Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

REQ System "Unintrusive"?

OP MyNamesFuRii

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 15
Recently Frank O’Connor stated this about the REQ system "We watched the EA battlefront thing with the curiosity you'd expect - but our current req system is player focused and well liked and unintrusive as far as these things go."

The game is built around the REQ System with no way to unlock armour or skins through a progression system, forcing you to go into the store just to open a pack. I personally find the system to be intrusive and I wanna hear everyone's thoughts on the matter. I'm honestly concerned that 343 sees their system as this even after the Battlefront 2 EA debacle.
It's not intrusive at all if you ask me. Just because you can't earn excatly what you want or get excatly what you want when you want it doesn't make it intrusive. Gamers today have very little patience. If you just play H5 and earn your RPs you will eventually have everything except the HCS stuff, classic helmets and voices of war. Those are the only buy only stuff in H5. Also req weapons are only really used in warzone and customs. Arena is still based on equal starts. Just because it does require a lot of play time to unlock everything doesn't make it intrusive.
REQ items are for an intentionally unbalanced gamemode, so that doesn't particularly matter. Along with that, just because someone paid for REQs doesn't necessarily mean that they'll get the use they intended out of it. I've never paid money, but I can tell you more than once I've lost legendary REQs that I got no kills with. It comes down to the player in those circumstances, not the REQ.

Also, cosmetic items are literally useless and have no impact on gameplay, and as such the method in which you unlock them doesn't particularly matter. Overall the REQ system is a cheap money grab, yes, I'm not denying that. But as someone who unlocked everything without paying any extra money, the REQ system didn't intrude on anything in my gameplay experience. It offers no distinct advantage to players who pay, and that's fine by me.
The REQ system is relatively unintrusive when compared to other microtransaction systems. Provided you don't play any Warzone game modes, there isn't really any need to buy REQ packs.

That said, it could be better, since I know some microtransaction systems (such as the one implemented in Titanfall 2) don't affect gameplay at all.
The major difference is that in Battlefront 2, progression is more than just cosmetic. The longer you play Battefront (or the more you spent when Microtransactions were available), the more powerful you’d be compared to other players. It’s was more of a “pay 2 win” model than people were willing to accept. Also there was concern on just how much playtime would earn players anything significant, making it seem like EA was trying to make players want to buy loot boxes by artificially increasing the grind.

Halo 5’s customization items do not affect gameplay. And the multiplayer is split into two parts: Arena, where REQs don’t come into play; and Warzone, where REQs do come into play. Now REQs in warzone could be looked at as a form of “pay 2 win”, in that someone who supplements playing with real money can acquire more packs than someone who just plays the same amount. And REQ packs are essentially loot boxes, just like Battefront 2. But Warzone does have some checks and balances that make it so that people who pay money for REQs can’t use them again and again (except in WZ Turbo). So in all, while Halo 5 unlocks can only be gotten through the REQ system, the game is less dependent on microtransactions compared to Battlefront 2 because 1) half the multiplayer experience doesn’t even use them, and 2) permanent unlocks are purely cosmetic and don’t effect gameplay.

Edit: I'm not advocating for the existence of REQs in Halo 5. I'm merely trying to point out why MTXs in Battlefront 2 caused such an uproar, while comparatively in Halo 5 they were tolerated.
LethalQ wrote:
It's not intrusive at all if you ask me. Just because you can't earn excatly what you want or get excatly what you want when you want it doesn't make it intrusive. Gamers today have very little patience. If you just play H5 and earn your RPs you will eventually have everything except the HCS stuff, classic helmets and voices of war. Those are the only buy only stuff in H5. Also req weapons are only really used in warzone and customs. Arena is still based on equal starts. Just because it does require a lot of play time to unlock everything doesn't make it intrusive.
The Halo 5 req system is one of the better ways of implementing Microtransactions in games, IMO.

It is possible to get everything purely through gameplay, while also giving the option of buying packs for people who are happy to pay to get everything.

