Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Halo 5 Population Discussion Thread

OP TheDarkKn1ght19

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 53
The fact that Microsoft and 343i didn't allow Halo games such as Halo: Reach to be backwards compatible until December (or later) shows me that they have little confidence that Halo 5 could compete with the old 360 games. What do you guys think?

XB1 BC Nov. 12
=======================================
Edit 1: Wow, this thread blew up quite quickly! Thank you guys for all of the passionate and varied responses. Again, I am stressing the fact that I think it is a conflict of interest that out of the 104 BC games announced today that the only Halo title was Spartan Assault. Reach and others will follow in the coming months, but I do believe that these 360 games could potentially draw XB1 users away from Halo 5. If anything, 343i is trying to avoid any noise from other Halo games, which, in a business sense, is smart.
=======================================
Edit 2: Conclusion: Most people are siding with the fact that BC will not hurt the population of Halo 5 significantly, while others have stated that they prefer Reach and would switch from Halo 5.

Let's say, if previous Halo titles became BC TODAY:
80% - would play Halo 5
20% - would switch to a previous Halo title

The PS4 has sold ~30 million units, so lets say the XB1 has sold ~15 million units. Lets say that 1 out of 5 XB1 users bought Halo 5. So ~3 million copies of Halo 5 have been sold.

If we take into account returns of the game and the fact that not all 3 million people will be online at once, Halo 5's population could reach 750,000 people at one time (this is an optimistic measurement). If 20% of that population left to play another Halo game, the population would fall 150,000 players to 500,000 players. That doesn't seem like a lot, but that is 20% decrease in population. With other games coming out around the holidays, the long-term population of Halo 5 could become a problem.

Halo Reach vs. Halo 4 - Halo 5 could have a much lower population over time than Halo Reach or Halo 4.
=======================================
Edit 3: For those who are wondering why "Reach is so popular all of a sudden", it has been for years now. It still has a strong clan community -- just check out the Reach forum. There has and will always be a love for Reach. 86,000 people want Reach for BC, and there are definitely many more. Considering the debacle that was the MCC launch, don't forget that game is dead too and more fans will play Reach instead.
=======================================
Edit 4: 1/14/16
(See post on page 39)
Rather than the game mechanics, Halo 5s population could be suffering due to the lack of content. Halo Reach and the MCC (when it does work lol) have way more content than Halo 5 does. Keep in mind that Halo 5 has only been out a few months. However, these "free" updates have been extremely underwhelming to many, and the game didnt have much content to begin with.

Classic Halo could be the answer, but more content could be too.

Halo 5 needs a shot of adrenaline, aka a huge update with a surprise (aka grifball, infection, file browser, or something along those lines).
=======================================
Edit 5: 6/12/16
(See post on page 45)
After getting Halo 5 and playing for awhile, I have noticed that I find games within 15-30 seconds, and find different players every match. IMO, population is not a concern for Halo 5. The Halo 5 population appears to have sustained much better than that of Halo 4, most likely due to the free DLC and high quality of gameplay and REQs.
=======================================
MONITOR EDIT :
Thread title has been changed to better indicate that this will be the thread for discussion Halo 5's population. All future threads shall be redirected here.
It is fair for them to be concerned... They want the highest numbers possible for the early launch period. It only makes sense. It doesn't indicate a poor showing on H5's part.

There is no point in flooding their market with additional Halo games to detract from the overall population of Halo 5. Not while the game is still brand new and trying to establish itself.
Where do people come up with these theories? I doubt 343 has an impact on any backwards compatibility, especially for Reach of all titles (really, are people so desperate for anti-343 games that they want to make reach out to be the best option for Halo now?).

Be thankful there's bc at all, let alone for games already on the system (a la MCC). If they were truly that desperate, they would have held off on backwards compatibility entirely. They are releasing it so late this year due to market demand (to sell more consoles). They could have waited for other games to be ported, but would rather rush it out before black friday.

