1. True but nothing wrong with trying. WZ succeeded in making a larger mode for Halo in my opinion.
1: bigger lobbies does not mean better games. It required more resources which could be spent elsewhere. See how BTB wasn't present at H5 launch, and how the BTB Maps now are Forge ones.
Fair enough. The reason I think it will be back is because:
I'm sure WZ will be back. It's a great mode that just needs a req system revamp. As far as gameplay I don't think it'll be 100% H5. Probably a mix of classic and H5With the lukewarm reception Halo 5 got, I wouldn't be sure that anything introduced in Halo 5 will be back. Especially with the REQ system being unpopular, and Warzone being built around selling REQ packs, the future of Warzone seems uncertain. If the mode was popular, they may salvage the general idea, but if it wasn't sufficiently popular, knowing 343i I could definitely see them completely scrapping it.
1. It's a good mode for going beyond the 8v8 BTB cap, let's them explore larger player lobbies.
2. It's pretty hard to find games in a lot of modes for a while now on H5 but WZ has been one that you can consistently find games pretty quick even 3.5 years later, even more impressive is it requires the biggest player count so I'd say it's probably H5's most successful addition to Halo.
3. It's pretty unique and really adds something to Halo, not just another mode. You've got PvPvE mixed with base capturing and core destruction. I couldn't see them putting so much work into it just to scrap it completely for the next game, I think it's gonna be one of those staple modes that are in every Halo from now on.
2: not really impressive. It's the mode which the REQ system revolve around, and gives out the most XP and REQ points.
3: Well, in terms of programming, everything got scrapped as they made a new engine. I also imagine they'd recreate a lot of assets, even though they technically wouldn't really have to. So, there's not much for or against its return to actually go on.
2. What I was saying is impressive is the fact that to this day it's populated while being the most demanding playlist in terms of lobby size, many other playlists have trouble with population with just 4v4/8v8.
3. True but I'm sure there's still a lot that went into planning the ins and outs of the mode besides the actual coding part of it.
1: Well, yes and no.
While there's nothing wrong with trying, there are still the hypothetical negatives to consider, and ponder wether or not it's worth the risk. Cost of development is only one part of the equation regarding a larger lobby. There's been other threads covering that subject though.
As far as a larger mode?
I think it fell kind of short on the NPC side of things, and it was really only in Assault where you felt that the extra 8 players really mattered. Seeing as in normal Warzone, if it's a more even match, the team is more spread out and the encounters do not really play out any differently than other modes with lesser players.
2: Yes and no, yet again.
Sure, it's not "easy" to get together 24 players, however, as I mentioned, it's the game mode which has the highest pay-out of what you grind for in Halo 5's multiplayer. Also consider that the more players there are, the lesser impact an individual player will have on the outcome of the match, and thus the skill criteria can be more relaxed and take in a wider range of differently skilled players, meaning a larger pool of players to choose from for matches. 4v4 would certainly gain a higher population if they made that XP and REQ reward be more than what Warzone matches pay out.
3: Of course, but that goes for any concept, they could have had in the making, and with most things on square one, there's a higher chance one of those concepts get tested, or that they feel it isn't worth it and focus on what we now call the "Arena" side of things.
I don't know if I'm the only one, but it did feel like inconsistent gameplay jumping between Arena and Warzone.