What I consider to be an intrusive MTs system is one that interferes with actual gameplay and your progression in a game.
Recently Frank O’Connor stated this about the REQ system "We watched the EA battlefront thing with the curiosity you'd expect - but our current req system is player focused and well liked and unintrusive as far as these things go."

The game is built around the REQ System with no way to unlock armour or skins through a progression system, forcing you to go into the store just to open a pack. I personally find the system to be intrusive and I wanna hear everyone's thoughts on the matter. I'm honestly concerned that 343 sees their system as this even after the Battlefront 2 EA debacle.
Eh technically you don’t.
you don’t have the have that weapon skin. You don’t have to have that armor. It’s a want.
warzone is something else because you need the weapons and vehicles to win but take the other half that hate warzone. They don’t need reqs for anything.
im not saying I agree with him but I can see where he’s coming from
Recently Frank O’Connor stated this about the REQ system "We watched the EA battlefront thing with the curiosity you'd expect - but our current req system is player focused and well liked and unintrusive as far as these things go."

The game is built around the REQ System with no way to unlock armour or skins through a progression system, forcing you to go into the store just to open a pack. I personally find the system to be intrusive and I wanna hear everyone's thoughts on the matter. I'm honestly concerned that 343 sees their system as this even after the Battlefront 2 EA debacle.
Sure it's intrusive, if what he says is true then I'm worried for Halo 6 so I'm literally tired of the P2W dominating Warzone, it's bad enough the games an unbalanced mess. The REQ is basically the same as EA's since it gives players better weapons if the player pays for better packs, I'm constantly feeling forced to open packs or gain little exp or have less resources to counter enemy's. It's part of the reason why I hate H5 more than previous titles.
Chimera30 wrote:
Halo 5’s customization items do not affect gameplay. And the multiplayer is split into two parts: Arena, where REQs don’t come into play; and Warzone, where REQs do come into play. Now REQs in warzone could be looked at as a form of “pay 2 win”, in that someone who supplements playing with real money can acquire more packs than someone who just plays the same amount. And REQ packs are essentially loot boxes, just like Battefront 2. But Warzone does have some checks and balances that make it so that people who pay money for REQs can’t use them again and again (except in WZ Turbo). So in all, while Halo 5 unlocks can only be gotten through the REQ system, the game is less dependent on microtransactions because 1) half the multiplayer experience doesn’t even use them, and 2) permanent unlocks are purely cosmetic and don’t effect gameplay.
Halo 5 are not cosmetics only in loot box's...you're given different tier weapons/vehicles that have higher stats that help the player gain an advantage. That is the literal definition of pay to win. The only difference is EA's SW's goes about it a slightly different way that involves stat boosting...except 343i shoves us with things with 20+BR's so nobody notices. Arena is the only place to avoid P2W but even that's an unbalanced mess.

Actually the customisation does technically effect game-play since the changes to weapons are just shoved into the game itself as things like golden wraith or slightly altered rocket launcher can give a player an advantage based on what the player won in the RNG loot box's, we all know that buying gold packs helps give players a major advantage...unless you're playing with gamers that stockpiled them over 2-3 years of game-play. Literally the game's main focus is micro-transactions...you can't get far without wasting RP or money on loot box's for exp, new players would struggle against players that have a higher stockpile of items. Permanent unlocks are not all cosmetics only...once you get a certification you can keep getting more of the same higher tier weapons that directly effects the game, ironically that sounds suspiciously similar to the SWB2 card system where people keep wasting money till they can get a higher tier of a card...
People are defending the req system with the claim that "it's not as bad as EA's". Like if that's enough to make it right.

The standards man...
People are defending the req system with the claim that "it's not as bad as EA's". Like if that's enough to make it right.

The standards man...
Exactly, I'm tired of them being forced. Some like to say there only cosmetics in some games but they literally destroy the games balancing issues or they make earning anything meaningless due to the endless farming of items...it's not fun, is tiresome, I've seen some people say it's so bad that it's like taking up a 2nd job to actual earn anything worthwhile. It's part of the reason that has put me off playing Battlefield 1, Gears 4 and I won't even give new IP's a chance when there forced in because I'm just sick of seeing them.
Recently Frank O’Connor stated this about the REQ system "We watched the EA battlefront thing with the curiosity you'd expect - but our current req system is player focused and well liked and unintrusive as far as these things go."

