Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] Population Split

OP RoastedGoat199

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
Is it not possible to indicate what playlist the players are playing? COD BO3 does it with percentages. is this not possible in Halo 5?
wasn't this a thing in Halo 3?
Halo 4, mcc, and halo 5 do not have population counters.
I THINK swat, super fiesta, and Warzone firefight heroic are the most populated game modes in halo 5.
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
Why would you actively want to spread unsubstantiated rumors? That's fairly unproductive and unnecessary.

In reality, what 343i has actually stated about the reason they no longer have population counters, is the potential of keeping a playlist a low numbers. When we get on and look at population numbers in any given playlist the low numbers in one will cause of cycle of low numbers in that playlist.

I didn't like it in the beginning, but I've gotten used to it. I would like to see overall numbers though. If not in game then on Waypoint.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
Why would you actively want to spread unsubstantiated rumors?
Because it seemed like something 343 would do. I never said it was true, just that it was likely.
Breakout has been tough for me to find a match
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
Why would you actively want to spread unsubstantiated rumors? That's fairly unproductive and unnecessary.

In reality, what 343i has actually stated about the reason they no longer have population counters, is the potential of keeping a playlist a low numbers. When we get on and look at population numbers in any given playlist the low numbers in one will cause of cycle of low numbers in that playlist.

I didn't like it in the beginning, but I've gotten used to it. I would like to see overall numbers though. If not in game then on Waypoint.
Yes, the reason they don't provide population numbers for individual playlists is because it can sway the population towards or away from particular playlists. In other words, if people see lower population numbers in a particular playlist they're more likely to avoid searching it which further perpetuates the unhealthy population of that playlist. There is some real semblance to the cliche phrase "ignorance is bliss" occurring here.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
Why would you actively want to spread unsubstantiated rumors?
Because it seemed like something 343 would do. I never said it was true, just that it was likely.
There is no population counters because all it does it funnel people to the playlist with the bigger numbers and not to the playlist they may actually want to play.
LethalQ wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
Why would you actively want to spread unsubstantiated rumors?
Because it seemed like something 343 would do. I never said it was true, just that it was likely.
There is no population counters because all it does it funnel people to the playlist with the bigger numbers and not to the playlist they may actually want to play.
Why would people go into a playlist they don't like?
LethalQ wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
Why would you actively want to spread unsubstantiated rumors?
Because it seemed like something 343 would do. I never said it was true, just that it was likely.
There is no population counters because all it does it funnel people to the playlist with the bigger numbers and not to the playlist they may actually want to play.
Why would people go into a playlist they don't like?
They might if they knew it was a heavily populated playlist, because they'd worry about not finding games quickly in a playlist that had lower population (even if they like that playlist more).
Chimera30 wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
Why would you actively want to spread unsubstantiated rumors?
Because it seemed like something 343 would do. I never said it was true, just that it was likely.
There is no population counters because all it does it funnel people to the playlist with the bigger numbers and not to the playlist they may actually want to play.
Why would people go into a playlist they don't like?
They might if they knew it was a heavily populated playlist, because they'd worry about not finding games quickly in a playlist that had lower population (even if they like that playlist more).
Fair point
It would really depend on the playlist for me regarding an unfavorable one to play. If Breakout or Grifball were the only ones that had people in it for example, I would just play a different game.
I don't think an individual break down of population per play list is needed really apart from the fact when 343 have said certain playlist have had low population team skirmish springs to mind I think that was total BS I always found a game in seconds on that . Then it would of been nice to see if they are the compulsive liars I think they are !!!!
I don't think an individual break down of population per play list is needed really apart from the fact when 343 have said certain playlist have had low population team skirmish springs to mind I think that was total BS I always found a game in seconds on that . Then it would of been nice to see if they are the compulsive liars I think they are !!!!
That is why they don't and shouldn't use them. Low population doesn't necessarily mean slow match making times. So when players see a playlist with a larger population it gives them a false sense of security for faster match making.
LethalQ wrote:
I don't think an individual break down of population per play list is needed really apart from the fact when 343 have said certain playlist have had low population team skirmish springs to mind I think that was total BS I always found a game in seconds on that . Then it would of been nice to see if they are the compulsive liars I think they are !!!!
That is why they don't and shouldn't use them. Low population doesn't necessarily mean slow match making times. So when players see a playlist with a larger population it gives them a false sense of security for faster match making.
To elaborate on this point because I think it important that you, TotaledCarton32, understand: a playlist with low population won't mean that everyone has a bad experience in that playlist. If you were playing Team Skirmish and still finding games quickly, it does not mean 343i was lying about its population being low. Those statements are made in a much larger scale than what you as a single player experience; they're talking global numbers over long periods of time. Here are some possibilities that would account for the scenario you described:
  • You were playing in a region/server where there were enough players to still find matches quickly
  • You were playing at a skill level where there were enough players to match you quickly
  • You were playing at times of day when there were enough other players in the playlist to support fast matchmaking
The thing about playlists with low population is that "low" is relative to the population of other playlists. If one playlist is sporting 30,000 players on average across a period of time, low compared to that could be something like 3,000; that 3,000 could still be enough for some players to find matches quickly, depending on time of day, region, and skill. Middle-of-the-pack players will always be better off for the skill-based matching; players on US servers (especially heavily populated areas like the coasts) will be better off compared to foreign players; playing during peak hours will also make you have a better time. Of that theoretical 3,000 players, most will be in the US, of average skill, and playing during peak hours. Problems with unhealthy playlists occur when you're outside these parameters: if you're too good/bad at the game, if you play at odd hours, if you play from somewhere like Australia which doesn't have as many local players as the US. When 343i describes a playlist as having a low population, they're talking about average number of players in that playlist over a period of time from all across the world. Looking at playlist numbers at one moment in time doesn't tell you much, because an hour later the numbers could be widely different.

