Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

The Perfect Micro-Transaction/Req System?

OP Chipmmunk

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 6
What happened to DLC being maps/modes? When did base load out weapons need to come through random "req" packs? Why did BTB have WZ slapped over it, and Team Assault have BTB slapped over it?

We need a black out day.
Chipmmunk wrote:
JLC4LIFE wrote:
Chipmmunk wrote:
JLC4LIFE wrote:
I completely agree about the armor section. It's well detailed and it has best of both worlds. Now come the weapons part. I'm not sure a CS:GO system would work as it put lesser skilled players at a disadvantage.

A solution to this would be to keep the REQ system as is for the weapon only. There would be customization REQs (the new system you talked about) and the regular REQs for weapon and vehicle. You would be able to buy currency with the micro-transaction system instead of buying packs. So that give you the choice on what you want to spend it.
[..]
[..]
Players would still get money from playing the objective(Capturing bases, killing bosses, etc)

Also a correction, a "specific armor *variant* can be bought from the customization menu at an inflated price". Variants can be bought, armor pieces cannot. (Just trying to get everybody on the same page, sorry if that came off as rude)

As for your system, I feel like it has a chance of succeeding, because again, there are many ways we can go about this. Personally I would prefer the groups (Youtubers) system as reqs would not be limited game to game in a sense. For example if I get 5 lightrifles from the system you mentioned and I use them all up in 3 games, then I no longer have the option to play how I feel would be best. However with the system the guys proposed you could use any weapon in any game, you don't have to worry about running out of lightrifles because you can buy as many as you want each game.

However I would prefer your system to the one found in Halo 5.
No offense taken. A part of me like the RNG system, because that kinda forces you to play differently instead of <get enough money to buy the sniper, go buy the sniper. No more bullet? Buy some more ammo>. With the REQ level in Warzone, I feel it's more appropriate than in-game cash to buy/upgrade your weapon. One way to mix both system could be that you can earn a maximum of 50 REQs level per game (not rechargeable). You start at 1 and work your way up to 50 by killing Spartans, play the objective, killing bosses, etc, but every use of REQs is taking "permanent" REQs off of your progress/lvl.

I.e. I started level 1 and by capping the first base and killing A.I. I'm not at REQ level 3. I now have 47 level left to maxed out. I decide I want to use the Hailstorm (REQ 3) to replace my AR and switch my pistol for a loadout BR (loadout would still be free). I'm currently sitting at a REQ level of 0, but I don't have 50 to maxed out now, I still only have 47 REQ level left. Is that clear?
Chipmmunk wrote:
WSerg wrote:
i like this idea better than the system at the moment, but i also believe that microtransaction (no matter what kind) should not be in a full price game.
to the argument that payed map packs devide the community: i think it's true, but i also think that microtransactions devide a community, because some people will always have stuff that others don't have, which could (doesn't have to) create some kind of bad blood.

for not deviding the community i would suggest a system, where you get map packs (or any add ons) and can decide on your own how much you want to pay for it. you can do it right at the moment you get the map pack or later on, you decide. that system would also force the developer to actually deliver a good ammount of content. but i'm also that realistic, that i don't think that any developer would do DLC that way, because it's riski and i also don't think they could make even close to that much money like with other systems.

and for the "gambling" part: maybe just put skins (not armor variants) in (for want of a better word) req packs and let them be opened with some kind of in game currency, which can't be purchased with real money
Yeah, I to believe that Micro-Transactions dont belong in 60$ games, however if for whatever reason they need to be in the game then at least have them be non detrimental to gameplay. I don't think this system would really divide the community as you sated because with this system, if players really wanted an armor variant then they could just buy it individually(at an inflated price) with credits, like in Halo Reach. However unlike in Halo Reach, with this system players can just pay real money to get the credits in order to buy there armor variant that they desperately want. Its a win win for both sides.
i see your point and i get it. i just meant, that by paying you can still skip time to achieve a new armor (or variant of it, like in the suggested system). that can (again, doesn't have to) create an urge to pay money to get an armor faster. to say it would divide (or create bad blood) is a bit hard maybe, but for completionists it can be tough.

overall i think, that the suggested system would be ok (even if i really am against any kind of microtransaction and i can't really accept them in 60$ games).

the thing is (which can be transfered to the h5 microtransaction system), any kind of microtransaction can lay the foundation for future titels to be pay 2 win (slowly getting people used to MT). i think thats the biggest threat of MT. (don't saying h5 is pay to win, although i'm sceptical)
I did not like his ideas at all because I believe I have a better solution.

