particularly engaging or anything (I’d be equally skeptical if it was whatever CoD came that year in place of Halo 5), but because I strongly believe that multiplayer games, unless they’re a complete disaster, are played more by players who have more than a passing interest in the game than single player games. But if you do take players with only a passing interest into account, then less popular games will usually trump more popular games in mean playtime, and median playtime would tell more about how players are responding to the game.
I can see your point, and that would certainly explain the difference between “mainstream” H5G and “special interest” Gears Remake.
But what about Tomb Raider? You’re right that it’s a game for a very specific demographic (supported by its low sales), but it’s also an exclusively single player game. Compared to Halo and Gears, which come with a huge multiplayer component (and in the case of H5G, online connection was even required for 99% of the content), I would think that there’s a large dark figure of players who probably played the game more offline than online, thus shifting the perceived average down from the real thing instead of up.
Even so, the number is still roughly consistent with the average play time of the H5G beta, which was 2.5 hours over three weeks (51 minutes per week) compared to 10 hours over 10 weeks (an hour or 60 minutes per week). And while the complete game may have attracted “average joe”, I don’t think the beta did.
Im seeing a lot of dubious claims from both sides here in regarding which sold more or which brought in more casual players. If you cant provide evidence or a source for your figures dont bring it up. Dont say that because classic halo was more simple it brought in more casual players you dont know the state of casual players in any halo game.
While halo 2 and 3 did have a large population base (population.pdf - Google Drive), you cant say that because they were simple that casual players like simpler gameplay mechanics(meaning casuals prefer simpler gameplay). A counter argument is the fact that COD sold more games and has consistently sold more games than halo since 2009 (http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=Call+of+duty). Casual players play whatever is fun.
> 2547348539238747;14327:
> > 2535422275901409;14316:
> > > 2547348539238747;14311:
> > > > 2535432010167589;14308:
> > > > > 2533274944267503;14307:
> > > > > > 2535432010167589;14306:
> > > > > > I have zero problem with sprint coexisting with halo and I hope to see it in the next game.
> > > > >
> > > > > There’s more to this as well. Classic Halo brought in non-MP FPS players, and even non-gamers. Because the gameplay was so simple, so easy to understand, and was, get this, more accessible to the larger audience (and casual gamers are the larger audience). With the addition of all these unwanted mechanics 343i not only pushed out Halo veterans but also Halo casuals. That is why Halo 4 and Halo 5 have been so unpopular compared to older Halos and other shooters on the platform.
> >
> > except for that not really being true:
> > One week after launching worldwide on October 27th, 2015, Halo 5: Guardians made history as the biggest Halo launch and fastest-selling Xbox One exclusive game to-date, with more than $400 million in global sales of Halo 5: Guardians games and hardware, pushing the franchise to over $5 billion lifetime.
>
> Halo sales.So I see where you got that information. Check the total sales for each of those games. Even though Halo 4 and 5 made more money they sold less units than Halo 3. A bigger focus on accessories like Halo themed consoles and controllers, and also REQs and overpriced collector editions helped push those numbers up.
>
> So what you are seeing is less players paying more money for the game.
>
> Halo 3 sold over 5 Million units in the U.S. in the first 2 months. It made $300 Million at launch and DIDN’T include hardware. Halo 5 does. Halo 5 sold 5 Million copies in 3 months world wide. After 3 months Halo 3 had sold 8 Million copies. Sales are down, by quite a bit. It appears it took Halo 5 3 months to do what Halo 3 did in 2 weeks.
And those Halo 5 sale numbers didn’t include digital sales. While I don’t think Halo 5 had better sales than Halo 3 I also doubt the difference is as big as your making it out to be. 74% of video game-related sales are now purchased digitally.
> 2533274825160595;14331:
> And those Halo 5 sale numbers didn’t include digital sales. While I don’t think Halo 5 had better sales than Halo 3 I also doubt the difference is as big as your making it out to be. 74% of video game-related sales are now purchased digitally.