I say all of this not to white knight 343i or anything, but to promote logical and realistic thinking. It's easy to assume things about a game when you think about it based on your experience only. But when you broaden your perspective, you'll realize things aren't so black and white.
Halo 4 did have and still has a counter. Surprisingly there was just under 3000 people still playing that game when I jumped on for the first time in 3 years over the weekend. There was a fraction of that on halo 3 which seemed weird to me with backwards compatiblility now.

But what surprised me is infinity slayer had roughly 700 players in it and the team objective playlist had 0. This is a direct result of the counter. Players see the lower number and flock to slayer when without the counter there would be objective games running as well and more gamers could play what they want.

Fun fact. Halo 4 is still a terrible hot mess. Just in case anyone was curious.
Ever since the Overtime update i am having trouble finding games.
I used to find Super fiesta games really quick but now it takes about 5 minutes.
I think way to many of you are way over thinking the population counters. They should have them. Its just another feature that was dropped. Other Halos had them and it never was an issue. Players played the playlist they wanted. The more excuses I hear as to why they don't have them is way over the top.
It's simpler than you think.

If players see that a mode has less players they won't join it.
Which forces that mode to remain unpopulated.
(Creates unnecessary "dead" playlists)

A "dead" playlist all because people saw numbers showing it.
LethalQ wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It was a thing in halo 3. I heard a rumor that they removed population counters so we wouldn't know the low amount of people playing their game.
Why would you actively want to spread unsubstantiated rumors?
Because it seemed like something 343 would do. I never said it was true, just that it was likely.
There is no population counters because all it does it funnel people to the playlist with the bigger numbers and not to the playlist they may actually want to play.
I must be the exception then. I never play a list I don't want to. Even in other games, in Titanfall 2 I play pilot v pilot more than anything else, and it has the lowest population. I always played the list I liked the most when I played Halo 5 too. I cannot understand why anyone would play a list because of numbers.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2