Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

We want more info on "armor coating".

OP Zakspeeeed

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 33
  4. 34
  5. 35
  6. 36
  7. 37
  8. ...
  9. 41
I totally get wanting the customization wanting to be like Reach. But..
You really are making THIS big a deal out of colors? Yes its a great feature, but come ON... the campaign and multiplayer are infinitely more important.
The backlash might cause them to implement it as user defined as well as developer made.

You dont want to be convinced; you want to have them reconsider.
Oh please.
A thread on armor skins is not a downplay on campaign or multiplayer, neither does anyone think they're not important. That's just a dismissal of an issue using something completely unrelated.

"Eat all your food, there are children in Africa starving."

Recognise that there's no info on any of those two modes, so there's not much material to discuss.

And this whole ordeal actually is quite a big deal to some, on several levels, atleast for me it's not just about the downgrade on one part of the customization, it's also how I'm treated as a player, and how they try to fool me with their PR.
I tend to agree. I don't give two hoots about colours or armour customisations... but I appreciate a lot of people do. And apparently quite a lot. :)

I don't have a problem with putting some of the stuff behind pay walls... that's a fact of life.

But to put people utterly and completely in the dark about what their options are does nothing to endear 343 to the community.
Darwi wrote:
I tend to agree. I don't give two hoots about colours or armour customisations... but I appreciate a lot of people do. And apparently quite a lot. :)

I don't have a problem with putting some of the stuff behind pay walls... that's a fact of life.

But to put people utterly and completely in the dark about what their options are does nothing to endear 343 to the community.
And prior to a game's launch, that can be enough to make or break a game's success. And considering Halo 5's reputation, Halo Infinite is going to be a turning point in Halo's future, and as it is right now, a bad one.

I'm just sad that putting coatings behind paywalls is taking away from players, rather than adding a cool alternative. If people had access to the basic 2 colors, and saw another player toting hot rod flames, or Covenant plating, or glowing plasma, then the idea of "I have something basic, they have something special" is enough incentive to encourage a purchase, while offering the player more options, rather than more restrictions for less quality. It's not a good consumer practice, it's not a good business practice, and I'm scared of what these poor decisions will do for the future of Halo.
Nefnoj wrote:
Darwi wrote:
I tend to agree. I don't give two hoots about colours or armour customisations... but I appreciate a lot of people do. And apparently quite a lot. :)

I don't have a problem with putting some of the stuff behind pay walls... that's a fact of life.

But to put people utterly and completely in the dark about what their options are does nothing to endear 343 to the community.
And prior to a game's launch, that can be enough to make or break a game's success. And considering Halo 5's reputation, Halo Infinite is going to be a turning point in Halo's future, and as it is right now, a bad one.

I'm just sad that putting coatings behind paywalls is taking away from players, rather than adding a cool alternative. If people had access to the basic 2 colors, and saw another player toting hot rod flames, or Covenant plating, or glowing plasma, then the idea of "I have something basic, they have something special" is enough incentive to encourage a purchase, while offering the player more options, rather than more restrictions for less quality. It's not a good consumer practice, it's not a good business practice, and I'm scared of what these poor decisions will do for the future of Halo.
Surely the game will at the very least start us off with the 16 or so basic colours from Halo: Combat Evolved, with coatings featuring more bold combinations or whatnot being the ones we have to earn/unlock, or worse, pay for...
Naqser wrote:
I totally get wanting the customization wanting to be like Reach. But..
You really are making THIS big a deal out of colors? Yes its a great feature, but come ON... the campaign and multiplayer are infinitely more important.
The backlash might cause them to implement it as user defined as well as developer made.

You dont want to be convinced; you want to have them reconsider.
Oh please.
A thread on armor skins is not a downplay on campaign or multiplayer, neither does anyone think they're not important. That's just a dismissal of an issue using something completely unrelated.

"Eat all your food, there are children in Africa starving."

Recognise that there's no info on any of those two modes, so there's not much material to discuss.

And this whole ordeal actually is quite a big deal to some, on several levels, atleast for me it's not just about the downgrade on one part of the customization, it's also how I'm treated as a player, and how they try to fool me with their PR.
Sure makes it seem like one. The amount of people focusing on it is a bit much.
Its them wanting to experiment. Nothing wrong with it. What they need to do is let players do it too.

Putting some colors behind challenges? Good. Some behind paywalls in order to fund the free to play multiplayer? Ehh fine. It has to make money somehow, or else it becomes part of a regular sixty dollar game.
Naqser wrote:
I totally get wanting the customization wanting to be like Reach. But..
You really are making THIS big a deal out of colors? Yes its a great feature, but come ON... the campaign and multiplayer are infinitely more important.
The backlash might cause them to implement it as user defined as well as developer made.

