Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Halo Infinite and Microtransactions

OP Jonny45k7236

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 8
Im fine with microstranactions for vehicle,weapons & boosts. But thats it. Let us earn anything cosmetic through progression/achievements.
surely this would be p2w too some degree, people paying for the advantage of specific weapons vehicles and boosts would give Amy person an advantage over those who have not unlocked them yet from the get go. Guaranteed failure and a true way too piss most people off
GravyGlove wrote:
Im fine with microstranactions for vehicle,weapons & boosts. But thats it. Let us earn anything cosmetic through progression/achievements.
surely this would be p2w too some degree, people paying for the advantage of specific weapons vehicles and boosts would give Amy person an advantage over those who have not unlocked them yet from the get go. Guaranteed failure and a true way too piss most people off
It's exactly what the current req system is imo. It's an rng loot based system that adds a pay to win element to Halo 5. If it appears in Halo Infinite in its current guise you can be assured I won't buy it, and I know many players that feel the same. I'll buy games that don't use these predatory systems.

I generally don't agree with micro transactions in AAA titles, but if they have to be there, additional cosmetic packs are about as much as I can stomach. Titanfall 2 is a good example of a non invasive example of micro transactions, and that's as far as they should go.

RNG needs to go, show me the goods and I'll buy what I want to, I will not buy the chance to get the item.
Everytime I hear the word "Micro-transactions" I throw up in my mouth, loot boxes have no place in Halo or any other game
Thats a shame. I guess Halo infinite wont be an amazing game online. Hopefully the story is good though.
maxammo365 wrote:
I don't like the REQ system in Halo 5, but I could understand if its necessary. Basically the people who spend a lot of money on REQ packs subsidize the people who do not. Therefore we can all have future updates instead of paying for DLC and splitting up the community. I saw this split in BF1. DICE made really good maps, but no one played them because the community was split behind a paywall. Honestly, I probably put $20 - $30 extra into Halo 5 with REQ packs because I wanted to get armor faster. After buying a few gold packs I stopped, but there are people out there who have spent hundreds. Their money helps go towards future DLC for the rest of us.
I get the DLC splitting the community. I too saw what happened in BF1. But 95% of post launch content in 5 was realistically just finishing the game. If Infinite has all its content at launch THAN gives us free DLC I will support this 100%.
After reading the original posters link I'm really worried for Halo Infinite, the DLC probably will get drip fed to us again, if the report is accurate and Halo Infinite is a games as a service title, I expect a bare bones launch and a drip feeding of content, there are a few alarm bells for me in that report.
Just wanna hop in to clarify that the REQ system is indeed P2W to some degree*, but exclusive to Warzone, Assault. and Firefight. It doesn't pervert the other frankly more important modes. So I suppose if you're dead serious about Warzone or cheesing Firefight that would be a problem for you, but honestly keeping the power weapon advantage on one throwaway mode was probably the best way to implement the loot. Halo Wars 2 did the same thing, a throwaway mode to sell card packs.

If it creeps into the real sandbox, we can talk.
Just wanna hop in to clarify that the REQ system is indeed P2W to some degree*, but exclusive to Warzone, Assault. and Firefight. It doesn't pervert the other frankly more important modes. So I suppose if you're dead serious about Warzone or cheesing Firefight that would be a problem for you, but honestly keeping the power weapon advantage on one throwaway mode was probably the best way to implement the loot. Halo Wars 2 did the same thing, a throwaway mode to sell card packs.

If it creeps into the real sandbox, we can talk.
Except the req system was not just exclusive to warzone, they are rammed down your throat the moment you boot up the game and they are hardwired to the entire progression system of the game. They are intrusive predatory rng loot crates that have no place in aaa titles imo. Pay to win is exclusive to warzone, but you cannot avoid them in Halo 5.
i'll definetly have an eye out for MTs in halo infinite. if there is any lootbox system in it, i won't buy the game regular. probably used for the campaign. i also won't play it with game pass, bc i don't know how the developers/publishers of games in the program get rewarded if a game is played with that service.

but i also will be very careful with any MTs in the game. even if they are just cosmetics, it's very likely for me to just get the game used.

i'm still all for the community finaly pushing back this practice (in all games not just halo). and even if it very likely will take many more years until people realise, that these MTs are made to generate money and are not made to better the experience of users.

