Would classic halo sell well in today's market?

Would a classic halo sell well today? I ask because it seems modernization is being forced into Halo 5.

Did the Master Chief Collection sell?

> 2535460843083983;2:
> Did the Master Chief Collection sell?

I dont know what its sales figures were.

Over 10% of xbone owners bought it. That’s not bad considering Halo 3, Reach and 4 released to a much larger install base.

That is something that has really been bothering me with this whole “halo must ‘modernize’” business. Nobody has the answer because no one has tried. No one has tried to release a brand new, fully featured Halo for over 4 years.

I can’t say that classic Halo would sell with certainty, but no one can say it would fail with any certainty either. I’ve heard nothing but circumstantial ‘evidence’ such as the popularity of CoD being evidence that player do not want a classic Halo, but that doesn’t say anything about how popular Halo would be.

There is more competition, but there is also a larger market to pull from, it should be relatively easy to create a very successful niche without playing follow the leader with game mechanics. You do not have to be #1 in order to be very successful Even if a classic Halo game failed, I would rather see the series fade with some measure of dignity than become some franchise zombie that lost its identity.

> 2535460843083983;2:
> Did the Master Chief Collection sell?

Irrelevant, selling a remake is an entirely different beast from selling a brand new game in a classic style.

I’ve been meaning to make a thread asking people who played Halo Ce for the first time in the MCC what they thought of it.

I’m unsure if a classic title would sell well. Actually I’m not sure if the right questions are being asked.

Who knows man the gaming community is as diverse as opinions are on the global economy, when it comes whether or not millions would buy a future Halo game with the mechanics/pacing of the original Halo; it probably would on namesake alone.

it depends on your definition of “classic halo game” if you were to release combat evolved today, it certainly wouldn’t break any sales records, but I have no doubt it would gain a cult following of dedicated fans, sadly 343 would rather have 10000 fans who don’t care then have 1000 who do, however I have no doubt that if 343 released a proper halo game (arena style, well balanced, no sprint) it would sell great, I mean they’ve already done 2/3 of them and look how much better the game already is.

> 2533274819446242;5:
> > 2535460843083983;2:
> > Did the Master Chief Collection sell?
>
>
>
>
> Irrelevant, selling a remake is an entirely different beast from selling a brand new game in a classic style.

Call it whatever you want. It’s the only example we have.

> 2535460843083983;2:
> Did the Master Chief Collection sell?

How much did nostalgia play into that though?

> 2533274825044752;10:
> > 2535460843083983;2:
> > Did the Master Chief Collection sell?
>
>
>
> How much did nostalgia play into that though?

I never got to play Halo 2 online, I joined the franchise at Halo ODST so for me there isn’t much nostalgia appart from Halo 3. And I -Yoinking!- love Halo 2 classic playlist. It feels fresh and new to me as I never got to play it. I have to learn the maps, learn the weapon placement, learn the mechanics, vehicles. And I have no doubt it would sell in today’s market.

I have gone back to uni for exams and left my xbox at home to concentrate and I am full on missing playing Halo 2.

> 2533274825044752;10:
> > 2535460843083983;2:
> > Did the Master Chief Collection sell?
>
>
> How much did nostalgia play into that though?

How much did Halo 2A pump up peoples excitement?

> 2535460843083983;2:
> Did the Master Chief Collection sell?

Not as much as CoD AW did.

Yes, Halo campaign sell Halo games. Classic Halo just give longevity for MM and 343 forget the harcore market, they are in PC but… A solid MM focused in aim+skill and not in "i feel a supersoldier"can sell some X1s…

The question shouldn’t be so much about if “classic” Halo can sell well. The focus should be on why is it not possible to develop a game built on the same kind of principles. And then the follow-up question should be, what good does it do to turn Halo into a modern standard shooter that conforms to the trends of its release period instead of trying to innovate on top of its own identity.

So if the question was can Halo sell well if it was built on its foundational principles rather than conforming to the trends in the industry right now… I say yes it would sell well. And it would attract even more attention to the franchise if it went that route instead. The market 343 is trying to target is already over-saturated. People not interested in Halo, non-XBox gamers and non-FPS gamers are not going to excited for a FPS that now plays even more similar to the alternatives. Halo’s core gameplay always allowed for a different kind of experience and attracted all kinds of gamers, including non-FPS gamers. A Halo built on its traditional principles on a new generation console had potential to get everyone excited, not just Halo or XBox supporters. It could have re-introduced a style of gameplay that has been missing in the FPS genre for quite some time.

Traditional arena shooters as we know them tend to fail on consoles. The speed of the gameplay makes it uncomfortable with a controller compared to keyboard/mouse. Halo CE found a way to make an “arena” shooter on consoles based on steady aim and shot-making consistency. Due to this slightly more methodical approach, Halo became a great game for tactical play and team play as well and was more than just a standard arena shooter. Halo was its own rare breed. Other traditional arena elements still remained in Halo as well though. The ability to shoot while moving at all times and a specific zooming mechanism allowed for gameplay to flow and have fluidity were staples in Halo. Making twitch less important allowed for Halo to work much better with a controller. Halo 2 and Halo 3 were both built on the same kind of principles. Each game felt different, but each still felt like Halo.

