• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Halo Has Not Met Financial Expectations - Brad Sams

Lady Jane

Banned
The battlepass is full of annoying challenges designed to make people buy challenge swaps. It's not hard to see.

Plus they give away challenge swaps as apologies when servers are down or something else goes wrong. That's like a casino offering you chips when they forgot to reserve your room. Messing up and then trying to use that as an opportunity to introduce someone to their shitty economy.
 
Last edited:
Can't really dig deeper because we don't have any numbers. The dude in the video also offers zero information and is instead just repeating what everyone with a bit of common sense knows, namely that Halo's performance is below Microsoft's expectations. Pelta88 Pelta88 thought that zero information is good enough to make a new concern thread though :messenger_beaming:
Using your own logic here bare with me.

If we have no real numbers; how can gamepass be a massive success as you posted about 5 posts earlier...

Until we get how much MS is spending on putting non first party games and running costs of all first party studies and publishers to how much the service brings in monthly/annually we won't know will we. Revenue is meaningless without knowing the cost.

Even Phil hasn't claimed it's a massive success and we all know he loves hyping shit.

I do love your absolute takes said with conviction without ever any facts to back then up.
 

Jimmy_liv

Member
Agreed. "Wait 'till next E3 (or next year)" has been a thing since, what, 2015? 7 years and still no delivery. In MS's defense, though, they have spent billions to acquire companies that have done what they couldn't (create good new IPs). The exclusives will start to get delivered next year, for real this time. Or perhaps the following year, lol. But the trajectory is up, finally.

Yes, it's being done by throwing billions of dollars at the problem rather than building the culture internally. That's not ideal, but when you're MS, you can afford to just buy companies up. But, at least the exclusive games should be arriving in the next couple of years. I have to give them a sort of halfhearted credit for that.
So its next year....or maybe the year after.....or if they can rebooting their games such as Everwild and Perfect Dark then maybe it will be the year after that. Xbox has struggled with games since the glorious 360 days and thats a damned shame.

Please release some AAA exclusives MS!
 

Hari Seldon

Member
The battlepass is full of annoying challenges designed to make people buy challenge swaps. It's not hard to see.
Just play the game and don't buy the battlepass? What is with kids these days and having to unlock shit in their FPSs. Just play the fucking game. If you want an RPG play an RPG.
 
I'm going to sound like a raging boomer here, but I'm only 37. I think the problem is they made a game that has no clear audience. My friends and I played Halo religiously in high school, in the multiple tv LAN tournament days. We followed the series for years and got to be pretty fucking good at Halo 1-3, even 4 and 5.

20 years of muscle memory was thrown out the window with Infinite. We're all working professionals and most of us have kids and aren't interested in all the superfluous garbage they've shoehorned into the gameplay. I'm not interested in grappling hooks and jetpacks and wall running and dancing. I want to play Halo, not another fast paced zoomer shooter with people spazzing out in every direction.

Playing Halo 2 remastered on Zanzibar is as good as we'll get I suppose. I haven't checked in awhile, but have they added hookshots and Marvel superhero powers to Counterstrike, or can the OG's still enjoy it?
 

Certinty

Member
Halo 4 was shit but fair enough it was 343’s first Halo game as the lead devs.

Halo 5 was a bit better but that’s hardly saying much. How Microsoft didn’t move the Halo franchise on from 343 after that is laughable.

I won’t even get started on Infinite, not a bad game by any means but hardly anything above good.

Quite sad to see what such a great franchise has become to be honest.
 

Reallink

Member
Most of the devs are temps. A lot of them are contractors even. Way, way cheaper than full time employees.

Btw, if RDR2, with its 2000 devs is between $300-500m, how is Halo with 800 devs at $500m too? A more realistic estimate would be around $150-200m. Of course, still a shitload of money, but far away from the debunked $500m rumor.
A mostly blind estimate cause we have no idea what portions or what percentage of Rockstar worked on RDR2, or for how long. Unlike 343, where we can reasonably assume they had all hands on deck considering they've released nothing else (Creative Assembly made the bulk of Halo Wars), nor are rumored to have been working on anything else. If Rockstar had anywhere near 2000 people working on it for years on end it would absolutely be well over half a billion...which they're willing to pay (same with GTA) cause they make every penny of it back within 5 minutes of posting the first preorder link. Also temps and contractors are not typically designated as employees, they're independent or employees of the labor firm that shops them out. Which brings up another good point and significant cost you're not accounting for. The 20 minutes of scrolling Chinese and Korean names in AAA credits are the asset farms that make a huge majority of the models, textures, etc...
 
