​

Halo 5's new model of offering Maps for free delighted everybody that sought to avoid the typical season pass. So how did 343 decide to make some extra money if they weren't going to charge for DLC?

Halo 5 offers a new Multiplayer system known as the REQ system, which allows you to use in-game currency, or real-world currency, to purchase what are essentially card packs in order to access bonus cosmetic items like emblems and armor, and weapons available in the new Warzone multiplayer mode.

As announced previously, these funds will be added to the Halo World Championship prize pool, bringing its new total prize purse to $1.5 million. Preliminary tournaments for the event start this winter.

These microtransactions are entirely optional and have no affect on unbalancing the game in anyones favor should they choose to purchase them, and yet they are still selling like hotcakes. It will be interesting to see if other developers will soon follow suit with this new model and perhaps find craftier ways of making money without upsetting the playerbase.

SOURCE

 

[KingVamp]

I think cosmetic buys that you can still unlock in game, is better than them purposely locking away content.

 

[Arecaidian Fox]

I've been playing since launch. I can say with absolute certainty that pretty much anything you can unlock by paying you can also unlock by playing. I had about $12 left over on my account from buying Minecraft, so I bought Gold REQ packs until I drained it, then went on to earn the exact same packs by just playing. I earn enough points for a Gold pack every four or five matches, no big deal. You get packs for more than just points, too. You get free ones for leveling up and achieving commendations (skilled play, from novice to expert) as well. The only thing spending more money on this does is allowing you to get more REQ for Warzone faster (and with how Warzone is set up, it doesn't unbalance it) and getting more unlocks for cosmetic gear faster. I happen to like how they've set this up, and they have my approval. Look at it this way...If they're using these funds to make DLC for the game that's free-to-download, then players who've put little to no money into the system are getting absurdly cheap content. Sounds like an all-around good idea to me.

 

[Deboog]

This is fantastic. I have no idea why people are upset about this. They are cosmetic. Yes people payed $60 for the game, and charging extra for more content is annoying, but look, the industry is moving towards micro-transactions whether you like it or not. 343 showing that companies can make money WITHOUT ruining gameplay is huge. If other companies catch on, we might be able to survive competitive multiplayer games adding in game currency.

 

[WolfSaviorZX]

Deleted

 

[Dr.Hacknik]

Heh, now it's more like a Mobile game than an Xbox One Game....xD

 

[Pedeadstrian]

Point is microtransactions shouldn't be in a 60$ game. Huge Halo fan but decided to skip this game till it's under 10 bucks. If it becomes more profitable to have microtransactions in a game than not, that's really our fault for supporting these type of games.

If you're willing to wait a long time (since AAA games like Halo don't get reduced by 80% a month later like some games do) to play the game just because Halo 5 has microtransactions that don't change the actual gameplay, then no, you're not a huge Halo fan.

 

[CathyRina]

If you're willing to wait a long time (since AAA games like Halo don't get reduced by 80% a month later like some games do) to play the game just because Halo 5 has microtransactions that don't change the actual gameplay, then no, you're not a huge Halo fan.

Don't confuse a fanboy with a fan. Halo 5 has something that isn't suiting his taste and he is not willing to blindly accept it just because he's a fan.

 

[Pedeadstrian]

Don't confuse a fanboy with a fan. Halo 5 has something that isn't suiting his taste and he is not willing to blindly accept it just because he's a fan.

You don't have to be a fanboy to understand that cosmetic microtransactions don't affect the game in any way. It's no different from the people who boycotted DMC when they changed the color of Dante's hair. Imaginary slippery slopes are not a valid reason to not play a game. And no, I'm not a Halo fanboy. I've played the Halo games maybe 3 times in my life.

 

[TecXero]

I won't buy a full priced game with microtransactions in it. I'm fine with microtransactions in a FTP or very cheap game as long as it's balanced and fair, but in a full priced game? Nope. You're doing good just to get me to pay $60 on a game. I'm spoiled by indie games anymore and expect a lot for my money. I probably only buy maybe five games a year that're over $20, anymore.

 

[CathyRina]

You don't have to be a fanboy to understand that cosmetic microtransactions don't affect the game in any way. It's no different from the people who boycotted DMC when they changed the color of Dante's hair. Imaginary slippery slopes are not a valid reason to not play a game. And no, I'm not a Halo fanboy. I've played the Halo games maybe 3 times in my life.

It's not about the legitimacy of this system being optional, it's about the principle and telling someone he's not a huge fan just because he disagrees is kinda low.
Also that Dante Comparison is like comparing apples and grapes but that's beside the point.

 

[Pedeadstrian]

It's not about the legitimacy of this system being optional, it's about the principle and telling someone he's not a huge fan just because he disagrees is kinda low.
Also that Dante Comparison is like comparing apples and grapes but that's beside the point.

"Why won't you buy this game with cosmetic microtransactions? It doesn't affect the gameplay at all!"
"It's about the principle."