The game is built around the REQ System with no way to unlock armour or skins through a progression system, forcing you to go into the store just to open a pack. I personally find the system to be intrusive and I wanna hear everyone's thoughts on the matter. I'm honestly concerned that 343 sees their system as this even after the Battlefront 2 EA debacle.
Thank you for starting this thread. I was getting ready to start one of my own. I was also going to leave a couple of source links. I like to leave the source of the quotes whenever I can.

Source of the Frankie quote from a thread titled Rumor: MS re-evaluating how loot boxes will be implemented in Halo 6 after EA BFII fiasco. Now this thread was started because of this podcast, The Sames Report. Go to around the 12:00 minute mark to hear what Frankie is responding to about what this guy is saying about loot boxes for Halo 6. I think it's nice to know the context for his comment.

That being said I take a different look at this whole "unintrusive" idea. It's not about whether or not it is just cosmetic or if the weapons are only available in Warzone. It is the fact that the whole Req system influenced the development of the entire multiplayer experience. The cosmetic numbers were bloated in order to accommodate this idea of "free dlc". We were told "free dlc" in order to help sell the Req system, and we have all been around long enough to know that most of the DLC maps and armors were just reskins. We don't need more and more when that more that we get is substandard. We don't need a loot box system that gives us the illusion of free and great. What we need is more of a reality of high quality, well made and interesting maps and skins that we are more than willing to either pay money for or earn through in game achievement.

I don't think we can deny that Warzone received a high priority in development. How many playlists and modes did we not have at launch because of their focus on Warzone? Have we already forgotten the missing BTB, and no developer made maps? Warzone is built around Reqs, and vice versa. We have only three exclusively, achievement based helmets. The ones we can buy, and the Challenger armor set don't count. The Req system again benefits from this.

The Spartan Rank with the ridiculous high max XP required to reach 152 once again all about Req's and Req boosts. The newly created weapon variants for Warzone made their way into Arena, and ranked Arena. Why else would we have those weapons if not for Warzone and the Req system?

You say unintrusive...I say their loot box system intruded all over Halo 5. I believe wholeheartedly that if we keep on this mindset of, "Well, it's not that bad.", then we will definitely continue to see it in our games. Frankie's statement is proof that even with the outcry of dislike for their system. They still think it is well liked. That fact that he says well liked just blows my mind. My guess is he is basing that on the numbers.

I am very concerned and disheartened by Frankies statement, and the obviousness of how the loot system in gaming has turned us to acquiescent gamers especially when it comes to our most loved game.
People are defending the req system with the claim that "it's not as bad as EA's". Like if that's enough to make it right.

The standards man...
I doubt most people like the REQ system, but REQ's aren't going away and they're already in the game so at least it's better than EA's version. My only hope is that it gets improved in H6 with customization items not completely locked behind the REQ system.
LUKEPOWA wrote:
People are defending the req system with the claim that "it's not as bad as EA's". Like if that's enough to make it right.

The standards man...
I doubt most people like the REQ system, but REQ's aren't going away and they're already in the game so at least it's better than EA's version. My only hope is that it gets improved in H6 with customization items not completely locked behind the REQ system.
I hope that it is completely done away with, but I know that probably won't happen. My only hope now is that the rumor of having two Halo's being developed with one more Classic than the other. If that is true than the Classic one will have no Req's.

I wish we could know how Frankie come up with the idea that the Req's have been "well liked". I only see the majority have disdain for it here, on Twitter, on reddit, on TeamBeyond, and on YouTube. Am I not looking far enough or at enough social media? I don't think so. I really think he is only basing that statement on the millions of dollars earned. Despite that, it doesn't mean that the Req system was/is "well liked". It has been tolerated.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
LUKEPOWA wrote:
People are defending the req system with the claim that "it's not as bad as EA's". Like if that's enough to make it right.