You dont want to be convinced; you want to have them reconsider.
Oh please.
A thread on armor skins is not a downplay on campaign or multiplayer, neither does anyone think they're not important. That's just a dismissal of an issue using something completely unrelated.

"Eat all your food, there are children in Africa starving."

Recognise that there's no info on any of those two modes, so there's not much material to discuss.

And this whole ordeal actually is quite a big deal to some, on several levels, atleast for me it's not just about the downgrade on one part of the customization, it's also how I'm treated as a player, and how they try to fool me with their PR.
Sure makes it seem like one. The amount of people focusing on it is a bit much.
Its them wanting to experiment. Nothing wrong with it. What they need to do is let players do it too.

Putting some colors behind challenges? Good. Some behind paywalls in order to fund the free to play multiplayer? Ehh fine. It has to make money somehow, or else it becomes part of a regular sixty dollar game.
If the armor coatings are remotely representative of things to come folks are well within their rights to complain about this issue as loudly as they have.

They can "experiment" all they want, no one is actually against the idea of a multi layer color/texture system, its the lack of choice where we previously had one that is the issue. Putting basic options on the color wheel behind "challenges" or grind is not in fact "good" its demonstrably worse than what we had before in this one particular aspect of the game. Short of having literally thousands of options 343 isn't going to match the shear possibilities of the old system and potentially tying basic color selection into monetization is gross, it is nowhere near "fine".

I would have had zero issues with Infinite multiplayer "just being part of a regular sixty dollar game" because there was never anything wrong with that in the first place. We didn't exactly get to vote on what model to use. The only reason so many of these AAA games are going F2P is to give themselves an excuse to use even more manipulative monetization than they otherwise would have been able to get away with in a full price title and they already get away with quite a lot.

Folks are "focusing on this a bit too much" because based on the way things have gone in this industry, armor coatings are likely just the tip of the iceberg.
Sure makes it seem like one.
So why do you think that is an issue?
And why do you find it a problem?

The amount of people focusing on it is a bit much.
If there's a large group of people on a specific subject, maybe it's because the subject is something they want to discuss?
Why is that a problem?

Its them wanting to experiment. Nothing wrong with it. What they need to do is let players do it too.
Then why does this "experiment" seem like Methos in a coke?

No, or course there's nothing wrong with experimentation.
It just so happen that the whole thing is a "seven-layer" issue.

1: Decision is removed. They decide which color combinations we get. "They know better".
2: Less options. Given that we're not allowed to mix how we want, there's going to be far less options to choose from. There's a fair chance many favourite combinations aren't available from the start, will be holiday limited, or just not ever going to be in.
3: PR surrounding the system. It's technical talk meant to sound impressive, and mentions on how much freedom they get. The technical part is meant to throw people off any notion that "it's simple", as long as they say fancy technical terms in a vague sense, common people not versed in "computery schtuff" will fall for it any mention that "doing that is too difficult", and there's no need to go any deeper as to why, because most "won't understand anyway". The freedom is for them and them only, it's their freedom of creation, it's their freedom of monetization. They sat down at meetings, and decided that players wouldn't be allowed to choose colors anymore. It's not that they can't do it, it's that they just won't.
4: Microtransactions. I know, these are inescapable at this point, but the whole point of this move is to make the entire multiplayer more monetizable. They're not breaking ground with new innovative, "more player friendly" ways of monetization. They're stripping features, and selling pieces of it back.
5: Bloating potential. Considering the freedom and ease they talk about in creating new skins, that we're most likely looking at a battlepass system, and Halo 5's sheer amount of armor permutations. It's more than likely that they'll over-commit and make a ridiculous amount of skins. Not to the point where they'll have the same amount as with a color customization system, like Halo 5's, but to the point where you start contemplating if all this hassle and work they go through is worth it, instead of a color mixing and matching system. Halo 5's armor pool was bloated, and then came the white dot/stripe versions.
6: Manipulation. Different color combinations work differently well with each other. Just look up color theory. They have a good shot here at creating a bunch of "free skins", where the color pairings are poor, leaving us less content with the skins than we'd like to be, then sell us skins with good color pairings instead. Or leave those desireable skins at the end of battlepasses.
7: Precedent (sp?): Testing the waters with this system, and having seen how Halo 5 initially handled emblem colorization. Emblems could very well fall into the same category of pre-colored, why not also the background of them? At what point is the reduction of choice the tipping point?

