Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

REQ System "Unintrusive"?

OP MyNamesFuRii

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 11
  4. 12
  5. 13
  6. 14
  7. ...
  8. 15
MKFREYA wrote:
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.
I do agree with the 80%, yes they should make some items to be unlocked via certain campaign/multiplayer challenges, but don't worry too much, gears of war 4 unlock system is worse, and there are other games even worse
The system needs a lot more work regardless if others are worse. A few token pieces of unlockable content won't cut it, especially if they'll just be added to the REQ system to pad out the system like Helioskril was.
MKFREYA wrote:
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.
I do agree with the 80%, yes they should make some items to be unlocked via certain campaign/multiplayer challenges, but don't worry too much, gears of war 4 unlock system is worse, and there are other games even worse
The system needs a lot more work regardless if others are worse. A few token pieces of unlockable content won't cut it, especially if they'll just be added to the REQ system to pad out the system like Helioskril was.
Agreed, a "few token pieces of content" is what we had with Halo 5, and I think the community is overwhelmingly saying that Halo 5 did not provide us with enough stuff to unlock.
Gubzs wrote:
MKFREYA wrote:
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.
I do agree with the 80%, yes they should make some items to be unlocked via certain campaign/multiplayer challenges, but don't worry too much, gears of war 4 unlock system is worse, and there are other games even worse
The system needs a lot more work regardless if others are worse. A few token pieces of unlockable content won't cut it, especially if they'll just be added to the REQ system to pad out the system like Helioskril was.
Agreed, a "few token pieces of content" is what we had with Halo 5, and I think the community is overwhelmingly saying that Halo 5 did not provide us with enough stuff to unlock.
At least, not stuff to WORK for. Grinding through games just to play a slot machine isn't working.
Something like the weapon assignments in Battlefield, thats more like it.
1
To know the Lore is to know Halo
"Dont be spoiled, dont start a fight. Always be careful, here at night. Because the Spartans might come, in suits that weigh half a ton. And they'll steal from you all you gots, just like they did from Colonel Watts."
i mean reqs support the free dlc/updates for the game which is worth it in my opinion
i mean reqs support the free dlc/updates for the game which is worth it in my opinion
Leaving aside for a moment the question of whether Halo 5's content updates were actually "free DLC", I've gotta say, games didn't have that stuff back in my day. When you bought a game, you got the game you bought, and that was it. It's nice that modern games can have extra content added to them after launch, but I never thought I'd see the day when players decided that extra content is such a necessity, that it's ok for a game to have an extremely intrusive and hated microtransaction system in order to support it. I mean, do you seriously think that's worth it? Would you really choose a game that was designed around an awful, intrusive microtransaction system, over a completed game that wasn't designed around such a system, just to have some extra stuff after launch?

Also, did I mention it's silly to call Halo 5's content updates "free DLC"? Do you remember how unfinished it was at launch? It's quite ridiculous to assert that 343 needed extra revenue from microtransactions in order to add things like Infection and post-game carnage reports to Halo 5. I don't buy it for a second. I have no doubt 343 could have added Halo 5's "extra content" to the base game if they just had more time. We shouldn't be using such flimsy justification for such an intrusive, disliked system.

That said, I would be in favor of a non-intrusive microtransaction system to support free DLC. I just don't think the req system is that system. How about letting us purchase cosmetics directly or something? Lootboxes need to go.
i mean reqs support the free dlc/updates for the game which is worth it in my opinion
While that's certainly true, let me ask how much of that free DLC was recycled content from the base game and previous updates? Too much if that is what the money generated by REQ Packs is really paying for.
The idea that microtransactions and loot boxes pay for DLC is a blatant lie. EA proved it when they told their investors that the Battlefront II controversy and removal of microtransactions would not have a materiel impact of the game's projected earnings. The game sold 12 million copies, which is more than enough to cover the cost of the game's development and future DLC. Note, that is without taking the enhanced versions of the game into account. Don't believe me? Then you can read it yourself: http://investor.ea.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=712515-17-95&CIK=712515

Games do not need microtransactions in order to provide content. Base game sales alone provide more than enough to cover base-game development cost, and a large portion of future DLC. This includes Halo 5, which had the biggest Halo launch in history, according to this Xbox article: https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2015/11/04/halo-5-guardians-biggest-halo-launch-in-history/
I just watched a video about the req system made by the YouTuber Aozolai (he’s pretty goo check him out) and he came up with a good balance for the req system. In warzone, everybody would be given all base weapons (assault rifle, magnum, smg, dmr, and halo 2 battle rifle) and could gain new variants through commendations such as kills, headshots, double kills, boss takedown, etc. and maybe use less weapon variants that nobody is going to use because of we had to unlock all 30 something variants, that would be kinda weird.
I think all players from the start should have all of the load outs unlocked and their variants. They make a significant difference in warzone and I’ve always hated that they were locked behind these packs. People who play longer have the advantage over those that don’t.
The problem I have with Warzone is that with multiple variations of weapons/vehicles and certifications to get more of them, you are often put at an disadvantage due to something that is out of your control. No-one should ever be put at a disadvantage because someone blew $100 on REQ packs and has an Answer certification with 30+ in stock. No-one should go through with consuming one of their last REQs, only to get killed seconds after spawning, and that REQ going to waste.