That number is pretty hard to relate to actual game sales, since it refers to all digital purchases, including games that don’t have a physical release, DLC, microtransactions and even game subscriptions like XBox Live Gold. It’s also not clear from context how this number is calculated: Is it the percentage of the total revenue, or is it literally how many transactions have been made, redardless of price? Even somebody who buys all their games in retail will still probably contribute in one way or another to the digital sales, so to infer from that number that the games themselves do well in digital is a stretch at best.
What we know is that in 2015, EA’s sales numbers indicated that 16-19% of its revenue was from full game downloads. Given that full games cost significantly more than DLCs and the likes, that translates to a low percentage of the games belonging to these DLCs were also sold in digital.
In fact, let’s calculate a ballpark figure here: 255 Million USD from “Extra Content” (aka DLCs) and 84 Million from Full Game Downloads in the first quarter of fiscal year 2016. Assuming that a full game costs ~60$ and a DLC from EA is at ~15$ (adapted from Battlefront), we can infer that around 1.4 Million EA games have been purchased digitally within those three months, compared to 17 Million DLCs. Of course every game has multiple DLCs, so let’s assume an average of 3 DLCs per game. That means that about 5.7 Million games were sold whose owners bought a DLC, so around 1/5th to 1/6th of all game sales in 2015/2016 were probably digital. (And that’s an upper limit, seeing as probably not all players also bought all DLCs).
If this number were to be translated onto H5G’s sales, it would be only slightly above ODST in terms of sales, but still significantly below Halo 3’s pure physical sales in the same timeframe by 1/3rd. (Halo 3: 5.89 Million physical, H5G: 3.46 Million physical + ~0.60 Million digital = 4.06 Million total, both within 10 weeks).
> 2533274801176260;14332:
> > 2533274825160595;14331:
> > And those Halo 5 sale numbers didn’t include digital sales. While I don’t think Halo 5 had better sales than Halo 3 I also doubt the difference is as big as your making it out to be. 74% of video game-related sales are now purchased digitally.
>
> That number is pretty hard to relate to actual game sales, since it refers to all digital purchases, including games that don’t have a physical release, DLC, microtransactions and even game subscriptions like XBox Live Gold. It’s also not clear from context how this number is calculated: Is it the percentage of the total revenue, or is it literally how many transactions have been made, redardless of price? Even somebody who buys all their games in retail will still probably contribute in one way or another to the digital sales, so to infer from that number that the games themselves do well in digital is a stretch at best.
>
> What we know is that in 2015, EA’s sales numbers indicated that 16-19% of its revenue was from full game downloads. Given that full games cost significantly more than DLCs and the likes, that translates to a low percentage of the games belonging to these DLCs were also sold in digital.
> In fact, let’s calculate a ballpark figure here: 255 Million USD from “Extra Content” (aka DLCs) and 84 Million from Full Game Downloads in the first quarter of fiscal year 2016. Assuming that a full game costs ~60$ and a DLC from EA is at ~15$ (adapted from Battlefront), we can infer that around 1.4 Million EA games have been purchased digitally within those three months, compared to 17 Million DLCs. Of course every game has multiple DLCs, so let’s assume an average of 3 DLCs per game. That means that about 5.7 Million games were sold whose owners bought a DLC, so around 1/5th to 1/6th of all game sales in 2015/2016 were probably digital. (And that’s an upper limit, seeing as probably not all players also bought all DLCs).
> If this number were to be translated onto H5G’s sales, it would be only slightly above ODST in terms of sales, but still significantly below Halo 3’s pure physical sales in the same timeframe by 1/3rd. (Halo 3: 5.89 Million physical, H5G: 3.46 Million physical + ~0.60 Million digital = 4.06 Million total, both within 10 weeks).
Your low balling that by a lot. For 1 video games become much less expensive as time goes on. What was once 60$ may very well be 30$ or 20$ after 3 or 4 months. Then you have to take into account things like steam sales. For instance Mass Effect 2 Digital Deluxe Edition normally casts 29.99 but right now on steam you can get it for 7.46. EA games on steam And steam isn’t the only one that does sales like that Both Xbox live Gold and PlayStation Plus both do it.