Last edited:

Crew511A

Member
Just play the game and don't buy the battlepass? What is with kids these days and having to unlock shit in their FPSs. Just play the fucking game. If you want an RPG play an RPG.

Because when you release a game so devoid of content, players need some reason to keep coming back. Like it or not, people are used to having progression systems. It keeps the game interesting, especially when you get tired of the paltry number of maps the game has.

It's amusing watching people white knight for 343. Everyone knows the deal with F2P games by now. There's a trade off. Fine. But 343 clearly hasn't upheld their end of the bargain, and they should be held accountable for it.
 

Crew511A

Member
Halo 4 was shit but fair enough it was 343’s first Halo game as the lead devs.

Halo 5 was a bit better but that’s hardly saying much. How Microsoft didn’t move the Halo franchise on from 343 after that is laughable.

I won’t even get started on Infinite, not a bad game by any means but hardly anything above good.

Quite sad to see what such a great franchise has become to be honest.

In fairness, I think Halo 5's MP was pretty enjoyable. I liked Warzone and Warzone FF. Where I run out of patience is that all the mistakes 343 made with Halo 5, they made with Infinite, but worse.

I get that split screen is dead, but they KNEW people were going to be upset about not having Forge shortly after launch. We've been through this before. What exactly were they doing in that 6 year gap?
 
In fairness, I think Halo 5's MP was pretty enjoyable. I liked Warzone and Warzone FF. Where I run out of patience is that all the mistakes 343 made with Halo 5, they made with Infinite, but worse.

I get that split screen is dead, but they KNEW people were going to be upset about not having Forge shortly after launch. We've been through this before. What exactly were they doing in that 6 year gap?
Bonnie Ross.
 

FireFly

Member
Because when you release a game so devoid of content, players need some reason to keep coming back. Like it or not, people are used to having progression systems. It keeps the game interesting, especially when you get tired of the paltry number of maps the game has.

It's amusing watching people white knight for 343. Everyone knows the deal with F2P games by now. There's a trade off. Fine. But 343 clearly hasn't upheld their end of the bargain, and they should be held accountable for it.
I recall 343 saying they are going to be improving the challenges to make them things you would get when playing the game normally. Also moving to the match XP system should make them much less important.
 

deathsaber

Member
I think Halo MP just isn't all that relevant anymore. It was the king of console online MP shooters in the early 2000's until CoD:4 modern warfare changed everything. And then hero shooters like Overwatch, followed by the Battle Royal revolution that PUBG/Fortnite introduced, changed things further (which Activision/CoD wisely jumped aboard pretty quickly, and now has a very lucrative evergreen product in that space that runs concurrent to the annual console releases)..

Even amongst MS's own ecosystem, the Gears series wound up eating Halo's lunch and is more compelling to gamers in its traditional "meat and potatoes" online MP shooter space- its just a more visceral, violent and entertaining experience vs. Halo's faceless and generic spaceman shenanigans.
 
Phil Spencer back in 2011

"If we lose our way we Halo we lose our way with XBOX."

Should I put this in the OP?

Xbox as a brand is doing considerably better than last generation. If MS can get some regular updates for Infinite the game would be in good shape. Forge and Co-op were late but looking at what is coming in Forge it's hard to argue that all is lost.



We'll see how season 3 looks in March.

And yet that wasn't the budget.
People don't have to be honest when they make statements especially if there is a narrative they want to maintain.
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member

Xbox as a brand is doing considerably better than last generation. If MS can get some regular updates for Infinite the game would be in good shape. Forge and Co-op were late but looking at what is coming in Forge it's hard to argue that all is lost.



We'll see how season 3 looks in March.

Is this a, "wait for™ season 3"?
 

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
Or a combination of both....at the end of the day, it's all about profit for these corps.
Truth This Is True GIF by Ford
 

Humdinger

Member
So its next year....or maybe the year after.....or if they can rebooting their games such as Everwild and Perfect Dark then maybe it will be the year after that. Xbox has struggled with games since the glorious 360 days and thats a damned shame.