The standards man...
I doubt most people like the REQ system, but REQ's aren't going away and they're already in the game so at least it's better than EA's version. My only hope is that it gets improved in H6 with customization items not completely locked behind the REQ system.
I hope that it is completely done away with, but I know that probably won't happen. My only hope now is that the rumor of having two Halo's being developed with one more Classic than the other. If that is true than the Classic one will have no Req's.

I wish we could know how Frankie come up with the idea that the Req's have been "well liked". I only see the majority have disdain for it here, on Twitter, on reddit, on TeamBeyond, and on YouTube. Am I not looking far enough or at enough social media? I don't think so. I really think he is only basing that statement on the millions of dollars earned. Despite that, it doesn't mean that the Req system was/is "well liked". It has been tolerated.
The req system could be an awesome system if they would just balance it out a bit. They need to have some stuff that is earned exclusively through game play. As bloated as the req system is there was plenty of stuff they could have made earn only.
BeneficBen wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
It's not intrusive at all if you ask me. Just because you can't earn excatly what you want or get excatly what you want when you want it doesn't make it intrusive. Gamers today have very little patience. If you just play H5 and earn your RPs you will eventually have everything except the HCS stuff, classic helmets and voices of war. Those are the only buy only stuff in H5. Also req weapons are only really used in warzone and customs. Arena is still based on equal starts. Just because it does require a lot of play time to unlock everything doesn't make it intrusive.
The Halo 5 req system is one of the better ways of implementing Microtransactions in games, IMO.

It is possible to get everything purely through gameplay, while also giving the option of buying packs for people who are happy to pay to get everything.

What I consider to be an intrusive MTs system is one that interferes with actual gameplay and your progression in a game.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. I hate the REQ system because of how intrusive it is to WZ. It directly interferes with my actual gameplay. I start off playing with whatever loadout. I receive REQ points according to my performance, which gets me access to higher tiers of REQs. In order to use those REQs, I have to scamper off to a REQ station and -Yoink- around in a menu to choose something that could've... should've... been available on the map to begin with, but it can't be because of the REQs. I guess I could just let myself be killed to access that menu, but that's a bit counter productive. And the worst part is, the better I perform, the more often I'm given the opportunity to interrupt my actual gameplay [and enjoyment] to poke around in a menu. I find that to be the very definition of interfering with gameplay, regardless of its effect on progression.

Maybe some people don't look at it that way, but that's how I see it because that's how it works. It is one of the biggest reasons I quit playing H5. I've already heard the usual excuses for it, but to me that's all they are, excuses.

"It's only used in WZ..." - I really only liked WZ and I don't care if it isn't used in other game types that I rarely played.
"It has to be there because MTs" - It could've been there, but deployed differently. Other games have done it.

There's the "It could be worse" comments and comparisons to other games that have already been mentioned... and my response will fall along the lines of another one I've seen... could be worse doesn't make it OK.

I actually have less of a problem with how GOW4 deployed their MT system, despite how many times it gets pointed out for being so "evil" on this forum. I fail to see how it's so much worse than H5's. Granted, I rarely touch vs MP, but it seems to me that the bulk of their MTs are aimed at Horde mode anyway. Since I play Horde almost exclusively, I can't see how their system gives any advantage to those who buy booster packs vs those who don't. Is it because someone else could buy their way to a maxed out character before me? It's a co op game mode, why would I care? Is it because someone could buy their way to all kinds of eye candy? Even in vs, if it's just cosmetic... again... why would I care? I suppose one could make the point that you're "forced" to buy certain packs to unlock specific character/weapon skins and point to game progress, but I'll gladly forgo a few pieces of eye candy in order to have gameplay that's actually fun and doesn't shove its MT based upgrades in my face while I'm playing.