> 2533274825160595;14331:
> > 2547348539238747;14327:
> > > 2535422275901409;14316:
> > > > 2547348539238747;14311:
> > > > > 2535432010167589;14308:
> > > > > > 2533274944267503;14307:
> > > > > > > 2535432010167589;14306:
> > > > > > > I have zero problem with sprint coexisting with halo and I hope to see it in the next game.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There’s more to this as well. Classic Halo brought in non-MP FPS players, and even non-gamers. Because the gameplay was so simple, so easy to understand, and was, get this, more accessible to the larger audience (and casual gamers are the larger audience). With the addition of all these unwanted mechanics 343i not only pushed out Halo veterans but also Halo casuals. That is why Halo 4 and Halo 5 have been so unpopular compared to older Halos and other shooters on the platform.
> > >
> > > except for that not really being true:
> > > One week after launching worldwide on October 27th, 2015, Halo 5: Guardians made history as the biggest Halo launch and fastest-selling Xbox One exclusive game to-date, with more than $400 million in global sales of Halo 5: Guardians games and hardware, pushing the franchise to over $5 billion lifetime.
> >
> > Halo sales.So I see where you got that information. Check the total sales for each of those games. Even though Halo 4 and 5 made more money they sold less units than Halo 3. A bigger focus on accessories like Halo themed consoles and controllers, and also REQs and overpriced collector editions helped push those numbers up.
> > So what you are seeing is less players paying more money for the game.
> > Halo 3 sold over 5 Million units in the U.S. in the first 2 months. It made $300 Million at launch and DIDN’T include hardware. Halo 5 does. Halo 5 sold 5 Million copies in 3 months world wide. After 3 months Halo 3 had sold 8 Million copies. Sales are down, by quite a bit. It appears it took Halo 5 3 months to do what Halo 3 did in 2 weeks.
>
> And those Halo 5 sale numbers didn’t include digital sales. While I don’t think Halo 5 had better sales than Halo 3 I also doubt the difference is as big as your making it out to be. 74% of video game-related sales are now purchased digitally.
It was Frankie from 343i who told us that 3 months in Halo 5 had sold 5 million copies. You honestly think they only counted physical copies?
(And I think it’s worth remembering that practically all PC sales are digital now, that would account for a lot of those digital purchases. The percentage would be lower on consoles)
> 2533274825160595;14333:
> Your low balling that by a lot. For 1 video games become much less expensive as time goes on. What was once 60$ may very well be 30$ or 20$ after 3 or 4 months. Then you have to take into account things like steam sales. For instance Mass Effect 2 Digital Deluxe Edition normally casts 29.99 but right now on steam you can get it for 7.46. EA games on steam And steam isn’t the only one that does sales like that Both Xbox live Gold and PlayStation Plus both do it.
On the other hand I was very generous with the 60$ price tag at launch, and the 15$ DLC cost. I can’t remember the last time I bought a game on release for under 70€(!) and numerous DLCs cost less (Titanfall’s DLC was 10$, for example). Additionally, none of the sales offers you mentioned are any new releases, so these retro games already pollute the full game download revenue statistic. All of this shifts the actual ratio of digital sales for new titles down, not up. It’s still very much an upper limit, and I fully expect that H5Gs digital sales (at least within the first few months) were more in the lines of 5-10% than 15-20%.
> 2547348539238747;14334:
> It was Frankie from 343i who told us that 3 months in Halo 5 had sold 5 million copies. You honestly think they only counted physical copies?
Besides, we already know that at least the physical part of this number is counting shipped copies (“sold in” in marketing terms), not actually copies purchased by a consumer (“sold through” in marketing terms). This number is already bloated as is. Yet it’s still lower after three months than Halo 3 was after 4 weeks.
> 2533274801176260;14335:
> That number is pretty hard to relate to actual game sales, since it refers to all digital purchases, including games that don’t have a physical release, DLC, microtransactions and even game subscriptions like XBox Live Gold. It’s also not clear from context how this number is calculated: Is it the percentage of the total revenue, or is it literally how many transactions have been made, redardless of price? Even somebody who buys all their games in retail will still probably contribute in one way or another to the digital sales, so to infer from that number that the games themselves do well in digital is a stretch at best.