Please release some AAA exclusives MS!

Yeah, I remember the last half of the 360's lifecycle being pretty sparse, too. Most of the focus shifted to Kinect. That's when I lost interest in the platform and jumped to PS3. 2009, 2010 or so.

The only game that stood out to me from their 2023 lineup was Starfield. Tastes differ, of course, so there may be other big new IPs in 2023 that I didn't notice. In 2024, hopefully Fable and the new Obsidian RPG. I'm expecting 2024 to be a good year for them. We shall see...
 

Kvally

Banned
Other than the bullet sponge bosses that could leap across the room and kill you with one hammer swipe, I agree.
Get good? I was able to handle them without a problem. Granted, it might have taken me two or three times, but the patterns were easy to figure out.
 

Godot25

Banned
Ehh. You don't say.

In "normal" environment 343 would be preparing 4th season that would start in november. That's 4 season for 10 bucks each = 40$.
Currently they delayed 3rd season and they released just two. That's 2 seasons for 10 bucks each = 20$.
 

Shut0wen

Member
At the end of the day Halo Infinite was a failed experiment for game pass. How can we monetise a game we have to put on gamepass because we made it? The answer is not very well at all.
How was it an experiment? The online is free for everyone and the campaign is on gamepass, i mean they honestly believed they could make a shit ton more money by making the online f2p with cosmetics but literally failed to add main content such as maps, a f2p experiment yes but i cant see how its an experiment for gamepass when the campaigns on there lmao
 

STARSBarry

Gold Member
How was it an experiment? The online is free for everyone and the campaign is on gamepass, i mean they honestly believed they could make a shit ton more money by making the online f2p with cosmetics but literally failed to add main content such as maps, a f2p experiment yes but i cant see how its an experiment for gamepass when the campaigns on there lmao

You literally just described the experiment, no other game pass game works like that. Because they made Halo they have to put it on gamepass as a first party game, however they wanted more money so they experimented with calling the multiplayer (which has been included in every game so far) as being free and heavily monetised.

It's exactly like when they wanted PC gamers to pay for online gaming after the success of Xbox gold so sacrificed Halo 2's PC multiplayer for the sake of that. Don't pay for xbox gold, can't play Halo 2 on PC because errrrr.... match making is expensive, they use big names for this.

If it was a success every single first party multiplayer would be made free and MTX'd into the ground, and only the single player included on gamepass.
 
Last edited:

Shut0wen

Member
Thing is 343 is actually capable of making halo, infintes gameplay is miles better then halo 4 and 5s which was abysmal, biggest problem within 343 is leadership, right now they have jason staten but for how long? Consent change of leadership hit infintes campaign really hard, doesnt know if it wants to be destiny or far cry and someone needs to remove frank o connor as well because he has no idea how to create a decent story for halo, to invested in shitty characters no one cares about
 

Pelta88

Member
How was it an experiment? The online is free for everyone and the campaign is on gamepass, i mean they honestly believed they could make a shit ton more money by making the online f2p with cosmetics but literally failed to add main content such as maps, a f2p experiment yes but i cant see how its an experiment for gamepass when the campaigns on there lmao

Erm

Taking XB's marquee and most important AAA game, which used to be sold for $60 a pop, and releasing it on a service... Where despite having over 20 million players the game failed to recoup it's costs and meet financial expectation/projections.

I'd say that's the very definition of a failed experiment.

 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
Erm

Taking XB's marquee and most important AAA game, which used to be sold for $60 a pop, and releasing it on a service... Where despite having over 20 million players the game failed to recoup it's costs and meet financial expectation/projections.

I'd say that's the very definition of a failed experiment.


Something is fucking wild where even having 20 million players can result in a game failing.

if RDR2, with its 2000 devs is between $300-500m, how is Halo with 800 devs at $500m too? A more realistic estimate would be around $150-200m. Of course, still a shitload of money

yea I don't think any of that matters btw, RDR2 also actually sold 45 million units.

They sold more units, then players for free for Halo...for FREE. Its a flop regardless of how you look at it, so good thing SOLD their game for what they believed it was worth vs this whole f2p, gamepass sub type thing as this game failing might open the door to many realizing how much flops can come from putting their big AAA titles on this thing.

