Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Why are people upset about free DLC?

OP Jonah48532

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. 6
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. ...
  9. 17
Forge in Halo 5 is amazing. Even more so now with the addition of textures. The only outstanding flaw with it, and one I can't comprehend, is how there's no fileshare system. Which means all the potential of the new Forge largely goes to waste, and for something so simple too. Regardless 343i has gone above and beyond expectations with Forge, and I will commend them for that.

Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that could have been diverted elsewhere, and it only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.

Breakout was another minor resource drain. Not anywhere near as bad as Warzone mind you, but I still feel like it didn't really need its own maps. Maps such as The Pit would probably make decent Breakout maps and still be viable for standard arena play. In fact for a period of time Breakout actually was on normal arena maps in the Team Arena playlist.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts and inappropriate remarks.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
Jonah48532 wrote:
Why are people upset about free DLC would you rather have to spend money on buying new content?
Sure I'd rather have AAA dlc over poor quality maps since the maps in Halo 5 maps that were made were of a poor quality. Calling it free dlc is a pretty poor excuse when most of the maps are forge maps that the community made, not 343i while 343i try's to take credit in the marketing to get people thinking there getting something new. It's bad enough dealing with how bad Halo 5's forge is.
Personally, I'm underwhelmed by what the DLC has offered. Despite all the money REQ Packs have generated, it seems 343 still has to recycle a lot of content for these free updates. There is original stuff, but not as much as I'd like to see. Free just isn't a substitute for quality.
I agree, however, I am happy that Forge took time to release, as the Forge is more of a game developer and serious map maker now than it was ever before. The amount of creative content the community has made with it, as well as how it compliments a lot of new maps in Infection is something to be desired.

Things like skins, and armors is underwhelming for each update. While it's nice to have a lot of community maps in the playlists, it would be nice to see a pack of three or four maps per update that are hand made. 343 can do awesome with their aesthetics skill on maps better than they can on armors and weapon skins.
I feel this would be best for Warzone, which is lacking creativity of new capture objectives, aside from garages, fortresses, armories and bases. Add Forerunner objectives to capture, or Covenant structures.

Arena maps, can be made a bit bigger, instead of having small map design with such cramped spawn points.

This would make the "free DLC" more enjoyable and would realistically stop a bunch of the 343 hate on all the forums.
I won't harp too much on Forge, after all it seems to work well and is helping people make a lot of cool maps like you said. But yeah, 343 could stand to be better with everything else.
I think gematypes, casual playlists, and maps are the only thing the game truly is lacking. From what I've noticed, they can't seem to keep more than a handful of playlists available at one time, or they don't like to. This, I feel is harming the game more than it is good.
Ramir3z77 wrote:
Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.
One man's gigantic waste of resources, another man's source of constant enjoyment.
Ramir3z77 wrote:
Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.
One man's gigantic waste of resources, another man's source of constant enjoyment.
I think Warzone is a blast... But given the choice, would you prefer a traditional Halo campaign (one that would keep you busy for months...) or Warzone?
I get why people complain but it is still better than what Bungie is doing with Destiny. They held back content and put it in as PAID DLC. At least 343 is not charging us for something that should have been in the game. This is what frustrates me about people comparing 343 to Bungie. Bungie is different from 343 and we can judge them on Destiny now, which IMO, is a worse game than Halo 5.
Ramir3z77 wrote:
Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.
One man's gigantic waste of resources, another man's source of constant enjoyment.
However, one could argue the time put into Warzone may have taken time away from other gametypes and explain why it took months to get a few game modes back.
Vinman720 wrote:
I get why people complain but it is still better than what Bungie is doing with Destiny. They held back content and put it in as PAID DLC. At least 343 is not charging us for something that should have been in the game. This is what frustrates me about people comparing 343 to Bungie. Bungie is different from 343 and we can judge them on Destiny now, which IMO, is a worse game than Halo 5.
I bet the numbers 343i has generated off of Req revenues are similar to that of Bungies paid DLC
iShylock wrote:
Ramir3z77 wrote:
Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.
One man's gigantic waste of resources, another man's source of constant enjoyment.
I think Warzone is a blast... But given the choice, would you prefer a traditional Halo campaign (one that would keep you busy for months...) or Warzone?
I don't think that's really an either/or choice. I do find myself still playing the H5 campaign and I have played Warzone more than any other campaign since I picked up XBL...so both, I guess?
Whatever "should have" been available at launch shouldn't matter 6 months later. When are people going to drop this? Get on with your lives, you've had half a year worth of downloadable content thrown at you and you people still whine.
A lot of us wish to see this system discontinued in halo 6, which is why we keep up with the discussion so that 343 doesn't repeat the same mistakes we're begging them not to do again.
iShylock wrote:
Ramir3z77 wrote:
Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.
One man's gigantic waste of resources, another man's source of constant enjoyment.
I think Warzone is a blast... But given the choice, would you prefer a traditional Halo campaign (one that would keep you busy for months...) or Warzone?
I don't think that's really an either/or choice. I do find myself still playing the H5 campaign and I have played Warzone more than any other campaign since I picked up XBL...so both, I guess?
:). Good answer. But resources my man.... There's only so much a studio has to throw around during the development cycle of a game.
TryHardFan wrote:
Whatever "should have" been available at launch shouldn't matter 6 months later. When are people going to drop this? Get on with your lives, you've had half a year worth of downloadable content thrown at you and you people still whine.
A lot of us wish to see this system discontinued in halo 6, which is why we keep up with the discussion so that 343 doesn't repeat the same mistakes we're begging them not to do again.
This should be very obvious, but people still can't understand why we still post.
Ramir3z77 wrote:
Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.
One man's gigantic waste of resources, another man's source of constant enjoyment.
However, one could argue the time put into Warzone may have taken time away from other gametypes and explain why it took months to get a few game modes back.
That's definitely a possibility. But I've played Warzone more than any other non-Slayer and CTF gametype. I think the most I've played of the non-Slayer and CTF gametypes is Reach's Invasion at a little more than 2 days. I have 4 days plus and counting in Warzone at this point. For me, well worth the investment.