1. Have the RNG portion stay with warzone. The people who don't play warzone are forced to unlock things for warzone every time they open a pack. If the req packs are exclusive to warzone, then the only arena players wouldn't have to worry about getting loadout weapons, power ups, power weapons, and vehicles.

2. Make "credits" req points. This would allow people to spend the req points on cosmetics OR req packs. They'd have to choose which one they want to buy. To make it so that you couldn't just save up and buy the best armor, you'd have to rank up so you could buy the armor.

3. Make microtransactions give you rp. Instead of buying a silver pack or a gold pack, you'd buy 5,000 rp or 10,000 rp.

4. Make some cosmetics attainable through commendations/achievements. Do I really need to explain more?
I did not like his ideas at all because I believe I have a better solution.

1. Have the RNG portion stay with warzone. The people who don't play warzone are forced to unlock things for warzone every time they open a pack. If the req packs are exclusive to warzone, then the only arena players wouldn't have to worry about getting loadout weapons, power ups, power weapons, and vehicles.

2. Make "credits" req points. This would allow people to spend the req points on cosmetics OR req packs. They'd have to choose which one they want to buy. To make it so that you couldn't just save up and buy the best armor, you'd have to rank up so you could buy the armor.

3. Make microtransactions give you rp. Instead of buying a silver pack or a gold pack, you'd buy 5,000 rp or 10,000 rp.

4. Make some cosmetics attainable through commendations/achievements. Do I really need to explain more?
Thats basically everything that they stated? I don't see how you don't agree.
WSerg wrote:
Chipmmunk wrote:
WSerg wrote:
i like this idea better than the system at the moment, but i also believe that microtransaction (no matter what kind) should not be in a full price game.
to the argument that payed map packs devide the community: i think it's true, but i also think that microtransactions devide a community, because some people will always have stuff that others don't have, which could (doesn't have to) create some kind of bad blood.

for not deviding the community i would suggest a system, where you get map packs (or any add ons) and can decide on your own how much you want to pay for it. you can do it right at the moment you get the map pack or later on, you decide. that system would also force the developer to actually deliver a good ammount of content. but i'm also that realistic, that i don't think that any developer would do DLC that way, because it's riski and i also don't think they could make even close to that much money like with other systems.

and for the "gambling" part: maybe just put skins (not armor variants) in (for want of a better word) req packs and let them be opened with some kind of in game currency, which can't be purchased with real money
Yeah, I to believe that Micro-Transactions dont belong in 60$ games, however if for whatever reason they need to be in the game then at least have them be non detrimental to gameplay. I don't think this system would really divide the community as you sated because with this system, if players really wanted an armor variant then they could just buy it individually(at an inflated price) with credits, like in Halo Reach. However unlike in Halo Reach, with this system players can just pay real money to get the credits in order to buy there armor variant that they desperately want. Its a win win for both sides.
i see your point and i get it. i just meant, that by paying you can still skip time to achieve a new armor (or variant of it, like in the suggested system). that can (again, doesn't have to) create an urge to pay money to get an armor faster. to say it would divide (or create bad blood) is a bit hard maybe, but for completionists it can be tough.

overall i think, that the suggested system would be ok (even if i really am against any kind of microtransaction and i can't really accept them in 60$ games).

the thing is (which can be transfered to the h5 microtransaction system), any kind of microtransaction can lay the foundation for future titels to be pay 2 win (slowly getting people used to MT). i think thats the biggest threat of MT. (don't saying h5 is pay to win, although i'm sceptical)
Yeah, thats why I really dont like MT's in games, they start off small but more times than not they get absurdly out of control. If that does begin to happen then its our job as a community to stand up and say no. Hopefully this franchise never takes that route, because if it does........then Im out and I'm sure many others would leave.
JLC4LIFE wrote:
Chipmmunk wrote:
JLC4LIFE wrote:
Chipmmunk wrote:
JLC4LIFE wrote:
I completely agree about the armor section. It's well detailed and it has best of both worlds. Now come the weapons part. I'm not sure a CS:GO system would work as it put lesser skilled players at a disadvantage.

A solution to this would be to keep the REQ system as is for the weapon only. There would be customization REQs (the new system you talked about) and the regular REQs for weapon and vehicle. You would be able to buy currency with the micro-transaction system instead of buying packs. So that give you the choice on what you want to spend it.
[..]
[..]
Players would still get money from playing the objective(Capturing bases, killing bosses, etc)

Also a correction, a "specific armor *variant* can be bought from the customization menu at an inflated price". Variants can be bought, armor pieces cannot. (Just trying to get everybody on the same page, sorry if that came off as rude)

As for your system, I feel like it has a chance of succeeding, because again, there are many ways we can go about this. Personally I would prefer the groups (Youtubers) system as reqs would not be limited game to game in a sense. For example if I get 5 lightrifles from the system you mentioned and I use them all up in 3 games, then I no longer have the option to play how I feel would be best. However with the system the guys proposed you could use any weapon in any game, you don't have to worry about running out of lightrifles because you can buy as many as you want each game.