I can play Horde all day long if I want and the only time I have to deal with bouncing around in skill/ability upgrade menus is before I start, or after I'm done playing. Which is how MT systems should be deployed, as opposed to being thrown at me in the middle of gameplay. In fact, I still do play it.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It's not about whether or not it is just cosmetic or if the weapons are only available in Warzone. It is the fact that the whole Req system influenced the development of the entire multiplayer experience.
This is exactly what I was about to say. It makes me sad to see people say things like "the req system only affects an unbalanced mode, therefore it doesn't matter". When BTB and so many other things (including the quality of the armor) clearly take a backseat to the microtransaction-fueled Warzone, then of course the req system is being intrusive, even for people who don't play Warzone. I wholeheartedly agree with everything you said in your post.
They could keep the Req system the way it is now. But please make it so it is not THE progression system...
Frank O'Connor can believe whatever he wants about the system, but that doesn't mean real improvements cannot be made. Seriously ask yourselves this question, does the REQ system need to be as bloated as it is?

  • Do there need to be dozens of vehicle variants that differ from each other very little outside of their color?
  • Do emblems need to be in the REQ pool?
  • Do there need to be "new" pieces of armor in the form of already existing helmets that only have small changes like a white stripe here or an orange circle there?
  • Do there need to be scores of starting weapon variants?
  • Does content previously only available through unlockable challenge need to be added to the REQ pool seemingly in spite of the people who put the work in to earn them?
I'll accept the REQ system continuing to exist, but there is definitely room for improvement. Furthermore, I think 343 could occasionally throw the people who aren't shelling out more money and instead play the game the occasional REQ Point discount from time to time.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It's not about whether or not it is just cosmetic or if the weapons are only available in Warzone. It is the fact that the whole Req system influenced the development of the entire multiplayer experience.
This is exactly what I was about to say. It makes me sad to see people say things like "the req system only affects an unbalanced mode, therefore it doesn't matter". When BTB and so many other things (including the quality of the armor) clearly take a backseat to the microtransaction-fueled Warzone, then of course the req system is being intrusive, even for people who don't play Warzone. I wholeheartedly agree with everything you said in your post.
It makes me sad as well. It as if we have come to a place where we will be happy with almost anything as long as it has Halo associated with it. I have stuck with this franchise for quite some time now. I am looking towards this next installment to help me decide if that support will continue. If this "well liked" system continues to Halo 6 it will be difficult to say the least.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. I hate the REQ system because of how intrusive it is to WZ. It directly interferes with my actual gameplay. I start off playing with whatever loadout. I receive REQ points according to my performance, which gets me access to higher tiers of REQs. In order to use those REQs, I have to scamper off to a REQ station and -Yoink- around in a menu to choose something that could've... should've... been available on the map to begin with, but it can't be because of the REQs. I guess I could just let myself be killed to access that menu, but that's a bit counter productive. And the worst part is, the better I perform, the more often I'm given the opportunity to interrupt my actual gameplay [and enjoyment] to poke around in a menu. I find that to be the very definition of interfering with gameplay, regardless of its effect on progression.
Dude, what the frak are you talking about. You don't like the Req system because it interferes with how you play Warzone?! Warzone was developed for the Req system. They go hand in hand. They are one in the same. This has to be the most convoluted reasoning I don't even know how to respond, and considered not responding because I am sure this will result in...well, I don't really know. It sounds to me you want Warzone type maps with a BTB mode. Why not just play BTB? Just because the maps aren't as big and it is only 8v8?

Anyway, not to go too off topic. Warzone and Req's just need to go, because them, in and of themselves intrude on Halo multiplayer, and the fact that Frankie is saying otherwise is a real head scratcher.

LethalQ wrote:
The req system could be an awesome system if they would just balance it out a bit. They need to have some stuff that is earned exclusively through game play. As bloated as the req system is there was plenty of stuff they could have made earn only.
I don't even think it could be some kind of be all end all awesome system. I could maybe go with something that I heard first from Favyn than elaborated more by Luke the Notable. There is a base armor that is earned through an achievement of some type; then a skin for that armor could be purchased via money or points, but the only way to wear said skin would be to earn the base armor. Still this leaves things open for what I think is a slippery slope of the so called free DLC. This is one of my main issues with the Req system. They used the free DLC reasoning to help placate us with the Req's. It was their fix to the last few games that had low amounts of purchases of their DLC.