I've looked back out of curiosity. Oddball and KOTH were some of my favorite gametypes outside of Slayer and CTF. In Halo 3, the game I've played the most of all (RIP college), combined I spent less than 5% of my time there. That's worth the cost/benefit to me.
Ramir3z77 wrote:
Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.
One man's gigantic waste of resources, another man's source of constant enjoyment.
However, one could argue the time put into Warzone may have taken time away from other gametypes and explain why it took months to get a few game modes back.
One could also argue it's why we have less scratch made Arena maps and more remixes of currently implemented maps.
EndersEye wrote:
mostly because the free DLC is putting things in the game that should have been in at launch. it's kinda like they're holding back stuff that was already in the game and just putting it in monthly updates (this does not apply to all things, but griffball, infection, the UI, ect)
but would you rather not have it at all? just no dlc?
iShylock wrote:
iShylock wrote:
Ramir3z77 wrote:
Warzone was a gigantic waste of resources that only serves to further propel Halo away from its traditional focus of being an Arena-style game. So it is doubly flawed.
One man's gigantic waste of resources, another man's source of constant enjoyment.
I think Warzone is a blast... But given the choice, would you prefer a traditional Halo campaign (one that would keep you busy for months...) or Warzone?
I don't think that's really an either/or choice. I do find myself still playing the H5 campaign and I have played Warzone more than any other campaign since I picked up XBL...so both, I guess?
:). Good answer. But resources my man.... There's only so much a studio has to throw around during the development cycle of a game.
For sure. And H5 has hit the best note on the things that matter to me most in a development. The things 343 has excluded from H5 at launch and in ongoing support matter less to me than the things they've done.
Free DLC is life!
EndersEye wrote:
mostly because the free DLC is putting things in the game that should have been in at launch. it's kinda like they're holding back stuff that was already in the game and just putting it in monthly updates (this does not apply to all things, but griffball, infection, the UI, ect)
but would you rather not have it at all? just no dlc?
He is really saying that 343 shouldn't try to advertise their free DLC with lackluster maps or features that existed in other games during their launches, and actually include all of that content during release as much as possible.
they have valid reasons like quality, premade, and other claims but, I'm personal fine with the free dlc.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. 6
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. ...
  9. 17