With Warzone, I'd say get rid of the fluff. Keep only the base versions of every weapon/vehicle (With few exceptions), and all players have access to them. That way everyone is on an even playing field. And if you die with, say a Shotgun, you can still get another once you have enough REQ points. Powerful weapons would still be a gamble, with higher REQ cost and the risk of it falling into enemy hands, but you wouldn't have to worry about stock.

I'd love to use Jorge's Chaingun, but I have never gotten one out of the loot boxes, let alone a certification for it. And I'm sure as hell not going to dump hundreds of dollars on loot boxes for an RNG chance at it like Frank O'Connor, Microsoft, and 343 Industries want me to.
The problem I have with Warzone is that with multiple variations of weapons/vehicles and certifications to get more of them, you are often put at an disadvantage due to something that is out of your control. No-one should ever be put at a disadvantage because someone blew $100 on REQ packs and has an Answer certification with 30+ in stock. No-one should go through with consuming one of their last REQs, only to get killed seconds after spawning, and that REQ going to waste.

With Warzone, I'd say get rid of the fluff. Keep only the base versions of every weapon/vehicle (With few exceptions), and all players have access to them. That way everyone is on an even playing field. And if you die with, say a Shotgun, you can still get another once you have enough REQ points. Powerful weapons would still be a gamble, with higher REQ cost and the risk of it falling into enemy hands, but you wouldn't have to worry about stock.

I'd love to use Jorge's Chaingun, but I have never gotten one out of the loot boxes, let alone a certification for it. And I'm sure as hell not going to dump hundreds of dollars on loot boxes for an RNG chance at it like Frank O'Connor, Microsoft, and 343 Industries want me to.
You don't have to dump money into the "loot boxes" to get anything. Just play the game earn points and open packs. Open silver's till they refund two 1500 point req cards and then open golds, they will refund two 3000 point req cards once you have everything unlocked. Most seem to finish the pack grind around SR145ish with that method. Once everything is unlocked building a req inventory is easy. When I was grinding packs I made sure to get my free daily win packs in warzone, warzone firefight and arena. Also take advantage of the free warzone firefight commendations gold packs and the free gold packs they give away during the HCS events. Also as some one who has played a lot I can guarantee you the largest req inventory doesn't mean you will win at all.
I wouldn't mind if I could choose what armour I want. Like if I could spend credits to buy a certain armour or helmet, like the bundles. So far other than the locus helmet I only wore armour that I earned or got outside of random drops. Like the Helioskrill from the MCC, the Mark V I got as a gift from some event, the Mark IV that came with the game, and the damaged variant from the beta, Jerome's armour idk where I got it. When they came out with the Halo Reach Req pack with the guaranteed armour like the operator, EVA, and others. I was more motivated to work towards that pack then I was for any gold pack. In fact, I played Halo 5 more for that one reach pack then I did for anything else since then. Because I knew that 100k credits was worth it to get the armour I actually wanted rather than spending that same 100k credits on random gold packs with a tiny chance of getting good armour. Most of the armour I have I actually like, and I think I am pretty lucky to have it that way because I am sure most people have more ugly armour then good armour.
LethalQ wrote:
You don't have to dump money into the "loot boxes" to get anything. Just play the game earn points and open packs.
With this statement, you've also illustrated exactly why Warzone is so unfriendly to new players: they haven't had a chance to "just play the game" yet, unlike veteran players with big req arsenals. If you compare it to a game mode like BTB in which the powerful weapons and vehicles are on the map as pickups and therefore available to anybody, Warzone is much more unfair to new players, for this very reason.

And I know you're probably going to say "but those new players have just as much of a chance to play the game and build a req inventory as the veteran players did." But that's kind of beside the point because in order to do so, they will have to spend a certain amount of time being outgunned by practically everyone else (unless they pay tons of money, of course). You can't deny how unfair that is to new players, when compared to BTB.

Halo should be about equal starts, not giving obvious advantages to players who have "just played the game" more. The only advantage that should come from "just playing the game" more should be skills such as map knowledge and better aim, not having better guns. Warzone flouts all of that, regardless of whether players play to earn their req arsenal, or pay money for it.

