Reach dropped to 7th place on the xbl charts a couple months after release. It took a nose dive. Being 3rd means little when HCE had no online and h3/3 are miles ahead of everything else. Reach sold well off the coattails of h3.
If you look at the sales for halo reach they are the second highest in the franchise, and someone posted the stats for how long reachs population lasted which was the 2nd or 3rd longest in the series. Reach had sprint and i could argue that it was successful as a halo game. There are many reasons why halo is no longer selling 9 million plus copies one being that the FPS genre has shifted, the gaming market has changed by being more competitive, the xbox one not selling as many copies and sprint may play a factor in their sale numbers. Sprint is part of the sales problem but is not the main reason for low sales.
There's no evidence saying it isn't.
Either way. Its still speculation. There's no hard evidence of sprint being the cause of Halo's decline
None of those things fundementally changed gameplay and map design.
Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn't fit and it fundamentally alters the game.Game absolutely cannot hold a population since the elites changed design, since the DMR was introduced, since the magnum had a scope reintroduced, so are those reason's for Halo's fall as well?
Just saying sprint is the reason is pure speculation.
Competition has hardly raised. The xb1 is outselling the 360. The xb1 does have RROD. The attach rate to xbl is higher than ever.
You're are factually incorrect on practically every point you made.
So you made no reference to how your numbers affected sprint which was the premise of my point. Here are a couple of facts, reach's population had 400,000 minimum playing until 2012. Thats two years after its release date. You mentioned that reach dropped to 7th place on xbl. I would argue that that doesnt mean much considering the population was still high and if you compare reach's numbers to halo 3 numbers of june a year after their release the population was very similar. I would also add that 7th place on the xbl doesnt mean much because in 2011 COD modern warfare 3 released selling over 14 million copies. This is would explain that drop to 7th place.
You said that competition has hardly changed, this couldn't be more wrong. Any COD game sold before 2006 sold less than 3 million copies, while after this period it sold upwards of 5 million and as high as 14 million. Coincidentally 2006 is the same time COD brought in regenerative health which they got from halo. Combine those sell numbers with battlefield with it's last two game 3, 4 which sold over 7 million in 2011 before this time they only sold around 2 million. This increase in sales of other games could mean that population for other games dont last as long. So my point is that competition has certainly changed for halo, other games have become successful.
And to say i was factually incorrect about reach being the 2nd best selling and 2nd best at holding the population was WRONG.
My point in the previous thread was that some people are saying that sprint is the cause of sell numbers, while i dont disagree with this (because obviously people dont like sprint which is apparent in the thread) it cannot be said that sell numbers are entirely due to sprint.