Halo CE let you pick a single color.
Halo 2 let you pick two and the emblem.
Halo 3 introduced different armors.
Halo Reach expanded on that with more parts
Halo 4 reduced the options
Halo 5 reduced combinations even more

With this coating system.
i343 isn't taking a forward step by adding a new component to the customization toolbox.
They're stripping one out and regressing. Halo 2 going back to Halo CE.
Coats would be a perfect addition on top of picking colors. Even if all the other layers were static. I'm sure sliders would be requested, but I'm sure given this scenario, to that, quite close to everyone would prefer the other.

Putting some colors behind challenges? Good. Some behind paywalls in order to fund the free to play multiplayer? Ehh fine.
-Xp boosters
-Credit boosters
-Weapon skins
-Armor parts
-Assassinations
-Stances
-Emblems

Are some of the already available items in Halo 5, that's plenty already.
Coats fit right in there, and they could very well be color customizable by the player.
If the temporary lock on real money usage in Star Wars Battlefront II wouldn't hurt its bottom line, then I'm sure color customization for coats wouldn't hurt Infinite's.

It has to make money somehow, or else it becomes part of a regular sixty dollar game.
Nobody is disputing that.
I totally get wanting the customization wanting to be like Reach. But..
You really are making THIS big a deal out of colors? Yes its a great feature, but come ON... the campaign and multiplayer are infinitely more important.
The backlash might cause them to implement it as user defined as well as developer made.

You dont want to be convinced; you want to have them reconsider.
I mean making a monetary system around colours that use to be in the game is sort of a joke. Even the extra special stuff. I just hope it isn’t like destiny 2 where once you use it up you have to recraft it, rebuy it, or refind it.
Re: HD Simplicityy's post- Yes, unequivocally the overall gameplay quality for MP and multi-player as well as the quality of the campaign absolutely trump the "cherry on top," of cosmetics customization.

I don't think that relegates this issue to "not a big deal," though. The entire series to date has set and continually reaffirmed precedent that players have the option to freely customize their Spartans' color schemes. If Infinite changes that, it's running very starkly against the grain of all of its predacessors in this regard. It's actively *removing* a long established and beloved feature.

As for whether or not the entire community wants to be convinced that Coatings are actually a good thing or just want 343i to admit they're not and reverse course? I can only speak for myself, obviously, but from day one I've been hoping that there are details being withheld that will exhonorate the entire system. I just feel like if there were, 343i would've made it a priority to make it known by now instead of finding themselves the butt of half of the industry's bad MTX jokes until an even more egregious offender comes around.

Hopefully the upcoming update will shed some light on why Coatings aren't as constraining as they seem to be based on the information we've received so far.