343 has decided to homogenize Halo 5 and make it play similar to other trendy shooters. This doesn’t mean its a clone or doesn’t have Halo elements, but the totality of the experience is very similar to other games. What I am talking about goes beyond some of the new mechanisms or visual animations, but the totality of the experience. Many of the tactical elements have been reduced. On a casual level, Halo 5 aims to provide mental stimulation through its “loudness” of gameplay rather than having the mental stimulation come from the thought of the player.

343 seems to have a lack of basic understanding of the fundamentals of Halo. No one is saying we need to have a clone of Halo 2 or Halo 3. No one is saying that innovation is not possible. Some of our criticisms are about how the specific mechanisms 343 has decided to adopt and integrate into Halo 5 are from a fundamentally different style of shooter. The mechanisms work much more naturally in twitch-aim and spray shooters. For the record, they also are from non-arena shooters as well. So now what we have in Halo 5 is more of a hot-mess. When you put the controller down, you will say “wow that was intense.” But on a casual level, the gameplay experience is much more shallow.

> 2547348539238747;4:
> http://n4g.com/news/1627550/halo-the-master-chief-collection-sells-1-01-million-units-first-week-worldwide
>
> Over 10% of xbone owners bought it. That’s not bad considering Halo 3, Reach and 4 released to a much larger install base.

It’s actually closer to 12%

To the OP: everyone I have talked to has said that they are waiting for another good Halo game, and they say that the last good one was 3. To me, that says that it would sell. MCC sold 1 million in the first week, and it even had the stigma of being a “money-grab” to those who didn’t really know much about it other than that it was a remake. With agressive marketing (see: Destiny), it would fly off the shelves.

> 2535410387829049;15:
> The question shouldn’t be so much about if “classic” Halo can sell well. The focus should be on why is it not possible to develop a game built on the same kind of principles. And then the follow-up question should be, what good does it do to turn Halo into a modern standard shooter that conforms to the trends of its release period instead of trying to innovate on top of its own identity.
>
> So if the question was can Halo sell well if it was built on its foundational principles rather than conforming to the trends in the industry right now… I say yes it would sell well. And it would attract even more attention to the franchise if it went that route instead. The market 343 is trying to target is already over-saturated. People not interested in Halo, non-XBox gamers and non-FPS gamers are not going to excited for a FPS that now plays even more similar to the alternatives. Halo’s core gameplay always allowed for a different kind of experience and attracted all kinds of gamers, including non-FPS gamers. A Halo built on its traditional principles on a new generation console had potential to get everyone excited, not just Halo or XBox supporters. It could have re-introduced a style of gameplay that has been missing in the FPS genre for quite some time.
>
> Traditional arena shooters as we know them tend to fail on consoles. The speed of the gameplay makes it uncomfortable with a controller compared to keyboard/mouse. Halo CE found a way to make an “arena” shooter on consoles based on steady aim and shot-making consistency. Due to this slightly more methodical approach, Halo became a great game for tactical play and team play as well and was more than just a standard arena shooter. Halo was its own rare breed. Other traditional arena elements still remained in Halo as well though. The ability to shoot while moving at all times and a specific zooming mechanism allowed for gameplay to flow and have fluidity were staples in Halo. Making twitch less important allowed for Halo to work much better with a controller. Halo 2 and Halo 3 were both built on the same kind of principles. Each game felt different, but each still felt like Halo.
>
> 343 has decided to homogenize Halo 5 and make it play similar to other trendy shooters. This doesn’t mean its a clone or doesn’t have Halo elements, but the totality of the experience is very similar to other games. What I am talking about goes beyond some of the new mechanisms or visual animations, but the totality of the experience. Many of the tactical elements have been reduced. On a casual level, Halo 5 aims to provide mental stimulation through its “loudness” of gameplay rather than having the mental stimulation come from the thought of the player.
>
> 343 seems to have a lack of basic understanding of the fundamentals of Halo. No one is saying we need to have a clone of Halo 2 or Halo 3. No one is saying that innovation is not possible. Some of our criticisms are about how the specific mechanisms 343 has decided to adopt and integrate into Halo 5 are from a fundamentally different style of shooter. The mechanisms work much more naturally in twitch-aim and spray shooters. For the record, they also are from non-arena shooters as well. So now what we have in Halo 5 is more of a hot-mess. When you put the controller down, you will say “wow that was intense.” But on a casual level, the gameplay experience is much more shallow.

This exactly what all the “purists” mean by its like CoD.

> 2533274840212973;17:
> To the OP: everyone I have talked to has said that they are waiting for another good Halo game, and they say that the last good one was 3. To me, that says that it would sell. MCC sold 1 million in the first week, and it even had the stigma of being a “money-grab” to those who didn’t really know much about it other than that it was a remake. With agressive marketing (see: Destiny), it would fly off the shelves.

And everyone I talked to said halo 5 was great, and that halo 4 wasnt that bad.

> 2533274857398125;19:
> > 2533274840212973;17:
> > To the OP: everyone I have talked to has said that they are waiting for another good Halo game, and they say that the last good one was 3. To me, that says that it would sell. MCC sold 1 million in the first week, and it even had the stigma of being a “money-grab” to those who didn’t really know much about it other than that it was a remake. With agressive marketing (see: Destiny), it would fly off the shelves.
>
>
> And everyone I talked to said halo 5 was great, and that halo 4 wasnt that bad.

That because everybody you talked to liked Halo 4 if you like Halo 4, Halo 5 is a good evolution. The problem is Halo 4 was not true Halo and neither is Halo 5.