Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Would you buy a Halo game with no campaign?
  • Subject: Would you buy a Halo game with no campaign?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Would you buy a Halo game with no campaign?

(Bungie > 343i)

I probably would.

  • 01.23.2011 8:49 PM PDT

To better illustrate what I'm saying...let's drop some numbers.

Assume you play for about the same amount of time every day.

Say you're a hardcore Halo Reach fan. You play it every day for 3 years. You beat the campaign in about a week, and then move on to multiplayer. 7/1095 spent playing campaign... .639%

Now, you're a bit less hardcore. You play it every day for a year, or 1 out of 3 days for 3 years. 7/365... about 1.9%

You beat campaign in a week, and after that only play multiplayer on the weekends for a year...about 7/111... 6.3%

You're not a hardcore fan. You play it every day for a month. 7/30 = 23%

---

Yahtzee says the campaign is obligatory...maybe it is. Maybe the game needs it in order to sell, that's not the point. My question is, if you look at it this way...doesn't it seem like a bit of a waste? I had to make the player for only a month (or 30 days out of 1095, if you want to look at the full lifespan of the game) to get the campaign's portion of the playtime even close to one-fourth of the total. If you look at someone who plays the game consistently throughout the entire lifespan, campaign slowly dwindles into nothingness.

That's the kind of point I wanted to illustrate. You don't have to agree with me; I just wanted to know if anyone else recognized this phenomenon. That campaign get's a disproportionate amount of work put into despite it overall being the least-played mode.

  • 01.23.2011 8:59 PM PDT
Subject: Would you buy a Halo game with no campaign? (Now w/ #s)

I would miss shooting elites and grunts and all those guys

  • 01.23.2011 9:05 PM PDT

Posted by: SilentHawk9
maybe....would have to be realy cheap like $5 or $10 at most

I hope you never buy Map Packs, otherwise your standards for what you're willing to pay for something are really inconsistent.

Posted by: Skeletor472
I would miss shooting elites and grunts and all those guys

Umm, you get Firefight for that?

[Edited on 01.23.2011 9:08 PM PST]

  • 01.23.2011 9:06 PM PDT

I wouldn't because I think the Halo campaigns are the things that really bring people into the game. Wouldn't it be a little weird if you just jumped into a game of online, not knowing the story of the person you were playing as? I don't think it would be as fun, because online gets boring after a while, so kicking back in campaign is a fun way to pass the time.

Posted by: PlasmaSnake893
Would you buy a Halo game that had no campaign, but was vastly more beefed up in every other area...Multiplayer, Firefight, Custom Games, and Forge?

Way more maps to start out with both in Multiplayer and Firefight. More weapons and vehicles, possibly bringing all the old ones back. Much more thorough customization options in Custom Games and Firefight. Tons more Forge pieces and customization including Firefight Forge. Of course, more armor permutations...for both Spartans and Elites. Everything else is greatly expanded at the cost of forgoing campaign. Same development time, but all of campaign's time and resources goes to other parts of the game.

If so, what would you require each other game mode to have? (ex. How many multiplayer maps? Depth of Custom Games? ect.)

-----------------------------

EDIT: NO, it does not get a second disc. That would be like having your cake and eating it. (Plus, a game being on two discs doesn't make it a different game...so yeah, I don't really know where that idea came from.) The games total development time, cost, resources, and amount of staff would not change, but would now be used for developing the other modes.

-----------------------------

EDIT2 (NOW WITH #s!!):

To better illustrate what I'm saying...let's drop some numbers.

Assume you play for about the same amount of time every day.

Say you're a hardcore Halo Reach fan. You play it every day for 3 years. You beat the campaign in about a week, and then move on to multiplayer. 7/1095 spent playing campaign... .639%

Now, you're a bit less hardcore. You play it every day for a year, or 1 out of 3 days for 3 years. 7/365... about 1.9%

You beat campaign in a week, and after that only play multiplayer on the weekends for a year...about 7/111... 6.3%

You're not a hardcore fan. You play it every day for a month. 7/30 = 23%

-----------------------------

Yahtzee says the campaign is obligatory...maybe it is. Maybe the game needs it in order to sell, that's not the point. My question is, if you look at it this way...doesn't it seem like a bit of a waste? I had to make the player play for only a month (or 30 days out of 1095, if you want to look at the full lifespan of the game) to get the campaign's portion of the playtime even close to one-fourth of the total. If you look at someone who plays the game consistently throughout the entire lifespan, campaign slowly dwindles into nothingness.