> What we know is that in 2015, EA’s sales numbers indicated that 16-19% of its revenue was from full game downloads. Given that full games cost significantly more than DLCs and the likes, that translates to a low percentage of the games belonging to these DLCs were also sold in digital.
> In fact, let’s calculate a ballpark figure here: 255 Million USD from “Extra Content” (aka DLCs) and 84 Million from Full Game Downloads in the first quarter of fiscal year 2016. Assuming that a full game costs ~60$ and a DLC from EA is at ~15$ (adapted from Battlefront), we can infer that around 1.4 Million EA games have been purchased digitally within those three months, compared to 17 Million DLCs. Of course every game has multiple DLCs, so let’s assume an average of 3 DLCs per game. That means that about 5.7 Million games were sold whose owners bought a DLC, so around 1/5th to 1/6th of all game sales in 2015/2016 were probably digital. (And that’s an upper limit, seeing as probably not all players also bought all DLCs).
> If this number were to be translated onto H5G’s sales, it would be only slightly above ODST in terms of sales, but still significantly below Halo 3’s pure physical sales in the same timeframe by 1/3rd. (Halo 3: 5.89 Million physical, H5G: 3.46 Million physical + ~0.60 Million digital = 4.06 Million total, both within 10 weeks).
You do realize that you’re comparing two different currencies, right? In the US, at least where I live, the base game (Not the “special edition”) is always $60 or less, and after about 3-5 months that price begins dropping. In short, you weren’t generous with your $60 figure at all, and you also aren’t taking into account that Halo 5 has microtransactions and not DLCs, meaning you can’t really accurately translate your battlefront calculations to Halo 5. I think your numbers are probably off by quite a bit, however I definitely believe that Halo 5 sold FAR less than Halo 3, and likely any other Halo game.
> 2535428931873471;14336:
> You do realize that you’re comparing two different currencies, right?
Yes. Yes, I do. Hence why I specifically put an exclamation mark behind the currency symbol in order to draw attention to that.
> 2535428931873471;14336:
> In the US, at least where I live, the base game (Not the “special edition”) is always $60 or less, and after about 3-5 months that price begins dropping.
That was the point. While you americans enjoy your low price tag on new releases, the rest of the world pays overprice. Hence why calculating with 60 Dollars overestimates the number of digital sales. Which was the entire point of calculating an upper limit.
> 2535428931873471;14336:
> In short, you weren’t generous with your $60 figure at all, and you also aren’t taking into account that Halo 5 has microtransactions and not DLCs, meaning you can’t really accurately translate your battlefront calculations to Halo 5.
I don’t think you understood the goal of the calculation. I used EA’s sales figures to calculate the percentage of digital sales versus physical sales in late 2015 to early 2016, since they seem to be one of the only companies to release sales figures. That data suggests that at that point in time, ~17% of video game sales were digital. H5G’s pay-to-win-system has nothing to do with it.
> 2535428931873471;14336:
> I think your numbers are probably off by quite a bit, however I definitely believe that Halo 5 sold FAR less than Halo 3, and likely any other Halo game.
Yes, they most likely are. In fact, I’ve said so myself, every time when I explained that I’m calculating an upper limit. All the people complaining about some wrong assumptions I have made (like the steam sales and not every game having DLC) fail to see that they actually are in favor of H5G’s sales.
But if nobody likes my estimates, fine. Let’s go with the official 5-Million-after-3-Months-claim. Overblown as it may be, it’s still significantly lower than any other main series Halo game, save ODST and Halo CE.
Honestly I would be happy either way, it’s a hard decision. Players will undoubtedly adapt to whatever movement style is incorporated into Halo 6.
While we’re on the topic (or rather, off it, seeing as how this is a sprint thread) we should probably discuss potential userbase.
Why? Because it doesn’t really matter if Halo 5 outsold Halo 3 in terms of units or not, if the potential number of xboxs on which to play the game is also larger. More people, probably more sales. Not necessarily, but given that Halo is basically the only reason to purchase an Xbox at this point… (Not that sales matter anyway, because they’re not an accurate reflection of quality or critical reception [cough transformers cough Call of Duty]).