This has nothing to do with Halo 5 or 343.
TripleT219 wrote:
Where do people come up with these theories? I doubt 343 has an impact on any backwards compatibility, especially for Reach of all titles (really, are people so desperate for anti-343 games that they want to make reach out to be the best option for Halo now?).

Be thankful there's bc at all, let alone for games already on the system (a la MCC). If they were truly that desperate, they would have held off on backwards compatibility entirely. They are releasing it so late this year due to market demand (to sell more consoles). They could have waited for other games to be portrd, but would rather rush it out before black friday.

This has nothing to do with Halo 5 or 343.
Because the devs need to give permission for the game to go BC. And 343 is now in charge of Reach.
It is fair for them to be concerned... They want the highest numbers possible for the early launch period. It only makes sense. It doesn't indicate a poor showing on H5's part.

There is no point in flooding their market with additional Halo games to detract from the overall population of Halo 5. Not while the game is still brand new and trying to establish itself.
This is true, still disappointing though :(
Rightfully so. If Halo Reach was BC, everyone would switch to that. For a long, long time. xD Especially since stats will carry over and you'll be able to play with 360 AND X1 players at the same time. Double population.
TripleT219 wrote:
Where do people come up with these theories? I doubt 343 has an impact on any backwards compatibility, especially for Reach of all titles (really, are people so desperate for anti-343 games that they want to make reach out to be the best option for Halo now?).

Be thankful there's bc at all, let alone for games already on the system (a la MCC). If they were truly that desperate, they would have held off on backwards compatibility entirely. They are releasing it so late this year due to market demand (to sell more consoles). They could have waited for other games to be portrd, but would rather rush it out before black friday.

This has nothing to do with Halo 5 or 343.
Because the devs need to give permission for the game to go BC. And 343 is now in charge of Reach.
Devs outside of MS, maybe. However, Halo is not your typical title.

If there is something to take away from this,it is that MS wants current products to sell the console over nostalgia. Why buy an Xbox One just to play a 360 game that you can still play now, especially over the most recent releases (including MCC)?

343 has control over the Halo ip when it comes to development, and with the launch of their current game, why would there be need to negotiate any support for Halo bc before the end of the year? As a business, they are not re-releasing Reach, so it is not like new sales of that game benefit them currently. Even if this was exactly as the OP suggests, what negativity does that bring to anything?

Reach was not even a 343 title. Any interest in bc for it at all does not help them, given Halo 5's population or not. It effectively just makes players miss the old Bungie, so in turn it hurts more than it helps. Again, this title being the one that has been bashed to no end, like 4 was, and the sole introduction of many things people hate about 5 (not my opinion - I must be one of the few enjoying the game!).
That's such a strange logical leap to make. Especially because Reach wasn't as well received as the other Bungie Halos and we have them all in Master Chief Collection already.
That's such a strange logical leap to make. Especially because Reach wasn't as well received as the other Bungie Halos and we have them all in Master Chief Collection already.
This. Exactly this...
The fact that Microsoft and 343i didn't allow Halo games such as Halo: Reach to be backwards compatible until December (or later) shows me that they have little confidence that Halo 5 could compete with the old 360 games. What do you guys think?

XB1 BC Nov. 12
The fact that you think Reach is a H5 killer shows me you don't remember the negative feedback it received.
That's such a strange logical leap to make. Especially because Reach wasn't as well received as the other Bungie Halos and we have them all in Master Chief Collection already.
Exactly, Longhorn remembers.
Man, I want to play Reach and dress up my Spartan even better! ;__;
FL Crysis wrote:
The fact that Microsoft and 343i didn't allow Halo games such as Halo: Reach to be backwards compatible until December (or later) shows me that they have little confidence that Halo 5 could compete with the old 360 games. What do you guys think?
XB1 BC Nov. 12
The fact that you think Reach is a H5 killer shows me you don't remember the negative feedback it received.
That's such a strange logical leap to make. Especially because Reach wasn't as well received as the other Bungie Halos and we have them all in Master Chief Collection already.
Exactly, Longhorn remembers.
Well, Reach has Infection... and Oddball... and KOTH... and Territories... and Race... and Juggernaut... and Campaign Theater... and Forge World... and Splitscreen... and Firefight...
It's the lesser of two evils.