(also hoping more and more that countries start to ban lootbox systems and MTs)
Nothing is free in life, you want the fancy things it'll cost money nowadays sadly
Yeah, US$60 plus US$60 a year for Xbox Live Gold.
eviltedi wrote:
Just wanna hop in to clarify that the REQ system is indeed P2W to some degree*, but exclusive to Warzone, Assault. and Firefight. It doesn't pervert the other frankly more important modes. So I suppose if you're dead serious about Warzone or cheesing Firefight that would be a problem for you, but honestly keeping the power weapon advantage on one throwaway mode was probably the best way to implement the loot. Halo Wars 2 did the same thing, a throwaway mode to sell card packs.

If it creeps into the real sandbox, we can talk.
Except the req system was not just exclusive to warzone, they are rammed down your throat the moment you boot up the game and they are hardwired to the entire progression system of the game. They are intrusive predatory rng loot crates that have no place in aaa titles imo. Pay to win is exclusive to warzone, but you cannot avoid them in Halo 5.
Also people forget that a huge amount of resources was dedicated to the req system and consequently Warzone which was designed specifically to exploit MTX. With the bare bones launch and garbage campaign, it was obvious that the resources given to req and Warzone detracted from the overall quality of the entire game.
Im fine with microstranactions for vehicle,weapons & boosts. But thats it. Let us earn anything cosmetic through progression/achievemei
Im fine with microstranactions for vehicle,weapons & boosts. But thats it. Let us earn anything cosmetic through progression/achievements.
It should be the other way around. You shouldn't be able to pay to be given any sort of advantage over your enemies.
Also, the H5 req system was pay2win. If you can even buy a higher LIKELIHOOD of getting good weapons, you have a SIGNIFICANT advantage. Oh, and any and all loot boxes are gambling. Change my mind.
Its real simple, just don't use exploitative gambling mechanics like lootboxes and/or P2W mechanics(which REQS were) and I feel like most people will be fine.

Just follow a Titanfall style model:
Step 1: Release a full featured game with a plethora of visual customization from the get go.
Step 2: Start development on additional paid(cosmetic) items after the game releases or at the very least after the game has gone gold.
Step 3: Just sell people cool stuff up front without any of the slimy yoink!
Step 4: Profit without the bad press and an angry fanbase.

The in game purchases need to be completely segregated in game unlocks. In game unlocks should only be able to be unlocked in game without being able to buy any "currency" to speed up the process. Microtransactions meanwhile should be straightforward and honest. "Do you think this thing we made is cool? Do you think it is worth the price we are charging? No slot machines or absurd grinds to wear the customer down, just selling a specific item for a specific price and letting them decide whether it is worth it.

But most importantly, JUST DON"T USE GAMBLING MECHANICS TO TRY AND EXPLOIT YOUR CUSTOMERS. Like seriously just don't do it, there are plenty of other ways to make money that are more ethical.
I'm hoping there'll just be cosmetic stuff not tied to loot boxes like you said, that's the only way I can tolerate micros in my already full priced games.
WerepyreND wrote:
Its real simple, just don't use exploitative gambling mechanics like lootboxes and/or P2W mechanics(which REQS were) and I feel like most people will be fine.

Just follow a Titanfall style model:
Step 1: Release a full featured game with a plethora of visual customization from the get go.
Step 2: Start development on additional paid(cosmetic) items after the game releases or at the very least after the game has gone gold.
Step 3: Just sell people cool stuff up front without any of the slimy yoink!
Step 4: Profit without the bad press and an angry fanbase.

The in game purchases need to be completely segregated in game unlocks. In game unlocks should only be able to be unlocked in game without being able to buy any "currency" to speed up the process. Microtransactions meanwhile should be straightforward and honest. "Do you think this thing we made is cool? Do you think it is worth the price we are charging? No slot machines or absurd grinds to wear the customer down, just selling a specific item for a specific price and letting them decide whether it is worth it.