At this point, you might be wishing to tell me to not play Warzone if I dislike it so much. But, as I pointed out earlier, it's not that simple. I wouldn't complain so much about Warzone if it didn't take the place of my beloved BTB Heavies. If it returns in Halo 6, all I ask is that it doesn't try to be the main focus of the game.
LethalQ wrote:
You don't have to dump money into the "loot boxes" to get anything. Just play the game earn points and open packs.
With this statement, you've also illustrated exactly why Warzone is so unfriendly to new players: they haven't had a chance to "just play the game" yet, unlike veteran players with big req arsenals. If you compare it to a game mode like BTB in which the powerful weapons and vehicles are on the map as pickups and therefore available to anybody, Warzone is much more unfair to new players, for this very reason.

And I know you're probably going to say "but those new players have just as much of a chance to play the game and build a req inventory as the veteran players did." But that's kind of beside the point because in order to do so, they will have to spend a certain amount of time being outgunned by practically everyone else (unless they pay tons of money, of course). You can't deny how unfair that is to new players, when compared to BTB.

Halo should be about equal starts, not giving obvious advantages to players who have "just played the game" more. The only advantage that should come from "just playing the game" more should be skills such as map knowledge and better aim, not having better guns. Warzone flouts all of that, regardless of whether players play to earn their req arsenal, or pay money for it.

At this point, you might be wishing to tell me to not play Warzone if I dislike it so much. But, as I pointed out earlier, it's not that simple. I wouldn't complain so much about Warzone if it didn't take the place of my beloved BTB Heavies. If it returns in Halo 6, all I ask is that it doesn't try to be the main focus of the game.
Then don't play that mode till you build a inventory. It's like any other mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players.
LethalQ wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
You don't have to dump money into the "loot boxes" to get anything. Just play the game earn points and open packs.
With this statement, you've also illustrated exactly why Warzone is so unfriendly to new players: they haven't had a chance to "just play the game" yet, unlike veteran players with big req arsenals. If you compare it to a game mode like BTB in which the powerful weapons and vehicles are on the map as pickups and therefore available to anybody, Warzone is much more unfair to new players, for this very reason.

And I know you're probably going to say "but those new players have just as much of a chance to play the game and build a req inventory as the veteran players did." But that's kind of beside the point because in order to do so, they will have to spend a certain amount of time being outgunned by practically everyone else (unless they pay tons of money, of course). You can't deny how unfair that is to new players, when compared to BTB.

Halo should be about equal starts, not giving obvious advantages to players who have "just played the game" more. The only advantage that should come from "just playing the game" more should be skills such as map knowledge and better aim, not having better guns. Warzone flouts all of that, regardless of whether players play to earn their req arsenal, or pay money for it.

At this point, you might be wishing to tell me to not play Warzone if I dislike it so much. But, as I pointed out earlier, it's not that simple. I wouldn't complain so much about Warzone if it didn't take the place of my beloved BTB Heavies. If it returns in Halo 6, all I ask is that it doesn't try to be the main focus of the game.
Then don't play that mode till you build a inventory. It's like any other mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players.
Unless you spend real cash.
LethalQ wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
You don't have to dump money into the "loot boxes" to get anything. Just play the game earn points and open packs.
With this statement, you've also illustrated exactly why Warzone is so unfriendly to new players: they haven't had a chance to "just play the game" yet, unlike veteran players with big req arsenals. If you compare it to a game mode like BTB in which the powerful weapons and vehicles are on the map as pickups and therefore available to anybody, Warzone is much more unfair to new players, for this very reason.

And I know you're probably going to say "but those new players have just as much of a chance to play the game and build a req inventory as the veteran players did." But that's kind of beside the point because in order to do so, they will have to spend a certain amount of time being outgunned by practically everyone else (unless they pay tons of money, of course). You can't deny how unfair that is to new players, when compared to BTB.

Halo should be about equal starts, not giving obvious advantages to players who have "just played the game" more. The only advantage that should come from "just playing the game" more should be skills such as map knowledge and better aim, not having better guns. Warzone flouts all of that, regardless of whether players play to earn their req arsenal, or pay money for it.

At this point, you might be wishing to tell me to not play Warzone if I dislike it so much. But, as I pointed out earlier, it's not that simple. I wouldn't complain so much about Warzone if it didn't take the place of my beloved BTB Heavies. If it returns in Halo 6, all I ask is that it doesn't try to be the main focus of the game.
Then don't play that mode till you build a inventory. It's like any other mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players.
Unless you spend real cash.
Even if some one buys the game and dumps a bunch of money on req packs a veteran player will still have the advantage. A big req inventory won't beat skill.
LethalQ wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
You don't have to dump money into the "loot boxes" to get anything. Just play the game earn points and open packs.
With this statement, you've also illustrated exactly why Warzone is so unfriendly to new players: they haven't had a chance to "just play the game" yet, unlike veteran players with big req arsenals. If you compare it to a game mode like BTB in which the powerful weapons and vehicles are on the map as pickups and therefore available to anybody, Warzone is much more unfair to new players, for this very reason.