"Why don't you like Dante's hair? It doesn't affect the gameplay at all!"
"It's about the principle."

I don't see how they're any different.

I can't understand anyone who believes that microtransactions of any nature (even the purely aesthetic ones) are morally wrong. A $60 game that allows you to buy a sword that is better than anything you'd ever be able to obtain through normal means? Sure, I'll join you, TecXero, and WolfSaviorZX and boycott the hell out of that game. But this? You're overreacting.

 

[CathyRina]

"Why won't you buy this game with cosmetic microtransactions? It doesn't affect the gameplay at all!"
"It's about the principle."

"Why don't you like Dante's hair? It doesn't affect the gameplay at all!"
"It's about the principle."

I don't see how they're any different.

I can't understand anyone who believes that microtransactions of any nature (even the purely aesthetic ones) are morally wrong. A $60 game that allows you to buy a sword that is better than anything you'd ever be able to obtain through normal means? Sure, I'll join you, TecXero, and WolfSaviorZX and boycott the hell out of that game. But this? You're overreacting.

You might not believe it but aesthetic choices in videogames might not affect the gameplay but they do affect the enjoyment of the gameplay. Crazy right? and unlike Halo 5 it's not a optional part of the game, it's the cocking main character that you spend all the time playing the game with. Not to mention it's really not only about Dante's hair since the character is entirely different, different backstory, different characteristic and so on.
But back to Halo. If you can't understand then just leave people be. Who are you to go to people and tell them what to do? A friend of mine refuses to upgrade to windows 10 out of a stupid principle reason. But I'm not arguing with him about how legit his reason is. If he doesn't want to then just leave him.

 

[Pedeadstrian]

You might not believe it but aesthetic choices in videogames might not affect the gameplay but they do affect the enjoyment of the gameplay. Crazy right? and unlike Halo 5 it's not a optional part of the game, it's the cocking main character that you spend all the time playing the game with. Not to mention it's really not only about Dante's hair since the character is entirely different, different backstory, different characteristic and so on.
But back to Halo. If you can't understand then just leave people be. Who are you to go to people and tell them what to do? A friend of mine refuses to upgrade to windows 10 out of a stupid principle reason. But I'm not arguing with him about how legit his reason is. If he doesn't want to then just leave him.

I have as much of a right to wonder why people believe something as they do to believe it. Forums are a place of discussion. That's all I'm looking for. You've told me I'm wrong multiple times but haven't told me why.

It is an optional part of the game, because you can use the default armor, you can use armor you've obtained through gameplay, or you can use armor you've obtained through microtransactions (the same exact armor you've obtained through gameplay, albeit more quickly obtained). This isn't an "aesthetic choice" of the developer. An aesthetic choice of the developer would be to suddenly use TF2-style art for Halo 5. Heck, that'd be a more legitimate reason than this.

 

[CathyRina]

It is an optional part of the game, because you can use the default armor, you can use armor you've obtained through gameplay, or you can use armor you've obtained through microtransactions (the same exact armor you've obtained through gameplay, albeit more quickly obtained). This isn't an "aesthetic choice" of the developer. An aesthetic choice of the developer would be to suddenly use TF2-style art for Halo 5. Heck, that'd be a more legitimate reason than this.

Oh good so you do understand how comparing halo 5 with DMC is like comparing apples with grapes.

I have as much of a right to wonder why people believe something as they do to believe it. Forums are a place of discussion. That's all I'm looking for. You've told me I'm wrong multiple times but haven't told me why.

I have told you that believing Halo 5's micro transactions are optional, is wrong? Multiple times even? Can you please use a text marker and underline the words I used to say that?
Because so far all I disagreed on is that you told someone he's not a huge fan for not willing to buy a game because it has micro transactions and that the DMC situation is comparable to what's happening right now.
I haven't said that Halo 5 uses a bad micro transaction model in this thread at all. Same way as I haven't said I'm not okay with it. You just assume that because I disagreed with you on a related topic.

 

[Pedeadstrian]

I have told you that believing Halo 5's micro transactions are optional, is wrong? Multiple times even? Can you please use a text marker and underline the words I used to say that?

Hmm... apparently my selective dyslexia kicked in and all I read was:

Halo 5 a optional part of the game

My bad. My assertion that boycotting a game (until it's cheap) that you'd normally love because of optional microtransactions is rather shallow and pedantic still stands, though.

 

[WolfSaviorZX]

Deleted

 

[CathyRina]

There is no "correct way to implement microtransactions".

Theoretically 1$ Cosmetics DLC's are microtransactions and Companies've been doing it for ages. the only difference between 1$ DLC and Halo 5 is that in Halo 5 playing the game can unlock the cosmetic DLC while the other model does not.
Also F*ck MGS V's microtransactions. first make them appear useless so that they won't affect reviews and then 30 days later make them destroy the online portion of the single player.

 

[ReigningSemtex]

Oh gamers smh microtransactions are the devil don't give in