However I would prefer your system to the one found in Halo 5.
No offense taken. A part of me like the RNG system, because that kinda forces you to play differently instead of <get enough money to buy the sniper, go buy the sniper. No more bullet? Buy some more ammo>. With the REQ level in Warzone, I feel it's more appropriate than in-game cash to buy/upgrade your weapon. One way to mix both system could be that you can earn a maximum of 50 REQs level per game (not rechargeable). You start at 1 and work your way up to 50 by killing Spartans, play the objective, killing bosses, etc, but every use of REQs is taking "permanent" REQs off of your progress/lvl.

I.e. I started level 1 and by capping the first base and killing A.I. I'm not at REQ level 3. I now have 47 level left to maxed out. I decide I want to use the Hailstorm (REQ 3) to replace my AR and switch my pistol for a loadout BR (loadout would still be free). I'm currently sitting at a REQ level of 0, but I don't have 50 to maxed out now, I still only have 47 REQ level left. Is that clear?
Hmm, I think I understand, correct me if Im wrong. But what your stating is that each game you can spend a maximum of 50 req levels?(excluding loadout weapons).

If that is what you are saying then I dont see why it couldn't work, if the req weapons were leveled properly and with utter care(No Req level 6 for the answer BS) then I think this system has a good possibility of working. However what happens once you run out of req level? Will you just be left there with your loadout weapons, if so then I feel like that can be a downer to players.

Also yeah I see how the sniper spam (Or any other powerweapon/vehicle) could be annoying. Another possible solution to stop it would be to limit the amount of times you can use a req each game. For example we use the system they proposed (CSGO)except Snipers are limited to 2 per person, per game, and each player can only use 3 spnkrs per game, etc etc..........or something like that, how would you feel about that?
Chipmmunk wrote:
JLC4LIFE wrote:
Chipmmunk wrote:
JLC4LIFE wrote:
Chipmmunk wrote:
JLC4LIFE wrote:
I completely agree about the armor section. It's well detailed and it has best of both worlds. Now come the weapons part. I'm not sure a CS:GO system would work as it put lesser skilled players at a disadvantage.

A solution to this would be to keep the REQ system as is for the weapon only. There would be customization REQs (the new system you talked about) and the regular REQs for weapon and vehicle. You would be able to buy currency with the micro-transaction system instead of buying packs. So that give you the choice on what you want to spend it.
[..]
[..]
[..]
No offense taken. A part of me like the RNG system, because that kinda forces you to play differently instead of . With the REQ level in Warzone, I feel it's more appropriate than in-game cash to buy/upgrade your weapon. One way to mix both system could be that you can earn a maximum of 50 REQs level per game (not rechargeable). You start at 1 and work your way up to 50 by killing Spartans, play the objective, killing bosses, etc, but every use of REQs is taking "permanent" REQs off of your progress/lvl.

I.e. I started level 1 and by capping the first base and killing A.I. I'm not at REQ level 3. I now have 47 level left to maxed out. I decide I want to use the Hailstorm (REQ 3) to replace my AR and switch my pistol for a loadout BR (loadout would still be free). I'm currently sitting at a REQ level of 0, but I don't have 50 to maxed out now, I still only have 47 REQ level left. Is that clear?
Hmm, I think I understand, correct me if Im wrong. But what your stating is that each game you can spend a maximum of 50 req levels?(excluding loadout weapons).

If that is what you are saying then I dont see why it couldn't work, if the req weapons were leveled properly and with utter care(No Req level 6 for the answer BS) then I think this system has a good possibility of working. However what happens once you run out of req level? Will you just be left there with your loadout weapons, if so then I feel like that can be a downer to players.

Also yeah I see how the sniper spam (Or any other powerweapon/vehicle) could be annoying. Another possible solution to stop it would be to limit the amount of times you can use a req each game. For example we use the system they proposed (CSGO)except Snipers are limited to 2 per person, per game, and each player can only use 3 spnkrs per game, etc etc..........or something like that, how would you feel about that?
You did get it right. Everyone can spend a total of 50 req levels, but remember you are starting at 1 so you can't get that SPNKR prime you unlocked right at the starts. limit could be set higher though 50 was just an example.