Edit: ...and Invasion... and Headhunter... and playable Elites... and Stockpile...
FL Crysis wrote:
The fact that Microsoft and 343i didn't allow Halo games such as Halo: Reach to be backwards compatible until December (or later) shows me that they have little confidence that Halo 5 could compete with the old 360 games. What do you guys think?

XB1 BC Nov. 12
The fact that you think Reach is a H5 killer shows me you don't remember the negative feedback it received.
That's such a strange logical leap to make. Especially because Reach wasn't as well received as the other Bungie Halos and we have them all in Master Chief Collection already.
Exactly, Longhorn remembers.
I would rather play Halo 4 then play reach with bloom on the DMR. There I said it, I picked what most people think is the worst halo over the second worst halo because I remember.
Or maybe its because they are some of the most popular 360 games and having those not backward compatible would be insane
Nystic wrote:
FL Crysis wrote:
The fact that Microsoft and 343i didn't allow Halo games such as Halo: Reach to be backwards compatible until December (or later) shows me that they have little confidence that Halo 5 could compete with the old 360 games. What do you guys think?

XB1 BC Nov. 12
The fact that you think Reach is a H5 killer shows me you don't remember the negative feedback it received.
That's such a strange logical leap to make. Especially because Reach wasn't as well received as the other Bungie Halos and we have them all in Master Chief Collection already.
Exactly, Longhorn remembers.
I would rather play Halo 4 then play reach with bloom on the DMR. There I said it, I picked what most people think is the worst halo over the second worst halo because I remember.
This just made me wet myself. Well played!
I was so eager to play some Reach, guess I will have to wait another month. The new system update will be released in November tho.
TripleT219 wrote:
Where do people come up with these theories? I doubt 343 has an impact on any backwards compatibility, especially for Reach of all titles (really, are people so desperate for anti-343 games that they want to make reach out to be the best option for Halo now?).

Be thankful there's bc at all, let alone for games already on the system (a la MCC). If they were truly that desperate, they would have held off on backwards compatibility entirely. They are releasing it so late this year due to market demand (to sell more consoles). They could have waited for other games to be portrd, but would rather rush it out before black friday.

This has nothing to do with Halo 5 or 343.
Because the devs need to give permission for the game to go BC. And 343 is now in charge of Reach.
No, since Reach was published under Microsoft Games they have the say of when it gets backwards compat, not the devs.
If 343i was truly worried about Halo 5 having to compete with older Halo games they wouldn't have released the MCC. This post is dumb.
Nystic wrote:
FL Crysis wrote:
The fact that Microsoft and 343i didn't allow Halo games such as Halo: Reach to be backwards compatible until December (or later) shows me that they have little confidence that Halo 5 could compete with the old 360 games. What do you guys think?

XB1 BC Nov. 12
The fact that you think Reach is a H5 killer shows me you don't remember the negative feedback it received.
That's such a strange logical leap to make. Especially because Reach wasn't as well received as the other Bungie Halos and we have them all in Master Chief Collection already.
Exactly, Longhorn remembers.
I would rather play Halo 4 then play reach with bloom on the DMR. There I said it, I picked what most people think is the worst halo over the second worst halo because I remember.
This just made me wet myself. Well played!
Thanks, now go get some new pants! lol
TripleT219 wrote:
Where do people come up with these theories? I doubt 343 has an impact on any backwards compatibility, especially for Reach of all titles (really, are people so desperate for anti-343 games that they want to make reach out to be the best option for Halo now?).

Be thankful there's bc at all, let alone for games already on the system (a la MCC). If they were truly that desperate, they would have held off on backwards compatibility entirely. They are releasing it so late this year due to market demand (to sell more consoles). They could have waited for other games to be portrd, but would rather rush it out before black friday.

This has nothing to do with Halo 5 or 343.
Because the devs need to give permission for the game to go BC. And 343 is now in charge of Reach.
Correction, Microsoft are in control of Reach, as they are with everything Halo.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 53