That's the kind of point I wanted to illustrate. You don't have to agree with me; I just wanted to know if anyone else recognized this phenomenon. That campaign get's a disproportionate amount of work put into despite it overall being the least-played mode.

  • 01.23.2011 9:11 PM PDT


Posted by: MidnightLobster
I wouldn't because I think the Halo campaigns are the things that really bring people into the game. Wouldn't it be a little weird if you just jumped into a game of online, not knowing the story of the person you were playing as? I don't think it would be as fun, because online gets boring after a while, so kicking back in campaign is a fun way to pass the time.

Ummm...no...that really wouldn't be that weird. You play as Mr. Generic Spartan Man in multiplayer, who for some reason enjoys killing other Mr. Generic Spartan Men for fun and fighting over colorful flags and skulls. He has no story.

The point of removing campaign in this scenario would be to beef up multiplayer. If I get bored of multiplayer, which at least allows me to play in somewhat dynamic games, I'm probably not going to go play the linear campaign. I'll go on the internet and watch anime...or Gargoyles...or play a different game...or if I really feel like playing Halo I'll go into Forge...or just run around an empty map meleeing walls and fusion coils.

  • 01.23.2011 9:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.

-Gandalf

No, I'd try to get it for free.

  • 01.23.2011 9:33 PM PDT

No. As it is, Campaign is the main reason I buy games. I want to be immersed in a story more than fragging some random guy in Asia.

For instance, if Black Ops didn't have a campaign, I wouldn't have bought it. Same with Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood.

  • 01.23.2011 9:55 PM PDT

The Forerunner, the Great Journey, and Heaven Theory

[Announcement Trailer] Halo: Forerunner

Posted by: Agustus
I lol'd at the absurd miscommunication that occurs whenever dibbs post something. Perhaps his brain is so highly evolved that he can no longer clearly communicate with lesser life forms, even among his own species.

Posted by: PlasmaSnake893
To better illustrate what I'm saying...let's drop some numbers.

Assume you play for about the same amount of time every day.

Say you're a hardcore Halo Reach fan. You play it every day for 3 years. You beat the campaign in about a week, and then move on to multiplayer. 7/1095 spent playing campaign... .639%

Now, you're a bit less hardcore. You play it every day for a year, or 1 out of 3 days for 3 years. 7/365... about 1.9%

You beat campaign in a week, and after that only play multiplayer on the weekends for a year...about 7/111... 6.3%

You're not a hardcore fan. You play it every day for a month. 7/30 = 23%

---

Yahtzee says the campaign is obligatory...maybe it is. Maybe the game needs it in order to sell, that's not the point. My question is, if you look at it this way...doesn't it seem like a bit of a waste? I had to make the player for only a month (or 30 days out of 1095, if you want to look at the full lifespan of the game) to get the campaign's portion of the playtime even close to one-fourth of the total. If you look at someone who plays the game consistently throughout the entire lifespan, campaign slowly dwindles into nothingness.

That's the kind of point I wanted to illustrate. You don't have to agree with me; I just wanted to know if anyone else recognized this phenomenon. That campaign get's a disproportionate amount of work put into despite it overall being the least-played mode.
Those numbers are fine (though not really because they're completely made up), if the primary value you derive from a game is play time. If that's the only value you're looking at, despite its monotony, multiplayer games have a longer "life" than nonmultiplayer games.

That being said, playtime isn't everyone's most desirable aspect in a game; different people care about different things. I like a story, something that will allow me to think, both about the game itself (what's going to happen, messages it's trying to give, etc) and how the story relates to other forms of media (books, movies, games). I like a story that will make me think deeply both about it and other things that might relate to it.

Right now, it doesn't take much (I hesitate to say it but) thought to create a new multiplayer oriented game. It takes a lot of thought to create a new campaign driven game (which will have to consist of a relatively original story).

[Edited on 01.24.2011 12:58 AM PST]

  • 01.24.2011 12:57 AM PDT

I dont know exactly what to call it, but it has something to do with spaggetti, duct tape and razor blades...

-GamerTag- CopSuicide (used to be Weedpot420)

I think the campaign is indispensable to the Halo(game) franchise.