Limiting the use of weapons I think would just add more "informatics language" (probably not the proper term) to an already heavy loaded system. They would have to have the language to limit access to all of the what? 50+ different weapons/vehicle? I don't think adding restrictions to a system is the way to go.
Chipmmunk wrote:
I did not like his ideas at all because I believe I have a better solution.

1. Have the RNG portion stay with warzone. The people who don't play warzone are forced to unlock things for warzone every time they open a pack. If the req packs are exclusive to warzone, then the only arena players wouldn't have to worry about getting loadout weapons, power ups, power weapons, and vehicles.

2. Make "credits" req points. This would allow people to spend the req points on cosmetics OR req packs. They'd have to choose which one they want to buy. To make it so that you couldn't just save up and buy the best armor, you'd have to rank up so you could buy the armor.

3. Make microtransactions give you rp. Instead of buying a silver pack or a gold pack, you'd buy 5,000 rp or 10,000 rp.

4. Make some cosmetics attainable through commendations/achievements. Do I really need to explain more?
Thats basically everything that they stated? I don't see how you don't agree.
Their req system involved them completely changing warzone so we wouldn't have to get guns and vehicles in the packs. Also, they said you would still have to use the RNG system to get armor variants.
Chipmmunk wrote:
WSerg wrote:
Chipmmunk wrote:
WSerg wrote:
i like this idea better than the system at the moment, but i also believe that microtransaction (no matter what kind) should not be in a full price game.
to the argument that payed map packs devide the community: i think it's true, but i also think that microtransactions devide a community, because some people will always have stuff that others don't have, which could (doesn't have to) create some kind of bad blood.

for not deviding the community i would suggest a system, where you get map packs (or any add ons) and can decide on your own how much you want to pay for it. you can do it right at the moment you get the map pack or later on, you decide. that system would also force the developer to actually deliver a good ammount of content. but i'm also that realistic, that i don't think that any developer would do DLC that way, because it's riski and i also don't think they could make even close to that much money like with other systems.

and for the "gambling" part: maybe just put skins (not armor variants) in (for want of a better word) req packs and let them be opened with some kind of in game currency, which can't be purchased with real money
[].
i see your point and i get it. i just meant, that by paying you can still skip time to achieve a new armor (or variant of it, like in the suggested system). that can (again, doesn't have to) create an urge to pay money to get an armor faster. to say it would divide (or create bad blood) is a bit hard maybe, but for completionists it can be tough.

overall i think, that the suggested system would be ok (even if i really am against any kind of microtransaction and i can't really accept them in 60$ games).

the thing is (which can be transfered to the h5 microtransaction system), any kind of microtransaction can lay the foundation for future titels to be pay 2 win (slowly getting people used to MT). i think thats the biggest threat of MT. (don't saying h5 is pay to win, although i'm sceptical)
Yeah, thats why I really dont like MT's in games, they start off small but more times than not they get absurdly out of control. If that does begin to happen then its our job as a community to stand up and say no. Hopefully this franchise never takes that route, because if it does........then Im out and I'm sure many others would leave.
i fear it could start going down that route.

maybe it has already started. first i have to mention, that i'm not playing h5 anymore (maybe once a month for 2 hours or so) for many reasons (but thats off topic. this is about microtransactions)
so this are just my impressions from short gaming sessions, so they can be wrong

warzone turbo felt to me like pay to win (spaming out tanks and power weapons) and warzone firefight feels like a req milking mode (with the intenssion of selling req packs -> because of the difficulty you need high req packs)
again, these are just some impressions i got from playing a few games, so they might be wrong.

but these things are also the reason i think this whole topic is important, to maybe bring up alternative systems (like the one suggested by OP or the pay-what-you-think-is-fit system). and i appeal to everyone to watch out (and shout out by every sign of pay2win), that the system for halo 6 doesn't become pay to win.
Chipmmunk wrote:
I did not like his ideas at all because I believe I have a better solution.

1. Have the RNG portion stay with warzone. The people who don't play warzone are forced to unlock things for warzone every time they open a pack. If the req packs are exclusive to warzone, then the only arena players wouldn't have to worry about getting loadout weapons, power ups, power weapons, and vehicles.

2. Make "credits" req points. This would allow people to spend the req points on cosmetics OR req packs. They'd have to choose which one they want to buy. To make it so that you couldn't just save up and buy the best armor, you'd have to rank up so you could buy the armor.