You get use to people not paying for games, what do you expect is really going to happen? 20 million players not enough to save something like this, I believe this model has more issues then many care to admit. Whats even more fucking wild, is if they are even at 25 million for gamepass, this is basically saying almost every single last member of gamepass could be playing that game and the game can still fail.

Can't say I'm surprised. We all had questions of how exactly this thing was suppose to make money.

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
Something is fucking wild where even having 20 million players can result in a game failing.



yea I don't think any of that matters btw, RDR2 also actually sold 45 million units.

They sold more units, then players for free for Halo...for FREE. Its a flop regardless of how you look at it, so good thing SOLD their game for what they believed it was worth vs this whole f2p, gamepass sub type thing as this game failing might open the door to many realizing how much flops can come from putting their big AAA titles on this thing.

You get use to people not paying for games, what do you expect is really going to happen? 20 million players not enough to save something like this, I believe this model has more issues then many care to admit. Whats even more fucking wild, is if they are even at 25 million for gamepass, this is basically saying almost every single last member of gamepass could be playing that game and the game can still fail.

Can't say I'm surprised. We all had questions of how exactly this thing was suppose to make money.

giphy.gif
You are prematurely creaming your pants, warrior. Gamepass is the way forward, better accept it sooner rather than later :messenger_smiling_with_eyes:
 

EDMIX

Member
You are prematurely creaming your pants, warrior. Gamepass is the way forward, better accept it sooner rather than later :messenger_smiling_with_eyes:

Cope Bernd. Dark times ahead. If 20 million players isn't enough and can flop a game, I don't see how this will get better, if a flop has already occurred. Thats like me telling you, you are "creaming your pants for BF2042, BF2042 IS THE WAY FORWARD" A flop is the way forward? smh.

Some times you have to just accept an L man, I get you love the game and nothing wrong with that, but many of us had logical, rational questions of how this was going to work if people just avoid paying for something to just opt to get it thru that service, if 20 million isn't enough, its literally starting to sound like this thing needs to have ever major AAA game hit fucking fortnite numbers to break even.

Good luck with that silly logic man lol

FLTYc2FaUAAPzHp.jpg
 
Cope Bernd. Dark times ahead. If 20 million players isn't enough and can flop a game, I don't see how this will get better, if a flop has already occurred. Thats like me telling you, you are "creaming your pants for BF2042, BF2042 IS THE WAY FORWARD" A flop is the way forward? smh.

Some times you have to just accept an L man, I get you love the game and nothing wrong with that, but many of us had logical, rational questions of how this was going to work if people just avoid paying for something to just opt to get it thru that service, if 20 million isn't enough, its literally starting to sound like this thing needs to have ever major AAA game hit fucking fortnite numbers to break even.

Good luck with that silly logic man lol

FLTYc2FaUAAPzHp.jpg
Do you know how much money Halo has made, or how much money it will make in the future (directly or indirectly)? Of course you don't, yet you call the game a flop. Then you move on to claiming that Gamepass doesn't work because one game that was supposed to be an online service failed to produce content on time. Both things have nothing to do with each other, but you still use it to shit on Gamepass.

I know this thread has been a bit of a trollfest for blue socked individuals, but at least try to come up with some decent arguments :messenger_beaming:
 

MHubert

Member
Do you know how much money Halo has made, or how much money it will make in the future (directly or indirectly)? Of course you don't, yet you call the game a flop. Then you move on to claiming that Gamepass doesn't work because one game that was supposed to be an online service failed to produce content on time. Both things have nothing to do with each other, but you still use it to shit on Gamepass.

I know this thread has been a bit of a trollfest for blue socked individuals, but at least try to come up with some decent arguments :messenger_beaming:
The only reasonable answer to that presently is: clearly not enough - and these numbers would probably be the same regardless of the quality of the single player campaign.

You have to acknowledge that there are people who have been sceptics about a day one streaming service for games from the start, blue socks or not. I mean, look at what it does to the movie industry. MS has yet to prove that this business model can make sense without being designed around microtransactions, and HI not being profitable confirms a lot the common criticisms.
 