Oh, and it’s worth noting that both games released two years after their respective consoles. Y’know, so we know it’s as close to fair as we’re likely to get.
Now, from what I’ve managed to gather via wikipedia and some maths, the sales numbers are as follows:
Xbox 360: 17million by the end of 2007 (the year Halo 3 released).
Xbox One: Less clear, but from what I gather it reached 18-20 million sometime between December 2016 and April 2017.
It’s worth noting: By the end of of 2014 the Xbox One was stated to have sold 10 million units, meaning the release of Halo 5 probably helped push 10 million units alone. Compare this to Halo 3 which, on release pushed about 7.06million. What can we pull from this? We can pull that Halo 3 and Halo 5 had roughly the same potential for sales at their release. 10 million consoles at the start of their respective years. At the end of their years, the Xbox One had sold more than the Xbox 360 in the same amount of time. Which, while not concrete, could mean that Halo 5 pushed more sales than Halo 3.
Take from this what you will.
Anyway, it may be a good idea to get back to the sprint discussion. If we want to talk population there’s a perfectly good thread for it elsewhere.
EDIT: Oh, and happy Canada Day folks
If you don’t like sprint then don’t use sprint!!
> 2535448186545972;14340:
> If you don’t like sprint then don’t use sprint!!
Could you explain the thought process behind that suggestion? Why handicap oneself?
> 2535448186545972;14340:
> If you don’t like sprint then don’t use sprint!!
Posts like these should become illegal on this thread. Apart from common sense, It has been explained quite literally a hundred times why handicapping yourself is not an option. If you wish to express your opinion, please do so with an actual argument. What you’re doing right now is basically trolling.
> 2533274866652866;14330:
> Im seeing a lot of dubious claims from both sides here in regarding which sold more or which brought in more casual players. If you cant provide evidence or a source for your figures dont bring it up. Dont say that because classic halo was more simple it brought in more casual players you dont know the state of casual players in any halo game.
>
> While halo 2 and 3 did have a large population base (population.pdf - Google Drive), you cant say that because they were simple that casual players like simpler gameplay mechanics(meaning casuals prefer simpler gameplay). A counter argument is the fact that COD sold more games and has consistently sold more games than halo since 2009 (http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=Call+of+duty). Casual players play whatever is fun.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you. However, there is nothing wrong with asking the question why have some games become so popular, while others have lost their popularity. As a gamer I play almost all the shooters that come along. But the best I stick with for long period of time (years). It is just my observation and speculation. But I have asked myself what has drawn so many people to COD, then Destiny and now to OverWatch? What separates them from Halo? specifically Halo 5? As I have played them it it has become quite clear. Halo 5 is significantly harder to play than the others(Gears 4 excluded). You can’t just sit down and play H5 and be immediately good if you are not a hardcore gamer. I’m speaking about the casuals. The average casual gamer gets slaughter in Halo for a while until the get past the learning curve. I’ve seen it more times than I can count in playing arena. they must play often to keep their skills up, which casuals don’t do for any number of reasons( family, job, school, other activities).Now by comparison, Look at COD, Destiny and Overwatch? All three you can jump into and almost immediately start having fun with no practice. Destiny is mostly PvE, but still thats also the point as well. Casuals can jump into all three (Infinite War excluded) and have fun an hour here and an hour there. I’m a pretty hardcore gamer. Its pretty much my only hobby. So when I played these other games it become quickly clear why people are attracted to the games. It is my observation it comes down to a few very simple things. casuals are simply going to play games that have a lower learning curve smaller skill gap, combined with lots of customization. Those three things Prior CODs, Destiny and Overwatch currently have that H5 does not. I don’think that can be underestimated. Even if you compare Halo 4-9 million copies sold
to Halo 5 with 4 million confirmed copies sold(speculatively best case 6 million sold). Those same traits still show up- Halo 4 lower learning curve, smaller skill gap and lots of customization , both in loadouts and armor appearance. Thats not coincidence. Two would be coincidence, three is a pattern and we have at least 4 games. there is a distinct pattern. I don’t think that can be underestimated.