I was in support of this in the beginning until I realized that we weren't really getting what was promised to us. I can't remember how it really comes out, but that so called 15 free maps wasn't really 15 maps. It was mostly reskinned maps. I get that they need to have some type of return for their investment. I get that it is a business. But this whole loot system is really getting out of hand in my opinion. Figure something else out for the DLC maps and armor. Something that isn't an RNG play only to grind system.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
It's not about whether or not it is just cosmetic or if the weapons are only available in Warzone. It is the fact that the whole Req system influenced the development of the entire multiplayer experience.
This is exactly what I was about to say. It makes me sad to see people say things like "the req system only affects an unbalanced mode, therefore it doesn't matter". When BTB and so many other things (including the quality of the armor) clearly take a backseat to the microtransaction-fueled Warzone, then of course the req system is being intrusive, even for people who don't play Warzone. I wholeheartedly agree with everything you said in your post.
It makes me sad as well. It as if we have come to a place where we will be happy with almost anything as long as it has Halo associated with it. I have stuck with this franchise for quite some time now. I am looking towards this next installment to help me decide if that support will continue. If this "well liked" system continues to Halo 6 it will be difficult to say the least.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. I hate the REQ system because of how intrusive it is to WZ. It directly interferes with my actual gameplay. I start off playing with whatever loadout. I receive REQ points according to my performance, which gets me access to higher tiers of REQs. In order to use those REQs, I have to scamper off to a REQ station and -Yoink- around in a menu to choose something that could've... should've... been available on the map to begin with, but it can't be because of the REQs. I guess I could just let myself be killed to access that menu, but that's a bit counter productive. And the worst part is, the better I perform, the more often I'm given the opportunity to interrupt my actual gameplay [and enjoyment] to poke around in a menu. I find that to be the very definition of interfering with gameplay, regardless of its effect on progression.
Dude, what the frak are you talking about. You don't like the Req system because it interferes with how you play Warzone?! Warzone was developed for the Req system. They go hand in hand. They are one in the same. This has to be the most convoluted reasoning I don't even know how to respond, and considered not responding because I am sure this will result in...well, I don't really know. It sounds to me you want Warzone type maps with a BTB mode. Why not just play BTB? Just because the maps aren't as big and it is only 8v8?

Anyway, not to go too off topic. Warzone and Req's just need to go, because them, in and of themselves intrude on Halo multiplayer, and the fact that Frankie is saying otherwise is a real head scratcher.

LethalQ wrote:
The req system could be an awesome system if they would just balance it out a bit. They need to have some stuff that is earned exclusively through game play. As bloated as the req system is there was plenty of stuff they could have made earn only.
I don't even think it could be some kind of be all end all awesome system. I could maybe go with something that I heard first from Favyn than elaborated more by Luke the Notable. There is a base armor that is earned through an achievement of some type; then a skin for that armor could be purchased via money or points, but the only way to wear said skin would be to earn the base armor. Still this leaves things open for what I think is a slippery slope of the so called free DLC. This is one of my main issues with the Req system. They used the free DLC reasoning to help placate us with the Req's. It was their fix to the last few games that had low amounts of purchases of their DLC.

I was in support of this in the beginning until I realized that we weren't really getting what was promised to us. I can't remember how it really comes out, but that so called 15 free maps wasn't really 15 maps. It was mostly reskinned maps. I get that they need to have some type of return for their investment. I get that it is a business. But this whole loot system is really getting out of hand in my opinion. Figure something else out for the DLC maps and armor. Something that isn't an RNG play only to grind system.
Sure there is plenty of room for improvement. But at the end of day the req system is "unintrusive". Whether some one spent thousands on req packs or absolutely nothing and just used req points they have the same chance of winning. Money can't buy you any special weapons or abilities and a huge req inventory doesn't mean you will win games. I have spent money on req packs, but haven't spent money on them in well over a year. I have noticed no difference in my winning/losing. It's simply pay to skip the grind.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 15