3. Make microtransactions give you rp. Instead of buying a silver pack or a gold pack, you'd buy 5,000 rp or 10,000 rp.

4. Make some cosmetics attainable through commendations/achievements. Do I really need to explain more?
Thats basically everything that they stated? I don't see how you don't agree.
Their req system involved them completely changing warzone so we wouldn't have to get guns and vehicles in the packs. Also, they said you would still have to use the RNG system to get armor variants.
But most of the points you stated still loosely follow their ideas the only thing that you want different it seems is that req weapons should be present in packs.

The best solution in my opinion would be to have some cosmetics that can only be purchased through the credit/micro-transaction system, that way if people don't feel like doing"tedious" tasks to get different armor they can either just gamble with req packs or purchase them (at an inflated price), I feel the system they suggested could be very flexible compared to the one you stated that is why I have to stick with their ideas.
Well if halo 6 launches complete then with a req system we could get future free dlc(maps,reqs,etc.)Halo 5 did not launch complete and stuff like infection and wff came in the updates,but if halo 6 launched complete,then we wouldn't need all these game modes,I also watched Luke's video and I think the system they came up with was amazing.
Honestly, Halo 5's REQ system is fine with me. I really wasn't sure about it at first, but after nearly a year, I'm ok with it.

The only thing I wish was different was being able unlocking customization parts.
It should've been more like this:
The REQ packs all give you the same chance like now.
5000 rp to unlock one common piece
10,000 rp to unlock one uncommon
20,000 to unlock a rare
35,000 to unock a very rare
60,000 to unlock a legendary
100,000 to unlock a mythic piece

This is just an example of what I mean.
and only the customization pieces can be actually bought.
no REQ weapons or anything for Warzone

It would let people save and grab the specific pieces they want, or they could get REQ packs like normal and have a chance at it and other things.
Honestly, Halo 5's REQ system is fine with me. I really wasn't sure about it at first, but after nearly a year, I'm ok with it.

The only thing I wish was different was being able unlocking customization parts.
It should've been more like this:
The REQ packs all give you the same chance like now.
5000 rp to unlock one common piece
10,000 rp to unlock one uncommon
20,000 to unlock a rare
35,000 to unock a very rare
60,000 to unlock a legendary
100,000 to unlock a mythic piece

This is just an example of what I mean.
and only the customization pieces can be actually bought.
no REQ weapons or anything for Warzone

It would let people save and grab the specific pieces they want, or they could get REQ packs like normal and have a chance at it and other things.
I'm sure its not fine to a lot of people however. Personally I HATE the current system and Im sure many others hate it also. Have you even given a look at what was proposed? If so what dont you like about it and why?

I honestly feel like the system they proposed is fair to both sides of the argument and can be a huge compromise for req haters and lovers.
It's a system that I more than agree with. I would buy halo 6 with this in place.
Well if halo 6 launches complete then with a req system we could get future free dlc(maps,reqs,etc.)Halo 5 did not launch complete and stuff like infection and wff came in the updates,but if halo 6 launched complete,then we wouldn't need all these game modes,I also watched Luke's video and I think the system they came up with was amazing.
I know I find the idea to be very intriguing, I dont know why people would prefer the current system over the one proposed.
I made a post where I talked more in depth about how I could improve the REQ System and how this will affect the game.
Also, I talked about customization Warzone load outs and Commendations. Here is the link if you want to check out.

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/how-to-improve-the-req-system/7573d518-6434-4357-85aa-87550a197664/posts?page=1#post4
COD has microtransactions AND dlc map packs. Would you guys rather split up the community by having dlc or have every play on the same maps with the Free dlc thing. I personally dont like the game being unfinished at launch and have them tryiny to fix it by the "free" dlc, but i much rather have that then dlc that has to be paid for
Exoworld wrote:
How about no micro transactions at all,is that to much to ask?
Exactly, I agree. Sick of the whole REQ/Micro-transactions ruining Halo.
FireHALO 3 wrote:
I made a post where I talked more in depth about how I could improve the REQ System and how this will affect the game.
Also, I talked about customization Warzone load outs and Commendations. Here is the link if you want to check out.

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/how-to-improve-the-req-system/7573d518-6434-4357-85aa-87550a197664/posts?page=1#post4
I do like your loadout weapon idea and customization idea. However I still do prefer the idea presented in the original post

Personally I hate the fact weapons can only be obtained through req packs as it limits options on how you want to play the game. If weapons were available via different methods other than req packs then I wouldn't be so negative towards them, however thats not the case with Halo 5, and thats not the case with the system you mentioned.

As I said to another guy who had different ideas regarding the req system, I would much rather have your system implemented rather than the one currently in place, however I think this system would be best for everyone.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 6