Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Multiplayer - Fortnite/CoD Warzone model?

OP Ken2379

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
They have one massive online gametype that is free for all. It helps boost population of a game and it's longevity. It also gets people interested in the game that wasn't previously which leads to full purchase of the game (or game pass in this example) to play other multiplayer modes meaning a greater population boost to what would have existed under normal circumstances.

Some people hate cosmetic microtrasactions, I understand. Personally I see huge benefits from them. I don't buy them, but loads of people do which means the developers get a continuous money source and they provide regular and free updates towards the game. You don't have to buy them, but we get to reap the benefits that they bring with them. Free content and additional game support. Special animations for assassinations, different helmets, characters from previous games, weapons skins, bunch of potential.

Imagine getting a bunch of well made, free multiplayer maps every two months. You could have some cosmetic items inside a season pass. I've bought them on games like Rocket League and Fortnite and you don't need to purchase them again, as you earn enough credits to get the next one with a little left over every season to use how you want. It's a proven model to increase online support and playerbase. Not a bad deal for $10 considering a lot of us used to spend that on 3 dlc maps that were mostly restricted to a single playlist as many others didn't own them...
hell no but tbh i joked about it before Xbox Stream with friends because they have already the OW and could be inspired again from COD Warzone and now after the stream im rly worried they consider this....
Not another 'Battle Royale', seriously they need to stay the hell away from Halo and no more stupid MT. The game needs to be a complete game, not full of predatory systems...had enough of those in Halo 5.
Ken2379 wrote:
They have one massive online gametype that is free for all. It helps boost population of a game and it's longevity. It also gets people interested in the game that wasn't previously which leads to full purchase of the game (or game pass in this example) to play other multiplayer modes meaning a greater population boost to what would have existed under normal circumstances.

Some people hate cosmetic microtrasactions, I understand. Personally I see huge benefits from them. I don't buy them, but loads of people do which means the developers get a continuous money source and they provide regular and free updates towards the game. You don't have to buy them, but we get to reap the benefits that they bring with them. Free content and additional game support. Special animations for assassinations, different helmets, characters from previous games, weapons skins, bunch of potential.

Imagine getting a bunch of well made, free multiplayer maps every two months. You could have some cosmetic items inside a season pass. I've bought them on games like Rocket League and Fortnite and you don't need to purchase them again, as you earn enough credits to get the next one with a little left over every season to use how you want. It's a proven model to increase online support and playerbase. Not a bad deal for $10 considering a lot of us used to spend that on 3 dlc maps that were mostly restricted to a single playlist as many others didn't own them...
Not to sound elitist on 343's behalf, but this game is the console's most valuable AAA franchise. They are better than just giving the game away for free to get people in the door in hopes of realizing monetization on what otherwise wouldn't be a player.

Also, Microsoft has already decided going down a different pathway to dangle the "free" to play carrot in front of players by heavily marketing Game Pass (GPU or whatever they call it now). Side note: I didn't pay for Gears 5 and don't plan on paying for Infinite (unless they release a stellar limited edition physical version). I took advantage of that GPU promotion around the holidays last year where you could upgrade to GPU for like $1. It automatically applies that upgrade to the remainder of your Xbox Live gold paid period. So before doing the GPU upgrade, I maxed out my XBL subscription (good deals on this at Costco) so I essentially got GPU for 3 years for $1 (and also got a discount on XBL gold by buying through Costco). Offering FTP version of Halo would detract from the value proposition of Game Pass. Given Xbox is a subsidiary of Microsoft, who is a financially savvy public company, they are obviously pushing hard on its subscriber ecosystem so it can highlight a growing subscription model (look at what they are doing with consoles now as well; hardware subscription models).

On adoption, I think your logic suggests very wishful thinking. How many Fortnite FTP players end up buying the campaign (Save the World)? Understand it's not a perfect comparison (Halo games are known for their campaign; Fortnite is not) but I think it's a fair question. CoD Warzone would be a better comparison, and I bet they're not seeing a huge pickup on the fully paid version of the game. People flock towards the FTP Warzone mode because its FTP. It's extremely hard to convert them over to the full paid game unless there is something truly compelling there. Creates a viscous cycle, players want to be where the most action is, if most of the population is in FTP warzone, people won't buy/adopt because not as many are there, etc.

If I had to put my money on the table to bet, I am guessing Infinite takes a lot of cues from Gears 5 on how it approaches seasons, unlockables, and optional MTX. Unlike Gears I am sure there will be an entirely separate set of unlockables that come from completing achievements or longer-term tasks that maybe span beyond a single season.
@ronnie42
Doesn't have to be battle royale, I think that wouldn't suit Halo's style anyway. I think a large 50 Vs 50 or maybe even 100 Vs 100 gametype would be cool. Proper vehicle warfare outside with arena gameplay style bases (built like mini maps - imagine epitaph or midship as a control point) and if you have control your team spawns there and gets points. Have five buildings like this on the larger map and people fight for control of them. Halo 5's model was shocking, it was essentially a pay to win model for Warzone. Very disappointing.

@GP Carry
I get where you're coming from but even having it exist means additional support for multiplayer fans. On Call of Duty we get free maps every couple of months which we otherwise wouldn't have had if people weren't pouring money into cosmetic items. I get what you're saying though and I'd be happy to see the Gears of War style (minus loot boxes). It's the same thing essentially and you just get loads of free content and online support. It's the free content for owners of the full game and multiplayer that I'm advocating for.
Have any of you actually played Warzone?

I have never been a Call of Duty player, but it’s an absolutely tremendous online game. The perfect mix of competitive and casual, and it takes a lot of skill to be decent.

