Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Halo 5 Population Discussion Thread

OP TheDarkKn1ght19

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 56
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...
Reach is being fondly remembered by players who started with Reach. (We tend to hold the first Halo we play as the best one.) I think the theory is spot-on. Backward compatible Reach would take away Halo 5 players. 343 already doesn't show population counts on Halo 5. That isn't a vote of confidence in the game's staying power.
Damn, I was really looking forward to playing Reach again. Gonna have to wait a little longer now.
If they want to make a little money, they'd release Reach as an add-on for the MCC. Having the other Halos available as BC games may cut into potential MCC sales as well as Halo 5 ones, hence why it hasn't been done right away.
If they want to make a little money, they'd release Reach as an add-on for the MCC. Having the other Halos available as BC games may cut into potential MCC sales as well as Halo 5 ones, hence why it hasn't been done right away.
I would buy it.
If they want to make a little money, they'd release Reach as an add-on for the MCC. Having the other Halos available as BC games may cut into potential MCC sales as well as Halo 5 ones, hence why it hasn't been done right away.
Problem is there is certain...umm...maps, and gametypes...that we wouldn't be able to play if Reach started fresh with MCC. Plus they'd cut Firefight like they did with ODST.

And the whole UI would get scrapped. And all the armor customization.
i77ogical wrote:
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...
Reach is being fondly remembered by players who started with Reach. (We tend to hold the first Halo we play as the best one.) I think the theory is spot-on. Backward compatible Reach would take away Halo 5 players. 343 already doesn't show population counts on Halo 5. That isn't a vote of confidence in the game's staying power.
Why are population numbers so important? Having regular groups playing the game beats high peak numbers of people trying and quitting a game.

Instead, would it not be better to focus on matchmaking times? By that margin, I've yet to wait for a match like I had in even the older Halo games when the pop. count was at its highest!

As for staying power, you may not have confidence in it, but that I not to say anything about it. Only time will tell if people keep playing or not. Heck, people like me only play a few times a week, as I have with any Halo game, and yet others play constantly. Should people really be spelling doom for a game that's been out for a few weeks just because MS has other things planned for the console overall? Notice that Halo wasn't first on the list because of MCC and Halo 5, not for population but for popularity - any halo fan not getting a fix (Reach players) can still play that on the 360. Everyone else that still cared bought an xbox one and MCC/halo 5. They want to convert players that have still refused to upgrade, so that makes other series take priority (like Gears).
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
Halo Reach has firefight, one of the most popular playlists in Halo: Reach. They better be worried.
i77ogical wrote:
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...
Reach is being fondly remembered by players who started with Reach. (We tend to hold the first Halo we play as the best one.) I think the theory is spot-on. Backward compatible Reach would take away Halo 5 players. 343 already doesn't show population counts on Halo 5. That isn't a vote of confidence in the game's staying power.
Why does showing population counts matter? It doesn't.

And I'll tell you right now, Reach becoming backwards compatible would not have a material impact on Halo 5's population. That concern is unwarranted.
Omg the pistol is so much > in Reach than Halo 5 !!!

Omg let's go Halo Reach ! Kappa

Dude i can't wait to play the real full Halo 3 with the backward compatibility exactly like it was on 360 with my Xbox One.

And Team Sniper and MLG was very very very good on Halo Reach.

RIP H5 2015-2015
Rightfully so. If Halo Reach was BC, everyone would switch to that.
How do you know?
Yeah it couldn't possibly be that large games like Reach just takes longer to port over.... There has to be a tin foil hat reason.... hahahaha also why did you buy an Xbox one if you are so ready to play 360 games again? Am I the only one who doesn't care about backwards compatibility? I still have my Xbox 360 and if I want to play it's game I will simply play it.
L3ntPuma wrote:
Rightfully so. If Halo Reach was BC, everyone would switch to that.
How do you know?
Because Reach is a much better game.
L3ntPuma wrote:
Rightfully so. If Halo Reach was BC, everyone would switch to that.
How do you know?
Like I've said before. Reach has Infection... and Oddball... and KOTH... and Territories... and Race... and Juggernaut... and Campaign Theater... and Forge World... and Splitscreen... and Firefight... and Invasion... and Headhunter... and playable Elites... and Stockpile...

It's the lesser of two evils.
L3ntPuma wrote:
Rightfully so. If Halo Reach was BC, everyone would switch to that.
How do you know?
Like I've said before. Reach has Infection... and Oddball... and KOTH... and Territories... and Race... and Juggernaut... and Campaign Theater... and Forge World... and Splitscreen... and Firefight... and Invasion... and Headhunter... and playable Elites... and Stockpile...

It's the lesser of two evils.
everyone gets the same weapons, armor is earned by grinding, DLC is not required.
People be like so glad I spent $400 on my Xbox one so I can play Xbox 360 games.... makes sense :-)
L3ntPuma wrote:
Rightfully so. If Halo Reach was BC, everyone would switch to that.
How do you know?
Like I've said before. Reach has Infection... and Oddball... and KOTH... and Territories... and Race... and Juggernaut... and Campaign Theater... and Forge World... and Splitscreen... and Firefight... and Invasion... and Headhunter... and playable Elites... and Stockpile...

It's the lesser of two evils.
everyone gets the same weapons, armor is earned by grinding, DLC is not required.
Well, the armor stuff I'm not too crazy about. I miss the Halo 3 style armor unlocks. But I'm a Noble (or Mythic...not sure) in Halo Reach, I have everything except like two helmets and Armor Effects I'll never use. With BC, I'll still have my stats and unlocks. So I'm not too worried about that. I'm talking strictly about gameplay.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not flame or attack other members.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
LethalQ wrote:
People be like so glad I spent $400 on my Xbox one so I can play Xbox 360 games.... makes sense :-)
Man, you're some kinda stupid aren't you? You try switching from one console to another just so you can play an old favorite.
How often do you play old games? If it's that often just leave it hooked up. Even if it's not hooked up wow... connecting like three connections... soooo tough.
i77ogical wrote:
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...
Reach is being fondly remembered by players who started with Reach. (We tend to hold the first Halo we play as the best one.) I think the theory is spot-on. Backward compatible Reach would take away Halo 5 players. 343 already doesn't show population counts on Halo 5. That isn't a vote of confidence in the game's staying power.
Why does showing population counts matter? It doesn't.

And I'll tell you right now, Reach becoming backwards compatible would not have a material impact on Halo 5's population. That concern is unwarranted.
Saying something doesn't matter, with no reason, is not very persuasive.

Population counts had been in Halo, until Halo started to lose population in a big way (which you could see proof of in Halo tracker websites). Now it's gone. No way to see how popular a playlist is, how long you might have to wait to get a game. This information helps. It doesn't hurt--unless the game isn't popular. An empty restaurant doesn't get business. 343 knows that.
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...
You are wrong with one thin. Halo 5 DOES have territories.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 56