Would it be cool if they released Halo 4, for example, with no campaign? Not in my opinion. Would I buy it? Yes, because I know it would be fun.

It would be great, as a hardcore fan, if they released a new game with 2 discs, one for multiplayer and one for campaign. They would both have to boast tons of content, of course. I would even wait twice as long for this and pay twice as much as long as it's worth it.

They could also sell these separately, of course, but I would most likely pre-order the Legendary edition for way too much money.

  • 01.24.2011 3:03 AM PDT

Just because I can beat the campaign in a week doesn't mean i will never go back to it.
Hell, i beat the campaign in a day, but i will never stopp going back to it and replaying.
About 1/5 of my games are campaign if i am reading my stats right.

Anyway, if they released a game without campaign, i would probably still buy it because it is halo.

However, I would much sooner buy a halo game with a campaign and no multiplayer.

Also, I would much rather, they spent 4 years making a halo game and have an extra years worth of content (longer campaign, more maps)

Maybe in the extra year of waiting for Halo 4 (for instance), they could build 3 maps from Halo 4 in the reach engine and release them as a map pack. It would sort of work like a beta.

  • 01.24.2011 4:33 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: chotato
smart, interesting, seems out of place.


Official fan of Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty, (Problem with that?) Halo, and Bungie, also a total gaming junkie.

Hell no.

  • 01.24.2011 6:13 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

i agree with you 100%
Posted by: PlasmaSnake893
Would you buy a Halo game that had no campaign, but was vastly more beefed up in every other area...Multiplayer, Firefight, Custom Games, and Forge?

Way more maps to start out with both in Multiplayer and Firefight. More weapons and vehicles, possibly bringing all the old ones back. Much more thorough customization options in Custom Games and Firefight. Tons more Forge pieces and customization including Firefight Forge. Of course, more armor permutations...for both Spartans and Elites. Everything else is greatly expanded at the cost of forgoing campaign. Same development time, but all of campaign's time and resources goes to other parts of the game.

If so, what would you require each other game mode to have? (ex. How many multiplayer maps? Depth of Custom Games? ect.)

-----------------------------

EDIT: NO, it does not get a second disc. That would be like having your cake and eating it. (Plus, a game being on two discs doesn't make it a different game...so yeah, I don't really know where that idea came from.) The games total development time, cost, resources, and amount of staff would not change, but would now be used for developing the other modes.

-----------------------------

EDIT2 (NOW WITH #s!!):

To better illustrate what I'm saying...let's drop some numbers.

Assume you play for about the same amount of time every day.

Say you're a hardcore Halo Reach fan. You play it every day for 3 years. You beat the campaign in about a week, and then move on to multiplayer. 7/1095 spent playing campaign... .639%

Now, you're a bit less hardcore. You play it every day for a year, or 1 out of 3 days for 3 years. 7/365... about 1.9%

You beat campaign in a week, and after that only play multiplayer on the weekends for a year...about 7/111... 6.3%

You're not a hardcore fan. You play it every day for a month. 7/30 = 23%

-----------------------------

Yahtzee says the campaign is obligatory...maybe it is. Maybe the game needs it in order to sell, that's not the point. My question is, if you look at it this way...doesn't it seem like a bit of a waste? I had to make the player play for only a month (or 30 days out of 1095, if you want to look at the full lifespan of the game) to get the campaign's portion of the playtime even close to one-fourth of the total. If you look at someone who plays the game consistently throughout the entire lifespan, campaign slowly dwindles into nothingness.

That's the kind of point I wanted to illustrate. You don't have to agree with me; I just wanted to know if anyone else recognized this phenomenon. That campaign get's a disproportionate amount of work put into despite it overall being the least-played mode.

  • 01.24.2011 10:06 AM PDT
Subject: Would you buy a Halo game with no campaign?

By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.

Hell no, the campaign is my main attraction to Halo, everything else is what makes me stay.

  • 01.24.2011 10:06 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Of course.

  • 01.24.2011 10:08 AM PDT
Subject: Would you buy a Halo game with no campaign? (Now w/ #s)
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

yeah, if the mp isn't screwed up

  • 01.24.2011 10:16 AM PDT
Subject: Would you buy a Halo game with no campaign?

Hmmmm don't know.

My Halo heart will probably be won over, but I do especially like the Halo stories so I don't want to miss out on that....

Kind of in a dubio here....

  • 01.24.2011 10:44 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2