And I know you're probably going to say "but those new players have just as much of a chance to play the game and build a req inventory as the veteran players did." But that's kind of beside the point because in order to do so, they will have to spend a certain amount of time being outgunned by practically everyone else (unless they pay tons of money, of course). You can't deny how unfair that is to new players, when compared to BTB.

Halo should be about equal starts, not giving obvious advantages to players who have "just played the game" more. The only advantage that should come from "just playing the game" more should be skills such as map knowledge and better aim, not having better guns. Warzone flouts all of that, regardless of whether players play to earn their req arsenal, or pay money for it.

At this point, you might be wishing to tell me to not play Warzone if I dislike it so much. But, as I pointed out earlier, it's not that simple. I wouldn't complain so much about Warzone if it didn't take the place of my beloved BTB Heavies. If it returns in Halo 6, all I ask is that it doesn't try to be the main focus of the game.
Then don't play that mode till you build a inventory. It's like any other mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players.
Unless you spend real cash.
Even if some one buys the game and dumps a bunch of money on req packs a veteran player will still have the advantage. A big req inventory won't beat skill.
Doesn't mean that disadvantage hasn't been decreased significantly.

Or, that a veteran player without a REQ library can spend money on REQs and get on the same level as someone who has played a lot.

LethalQ wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
You don't have to dump money into the "loot boxes" to get anything. Just play the game earn points and open packs.
With this statement, you've also illustrated exactly why Warzone is so unfriendly to new players: they haven't had a chance to "just play the game" yet, unlike veteran players with big req arsenals. If you compare it to a game mode like BTB in which the powerful weapons and vehicles are on the map as pickups and therefore available to anybody, Warzone is much more unfair to new players, for this very reason.

And I know you're probably going to say "but those new players have just as much of a chance to play the game and build a req inventory as the veteran players did." But that's kind of beside the point because in order to do so, they will have to spend a certain amount of time being outgunned by practically everyone else (unless they pay tons of money, of course). You can't deny how unfair that is to new players, when compared to BTB.

Halo should be about equal starts, not giving obvious advantages to players who have "just played the game" more. The only advantage that should come from "just playing the game" more should be skills such as map knowledge and better aim, not having better guns. Warzone flouts all of that, regardless of whether players play to earn their req arsenal, or pay money for it.

At this point, you might be wishing to tell me to not play Warzone if I dislike it so much. But, as I pointed out earlier, it's not that simple. I wouldn't complain so much about Warzone if it didn't take the place of my beloved BTB Heavies. If it returns in Halo 6, all I ask is that it doesn't try to be the main focus of the game.
Then don't play that mode till you build a inventory. It's like any other mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players.
You have skill, then REQs are added on top of your player capabilities giving you an even better outlook.
So, no, the comparison is not apt.
I would agree. It really is intrusive. And most people are like "oooh its ok its just skins n stuff" But no its still not good. I have to grind my butt off just to get armor I want. I should be able to get it directly earn it without grinding and getting a ton of stuff I dont need. The ONLY reason they do it is because it earns them more money. It also ruins quality of armors because they just pack them full of junk to make you mad and just buy the packs.
LethalQ wrote:
Then don't play that mode till you build a inventory. It's like any other mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players.
If new players need to grind lots of hours in X game modes in order to be on an even playing field with veteran players in Y game modes, then I think it's still fair to say Y game modes aren't exactly friendly to new players, compared to X game modes in which new players start on an even playing field with veteran players. In that respect, it's not like any other game mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players. Remember I'm only talking about req arsenals, not skill or map knowledge.
LethalQ wrote:
Then don't play that mode till you build a inventory. It's like any other mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players.
If new players need to grind lots of hours in X game modes in order to be on an even playing field with veteran players in Y game modes, then I think it's still fair to say Y game modes aren't exactly friendly to new players, compared to X game modes in which new players start on an even playing field with veteran players. In that respect, it's not like any other game mode where new players are at a disadvantage to veteran players. Remember I'm only talking about req arsenals, not skill or map knowledge.
Why does everything have to be fair? Is it really that bad that players have to actually play the game to get stuff in it? That players have to work their way up. Granted it sucks that it's RNG for their stuff but it's really not that hard to grind out points for packs.
LethalQ wrote:
Why does everything have to be fair? Is it really that bad that players have to actually play the game to get stuff in it? That players have to work their way up. Granted it sucks that it's RNG for their stuff but it's really not that hard to grind out points for packs.
Whether it's really that bad is a matter of opinion. Anyway, if 343 wants to put unfair game modes in their Halo games, that's fine until they do so to the detriment of other game modes. But I think we've already had that discussion
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 11
  4. 12
  5. 13
  6. 14
  7. ...
  8. 15