The only reasonable answer to that presently is: clearly not enough - and these numbers would probably be the same regardless of the quality of the single player campaign.
And the reason is that, so far, 343 has failed to provide a proper service. Has nothing to do with Gamepass.
You have to acknowledge that there are people who have been sceptics about a day one streaming service for games from the start, blue socks or not. I mean, look at what it does to the movie industry. MS has yet to prove that this business model can make sense without being designed around microtransactions, and HI not being profitable confirms a lot the common criticisms.
Again, Halo (allegedly) not being profitable has nothing to do with Gamepass. It's not like the game would've sold ten million copies at full price without Gamepass.
 
The problem I have with GP figures is that I'm not sure where the PR and actual data stops. Microsoft refuses even when asked in previous earnings calls to clarify the following.

1. Does the announced numbers include concurrent or anyone who has used the service since it's introduction
2. Does the numbers include all promo and £1/$1 and confectionary/food giveaways

Without clarification, GP's actual numbers could be a significant reason why Halo hasn't been able to recoup, even with "20 million" players.

MS knows what the numbers are regarding GP and with that information are spending $billions to feed the service more content. That should tell you everything you want to know about the indicators MS is looking at.
MS maybe, but you never know what kind of manager/ director is cooking those to make sure they get their bonus.
 

MHubert

Member
And the reason is that, so far, 343 has failed to provide a proper service. Has nothing to do with Gamepass.
Again, Halo (allegedly) not being profitable has nothing to do with Gamepass. It's not like the game would've sold ten million copies at full price without Gamepass.
It only has nothing to do with gamepass because GP wasn't supossed to bring in the money - that's the whole point.
Yes who knows what it might have sold.
 

Kvally

Banned
The only reasonable answer to that presently is: clearly not enough - and these numbers would probably be the same regardless of the quality of the single player campaign.

You have to acknowledge that there are people who have been sceptics about a day one streaming service for games from the start, blue socks or not. I mean, look at what it does to the movie industry. MS has yet to prove that this business model can make sense without being designed around microtransactions, and HI not being profitable confirms a lot the common criticisms.
Why are you so concerned with how much money Microsoft makes? Also, when did MS state that Halo wasn't profitable? And whether it was or wasn't does mean anything to us.
 

Crew511A

Member
Get good? I was able to handle them without a problem. Granted, it might have taken me two or three times, but the patterns were easy to figure out.

I did beat them, but bullet sponge bosses are just lazy. It seems like the elite boss fights were ok, but the brute fights were uninteresting. Just my take.
 

GloveSlap

Member
Mistakes abound, but they really should have had a battle royale mode in addition to death match. But instead they launch with no BR and no......slayer. Bravo.
 

MHubert

Member
Why are you so concerned with how much money Microsoft makes?
I am not, but the gamepass business model intrigues me since it could potentially alter the way games are made in the future, like we see in the movie industry. If such a model only makes financial sense by relying on microtransactions, I will vote for another future with my wallet elsewhere.
Also, when did MS state that Halo wasn't profitable? And whether it was or wasn't does mean anything to us.
They haven't, and the never will, but I'm sure MS wouldn't restructure a studio that produce profitable products. It means something to 'us' because the way we spend our money today will dictate what kind of games we will get down the line.
 
Last edited:

Shut0wen

Member
Erm

Taking XB's marquee and most important AAA game, which used to be sold for $60 a pop, and releasing it on a service... Where despite having over 20 million players the game failed to recoup it's costs and meet financial expectation/projections.

I'd say that's the very definition of a failed experiment.

[/URL]

You literally just described the experiment, no other game pass game works like that. Because they made Halo they have to put it on gamepass as a first party game, however they wanted more money so they experimented with calling the multiplayer (which has been included in every game so far) as being free and heavily monetised.

It's exactly like when they wanted PC gamers to pay for online gaming after the success of Xbox gold so sacrificed Halo 2's PC multiplayer for the sake of that. Don't pay for xbox gold, can't play Halo 2 on PC because errrrr.... match making is expensive, they use big names for this.

If it was a success every single first party multiplayer would be made free and MTX'd into the ground, and only the single player included on gamepass.
But they did, destiny 2 was literally on gamepass for afew months, worked exactly the same way, MS fucked up thinking theyd make money with it going f2p, nothing to do with gamepass but because they wanted to support the game for up to 10 years
 

NeroDaGod

Member
Curious to see if all the other games they’ve acquired will be considered profitable or not as well. Interesting times ahead that’s for sure.
 
Top Bottom