I’ve sat in bed many of times thinking about a similar game with Halos sandbox. The possibilities are absolutely endless.
Im okay with cosmetic only microtransactions but not for Halo. I really want the armor to mean something when you see people wearing it like "Woah that guy got the ___ helmet?"
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
Im okay with cosmetic only microtransactions but not for Halo. I really want the armor to mean something when you see people wearing it like "Woah that guy got the ___ helmet?"
Why not both? Like the H3 armour, you could have really cool armour that took great effort to unlock. Or the Reach helmet that took a huge amount of time to earn.

You wouldn't be able to buy armour that can be earned just as much as you wouldn't be able to earn armour that could be bought.
Ken2379 wrote:
This zoomer pandering is whats killing Halo's core fanbase
How so?
So basically adopt the models from other franchises?? You mean exactly what they were doing since Halo 4? i personally dont care either way, its not Halo anymore
xsv wrote:
So basically adopt the models from other franchises?? You mean exactly what they were doing since Halo 4? i personally dont care either way, its not Halo anymore
Halo has yet to adopt this particular model. They essentially have a free "battle pass" for MCC so it's clear they are testing the waters.

But yeah why not take things from other franchises if it's a highly popular, densely proven model? There is no suggestion this model will fail any time soon either so it's worth riding the wave.

Halo is a story, not a game. They could tell it many ways and I hunk it's time they mixed up the formula. Going open world is a good start.
Ken2379 wrote:
xsv wrote:
So basically adopt the models from other franchises?? You mean exactly what they were doing since Halo 4? i personally dont care either way, its not Halo anymore
Halo has yet to adopt this particular model. They essentially have a free "battle pass" for MCC so it's clear they are testing the waters.

But yeah why not take things from other franchises if it's a highly popular, densely proven model? There is no suggestion this model will fail any time soon either so it's worth riding the wave.

Halo is a story, not a game. They could tell it many ways and I hunk it's time they mixed up the formula. Going open world is a good start.
But yeah why not take things from other franchises if it's a highly popular, densely proven model? There is no suggestion this model will fail any time soon either so it's worth riding the wave.Funny thing, this way of thinking is exactly what got Halo here....

Halo is a story, not a game.Its both, and mixing up the formula is also what got us here. This is why other franchises stick to their formula and dont deviate from it. Imagine being able to wallrun in a war game like cod.... oh wait
Why do you want Halo to follow these trends? Let me be real clear here, the reason no one plays Halo anymore is precisely those reason you want, they followed trends and it failed. Why doesn't anyone want a Halo that bucks these trends and makes it's own path? Halo used to set trends not follow them.
Why do you want Halo to follow these trends? Let me be real clear here, the reason no one plays Halo anymore is precisely those reason you want, they followed trends and it failed. Why doesn't anyone want a Halo that bucks these trends and follows it's own path? Halo used to set trends not follow them.
Because they are proven to increase player population, longevity and you get continuous game support and a bunch of free maps and other content with this. Why wouldn't you want that?

Halo has NEVER done this before.

Has any game retained a strong online community after 20 years? Are we really expecting modern gamers to spend 5 years playing a single game? It was easier in the days of 360 as their was limited competition. But now gaming is heavily mainstream, it's a lot harder as many high quality online games are available. Not to mention the fact crossplay is a huge feature on many popular online games.

Having PC/console crossplay for Halo is a good step in the he right direction.

Halo will probably do extremely well in ten years time with a soft reboot. It's just how things are now.
Do you think anybody would care about recon or hayabusa if you could just buy it?
Ken2379 wrote:
Im okay with cosmetic only microtransactions but not for Halo. I really want the armor to mean something when you see people wearing it like "Woah that guy got the ___ helmet?"
Why not both? Like the H3 armour, you could have really cool armour that took great effort to unlock. Or the Reach helmet that took a huge amount of time to earn.

You wouldn't be able to buy armour that can be earned just as much as you wouldn't be able to earn armour that could be bought.
Id prefer just having unlockable armor so it means something and some of them don't even have to be that hard to get. It would be interesting to have armor that shows what kind of player you are, if you drive around a lot maybe theres a helmet for that, if you get a lot of grenade kills theres a helmet. If they are gonna have them be paid for then the coolest ones are probably gonna be paid for because they want to rake in the money with only some actually meaning something and shows you went through a lot to get it kind of like Helioskrill before everyone could get it.
Do you think anybody would care about recon or hayabusa if you could just buy it?
The model doesn't mean you can buy everything.

You have stuff unlockable for owners of the full game. Armour/titles unlocked for challenges etc etc. This cannot be brought.

You have stuff unlockable for players of the free portion of the multiplayer. Armour/titles unlocked for completing challenges etc etc. This also cannot be brought.

Then you have titles/armour/assassinations that can only be brought.
Ken2379 wrote:
Why do you want Halo to follow these trends? Let me be real clear here, the reason no one plays Halo anymore is precisely those reason you want, they followed trends and it failed. Why doesn't anyone want a Halo that bucks these trends and follows it's own path? Halo used to set trends not follow them.
Because they are proven to increase player population, longevity and you get continuous game support and a bunch of free maps and other content with this. Why wouldn't you want that?

Halo has NEVER done this before.
Incorrect. Halo 2 and 3 had free maps, back when Halo was a leader not some trend follower.
Ken2379 wrote:
Incorrect. Halo 2 and 3 had free maps, back when Halo was a leader not some trend follower.
Unless you're talking about Cold Storage, every other Halo 3 map pack had to be paid for. They didn't become free until a long time after release.

Having paid map or gameplay affecting dlc for multiplayer is a horrific idea outside of fighting games (don't agree with that either) but at least the model works.

Few games seem to have a thriving community after 12 months from release so it's important to culture this with continued support. This is pointless for a company however if there is no revenue attached.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2