TL;DR- If Infinite is fun and has a great campaign, Coatings can't and shouldn't ruin the entire experience, even if they are every bit as bad as they seem. But they are a big deal to a lot of players who've reasonably come to expect freedom of color expression for their MP Spartans since '01, and 343 should absolutely hear that feedback.
People keep arguing over this, the solutions are simple: cancel the F2P multiplayer, integrate it to the full priced game and scrap the entire armor coating system to allow players to chose the color they want for every armor piece. It's not complicated, 343 knows this but they won't do it because Microsoft cares more about profit than fans.
Honestly now that the game is most likeley delayed till fall 2021, they have a chance to fix this shitstorm
People keep arguing over this, the solutions are simple: cancel the F2P multiplayer, integrate it to the full priced game and scrap the entire armor coating system to allow players to chose the color they want for every armor piece. It's not complicated, 343 knows this but they won't do it because Microsoft cares more about profit than fans.
And even if they wanted to reverse these changes, they can’t (for the time being). They already have major deals with sponsors, and abruptly ending those would cause Microsoft’s stocks to take a hit. We’re not going to be able to make a change unless these egregious micro transactions practices are bad enough to cause another Avengers situation (which even then I doubt, considering that multiplayer will be F2P, allowing the game to take those hits from people. I mean, look at Fortnite, people have been lambasting their awful micro transactions ever since the game became a F2P battle royale and they’re still not dead). But then again, if that kind of situation was to happen to Halo, the franchise would be completely dead. The only option we really have is to put up with micro transactions and hope that the deals are set to expire in June or something, and then they’ll finally remove that -Yoink-. Or if they give people who pay the full $60 customization and leave the paid stuff to those who only play F2P.
spirlol wrote:
People keep arguing over this, the solutions are simple: cancel the F2P multiplayer, integrate it to the full priced game and scrap the entire armor coating system to allow players to chose the color they want for every armor piece. It's not complicated, 343 knows this but they won't do it because Microsoft cares more about profit than fans.
And even if they wanted to reverse these changes, they can’t (for the time being). They already have major deals with sponsors, and abruptly ending those would cause Microsoft’s stocks to take a hit. We’re not going to be able to make a change unless these egregious micro transactions practices are bad enough to cause another Avengers situation (which even then I doubt, considering that multiplayer will be F2P, allowing the game to take those hits from people. I mean, look at Fortnite, people have been lambasting their awful micro transactions ever since the game became a F2P battle royale and they’re still not dead). But then again, if that kind of situation was to happen to Halo, the franchise would be completely dead. The only option we really have is to put up with micro transactions and hope that the deals are set to expire in June or something, and then they’ll finally remove that -Yoink-. Or if they give people who pay the full $60 customization and leave the paid stuff to those who only play F2P.
That's the best solution, F2P get armor coatings while paying full price unlocks full customization
spirlol wrote:
People keep arguing over this, the solutions are simple: cancel the F2P multiplayer, integrate it to the full priced game and scrap the entire armor coating system to allow players to chose the color they want for every armor piece. It's not complicated, 343 knows this but they won't do it because Microsoft cares more about profit than fans.
And even if they wanted to reverse these changes, they can’t (for the time being). They already have major deals with sponsors, and abruptly ending those would cause Microsoft’s stocks to take a hit. We’re not going to be able to make a change unless these egregious micro transactions practices are bad enough to cause another Avengers situation (which even then I doubt, considering that multiplayer will be F2P, allowing the game to take those hits from people. I mean, look at Fortnite, people have been lambasting their awful micro transactions ever since the game became a F2P battle royale and they’re still not dead). But then again, if that kind of situation was to happen to Halo, the franchise would be completely dead. The only option we really have is to put up with micro transactions and hope that the deals are set to expire in June or something, and then they’ll finally remove that -Yoink-. Or if they give people who pay the full $60 customization and leave the paid stuff to those who only play F2P.
Halo probably won't die. It'll just become a loveless money zombie. That's assuming they can steal enough fans from Fortnite, which is a dubious proposition at best. Titanfall couldn't bead COD at its own game, and Titanfall was actually a really good game. I expect Halo Infinite will have similar levels of success as the old fanbase ignores it to play MCC, because why wouldn't we? It's literally everything we always loved in one neat package.
I mean making a monetary system around colours that use to be in the game is sort of a joke. Even the extra special stuff. I just hope it isn’t like destiny 2 where once you use it up you have to recraft it, rebuy it, or refind it.
I'm sure they're going to be a one time use. Anything else wouldn't make sense when thinking about monetization the coating system imo.
I Achi I wrote:
I mean making a monetary system around colours that use to be in the game is sort of a joke. Even the extra special stuff. I just hope it isn’t like destiny 2 where once you use it up you have to recraft it, rebuy it, or refind it.
I'm sure they're going to be a one time use. Anything else wouldn't make sense when thinking about monetization the coating system imo.
Oh I agree. I think the issue is that it’s exactly that, it wouldn’t make sense to have to reacquire colours but we’ve been surprised before. Can only wait to see what happens I guess.
spirlol wrote:
People keep arguing over this, the solutions are simple: cancel the F2P multiplayer, integrate it to the full priced game and scrap the entire armor coating system to allow players to chose the color they want for every armor piece. It's not complicated, 343 knows this but they won't do it because Microsoft cares more about profit than fans.
The only option we really have is to put up with micro transactions and hope that the deals are set to expire in June or something, and then they’ll finally remove that -Yoink-.
We have another option. Don't buy into it. It's ridiculous that this idea is being tolerated at all imo. We've always had our base colour system, this is a disgusting and egregious cash grab from 343i imo. I won't be buying a single armour coating with real money, or in game currency that's purchased with real money, if applicable. I never bought the req packs in Halo 5 either, I will never give in to, or put up with this. Vote with your wallets and purses, they'll get the message.
Looks like unfortunately they are doubling-down on the idea of locked-in dev-made coatings.
More info has been revealed on coatings: https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/news/inside-infinite-december-2020

While some of the information is fine, I still don't see it improving the primary/secondary system. If I had the option between the primary and secondary colors, and the prepicked coatings, I'd pick the colors. I don't want my character's individuality taken away. It's even worse how many other games use a primary/secondary system along with coatings, Doom 2016's multiplayer comes to mind. Not to mention how the currently revealed coatings all have primary/secondary palettes. And how variations in color will programmatically have to exist for team games anyway.

If coatings blew me out of the water with incredible details skins, of course I'd back it... But as of now, I'm only left with the frustration of losing options and disappointment of lackluster substitution.
IXI Sean wrote:
Looks like unfortunately they are doubling-down on the idea of locked-in dev-made coatings.
Ofc they are doubling down on them.

You will get your cool coatings by purchasing them directly or through a battlepass. They even said that they can create them more easily, so cranking them out for each season will be not a problem.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 33
  4. 34
  5. 35
  6. 36
  7. 37
  8. ...
  9. 41