But most importantly, JUST DON"T USE GAMBLING MECHANICS TO TRY AND EXPLOIT YOUR CUSTOMERS. Like seriously just don't do it, there are plenty of other ways to make money that are more ethical.
I think for me if it's purely cosmectics for me it's fine.
The people are still forgetting about the side of developers. To make an AAA title requires millions like they made for a movie. There are a thousand of artists, programmers, server maintenance, audio team, effect team, etc...
I completely agree about the unbalanced reqs on the warzone, and I hate lootboxes when bring so useless random itens, but it's not necessary to be so extremist on the idea.
If Infinite won't be any microtransactions, they will problaby sell more expensive on their final product. So my question is: this will be worthing for truth or the results will be the same if will had microtransactions?
eviltedi wrote:
Just wanna hop in to clarify that the REQ system is indeed P2W to some degree*, but exclusive to Warzone, Assault. and Firefight. It doesn't pervert the other frankly more important modes. So I suppose if you're dead serious about Warzone or cheesing Firefight that would be a problem for you, but honestly keeping the power weapon advantage on one throwaway mode was probably the best way to implement the loot. Halo Wars 2 did the same thing, a throwaway mode to sell card packs.

If it creeps into the real sandbox, we can talk.
Except the req system was not just exclusive to warzone, they are rammed down your throat the moment you boot up the game and they are hardwired to the entire progression system of the game. They are intrusive predatory rng loot crates that have no place in aaa titles imo. Pay to win is exclusive to warzone, but you cannot avoid them in Halo 5.
I merely commented on the P2W aspect. I'm not defending the REQ system.
AlibutOne wrote:
WerepyreND wrote:
Its real simple, just don't use exploitative gambling mechanics like lootboxes and/or P2W mechanics(which REQS were) and I feel like most people will be fine.

Just follow a Titanfall style model:
Step 1: Release a full featured game with a plethora of visual customization from the get go.
Step 2: Start development on additional paid(cosmetic) items after the game releases or at the very least after the game has gone gold.
Step 3: Just sell people cool stuff up front without any of the slimy yoink!
Step 4: Profit without the bad press and an angry fanbase.

The in game purchases need to be completely segregated in game unlocks. In game unlocks should only be able to be unlocked in game without being able to buy any "currency" to speed up the process. Microtransactions meanwhile should be straightforward and honest. "Do you think this thing we made is cool? Do you think it is worth the price we are charging? No slot machines or absurd grinds to wear the customer down, just selling a specific item for a specific price and letting them decide whether it is worth it.

But most importantly, JUST DON"T USE GAMBLING MECHANICS TO TRY AND EXPLOIT YOUR CUSTOMERS. Like seriously just don't do it, there are plenty of other ways to make money that are more ethical.
I think for me if it's purely cosmectics for me it's fine.
The people are still forgetting about the side of developers. To make an AAA title requires millions like they made for a movie. There are a thousand of artists, programmers, server maintenance, audio team, effect team, etc...
I completely agree about the unbalanced reqs on the warzone, and I hate lootboxes when bring so useless random itens, but it's not necessary to be so extremist on the idea.
If Infinite won't be any microtransactions, they will problaby sell more expensive on their final product. So my question is: this will be worthing for truth or the results will be the same if will had microtransactions?
Developers and publishers love to use the "games are expensive to make" excuse and I don't think anyone will deny there is truth to that, but until dev/pubs start being vastly more transparent about how and where all this money is being spent, they can stuff it. Its easy to go and say "X game cost Y millions" to make, but if it is the publishers who blow up the price due to absurd demands and meddling than suddenly Y millions of dollars is suddenly a lot less sympathetic.

I didn't even say microtransactions as a whole needed to go, just exploitative gambling mechanics and absurdly long grinds(regardless of whether it is "only cosmetic"). Go ahead, sell bits a pieces of armor, assassinations, armor effects, etc. Simple, up front micro-transactions that are not hidden behind gambling or other shady practices. Make small things people want to buy and just let them buy them with no strings attached.
So lets add something to the conversation.

What if lootboxes but not microtransactions are indeed banned throughout most of the world? That is becoming a very real possibility as we get closer to Infinites launch.

What would they do than?
So lets add something to the conversation.

What if lootboxes but not microtransactions are indeed banned throughout most of the world? That is becoming a very real possibility as we get closer to Infinites launch.

What would they do than?
You'll find out soon enough what they'd do instead of paid lootboxes.
You give them an inch, and microsoft will try to milk you dry

I am apalled that you guys are even slightly okay with this slap to the player's face

WE SHOULD BE PROTESTING TO GET MICROTRANSACTIONS REMOVED
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 8