Indeed

So in this hypothetical scenario, how many hours would it take you to get to hero rank, since it's not a skill based progression: It's Exp based progression? And say you translated that many hours into a pay, let's say $15/hr. How much would it cost to obtain "Master Chiefs Armor Kit", and is it worth this price if it was available in the shop?

In Halo 3 it was the default armour.

That's not even a win

Kind of like what was done during Halo 3 and Halo 4. However, the problematic aspect of this is that these maps are still, unironically, community maps. So it'll have a high quit rate (almost guaranteed looking at the current data), and very much so chug on the game consoles or most PC's.

​@anonymous7564 and he said that nobody complains about too many maps. I hate that theres so many. Im already bad enough at a game that doesn't feel (or really even LOOK) like halo...

Just one item and for max rank only is pretty weak imo

​@@FANTAVISIONthe game is free so lol yeah

Say if you got paid $15/hr. How much money would you receive in the same amount of time to obtain this armor? Is this worth this amount?

if you only 1 of 20 right now. yes. you will be recogniced in every game@@anonymous7564

@@anonymous7564 I've spent my money way worse lol plus you don't have to get anything if you don't want to lol lol

You get one thing :/

@@FANTAVISIONyou actually get more than just Chief’s armour. There’s a few extra coatings & emblems along with it. Chiefs armour is also customisable with coatings, visors etc

You get that after 250+ hours. Or, if you got paid $15/hr (Let's just use this as an example), it'll earn you $2500. Is Master Chief Armor worth $2500?

@@thedoncjg6263 Much the same: Is this justified for the amount of time spent doing such a grind-fest of a task? I'd proclaim having a classic Halo 2 and Halo 3 level ranking system, based on win/loss and not exp, is more sufficient of a progression solution rather than a pseudo 2009 cod prestige without weapons as prizes solution. I'd argue a lot of the reasoning behind why it's dull and otherwise stupid to even consider doing is due to where it stems from in the first place: Halo Content Creators. How often will you see a MintBlitz video, verses play Halo Infinite? Consider 343 effectively paid him, and a few dozen others, in "Master Chief Armor", and locked it behind the "Several hundred hours" barrier for you to be required to hit. What sounds more like a chore: 1) Playing 60 games to get into Onyx rank (Where a player may belong) and unlock Master Chief Armor within 100 games by simply winning? 2) Playing 4,000+ games to receive 90,000 kills, and after that 250+ hours mark, unlock the same armor piece? I'd argue #1. Which the only reason the "halo community" doesn't want it, is because they never liked Halo or were even mediocre at Halo. They simply were incapable of getting past something like Level 20 in Halo 3 (Much like Infinite, a game that is pretty easy to get into at least 40s, or Diamond.) Additionally, if #1 still sounds "out of reach" alternatively allow the armor to be purchased for $20 without the option of changing colors (the kit). And already right there, you fixed two categorically horrible problems that the Halo Community glosses over.

True but one unlockable and only for max rank is pretty sad lol

@@FANTAVISION Plus it's hundreds of hours of your time to receive such an arbitrary reward. Consider that if you were paid $15/hr for that time, is it worth that amount of money? The answer is no. And that's a bare minimum amount.

Indeed! Have ads dropped yet?

You should like the multiplayer of Halo Infinite then, as you're the target audience for the Battle Pass, Events, and even Firefight. These are core components of "lore" rather than "multiplayer". The ironic part is how backwards 343 got it due to the Halo Community convincing them that multiplayer fans love lore, party social games and rpg elements. Back in the original era, the "multiplayer' of Halo was hyper competitive since it only provided reward when skill rank was applied. Halo Infinite does not do this, even in an era where it's so incredibly standard to do this...because Halo created this standard in 2004.

indeed!

This video is only about the multiplayer. Any Halo campaign past Reach isn't worth playing.

@@FANTAVISIONI disagree- I think halo 4’s campaign is overhated, I find myself enjoying it with replays. Infinite is not the best, but it’s its bad per se, just empty and kinda boring at times.

@@BObbert179 Halo 4's campaign is hated because it's a collection of fanfiction from books rather than the actual games lore. A large reasoning to why people "like" Halo 4 is because it respected Halo Waypoint's views on what Halo was, rather than the players of Halo. But if you go back to 2012, the majority of people hated both the campaign and multiplayer of Halo 4 (along with Halo Reach btw) because it took an otherwise complete story, threw it away, and created an entirely new lore for the universe that otherwise never was required to exist. However, the argument against this was "the books", and that's an argument that should be used for the TV Series, as well -- but it's not. Because, and I cannot make this one anymore clear, Halo Reach & Halo 4 (just like infinite currently) was created for the "niche book-lore fans" rather than the typical players of CE, 2 and 3. Infinite is perfect if you read the books and played Halo Wars 2. If you didn't, then the campaign is otherwise boring and character assassination's. Because they made Halo Infinite's story for the "Halo Community", not the "Halo Player". Much like how Halo Infinite was changed to be "for the community" and not "for the player", which is why most people are only playing HCS within Halo Infinite: Because it's just remotely at least closer to Halo 3 than anything else that exists in the game. Even with the new Bandit Evo.

Tú nombre es Alastor mejor no opiniones, tienes el nombre de un femboy de una serie cringe 💀💀💀

@@gizmo366 my name comes from the Poem "Alastor; or, the Spirit of Solitude" by Percy Shelley. I find it funny how many people keep telling me it's from this weird ass generation Z show, as if it was the first use of the name "Alastor". Shows how uncultured you are, swine.

Agreed!

LOL

What's wrong with campaign?

I have everything

Agreed! The variety of maps makes it way more replayable

The forge maps made a major difference, they have an 85% quit rate. For the ranked arena maps, this surprisingly has a 10% quit rate. Which is lower than Halo 5 lol.

Halo Infinite has one of the best battle passes

@@FANTAVISION The best bucket of snot is still a bucket of snot. I no longer buy into subscriptions where the only reward is cosmetics. Fomo also works backwards on me. Once I have "missed out" I lose all interest. I quit destiny 2 after the first time I didn't complete a battle pass. (The second one I purchased) I have already missed out on previous battle passes in Halo infinite. My largest grievance is that armor colors are locked behind battle passes. Since I have already missed out on those armor colors I am not inclined to start purchasing battle passes now. I'm glad you get infinite time to complete the passes in Halo Infinite. However I have already missed purchasing them in the first place so I have already "missed out". Once I have missed out on their stuff the company has missed out on any further business from me. This is why FFXIV earned my subscription. If I think an armor set that released several expansions ago looks cool I can look up exactly where to go and/or what to do to get it. I miss shooters sometimes but the second I hear battle pass I groan and say never mind.

We also need to pickup the actual point to what can fix this: Removing it from importance and setting it as a "arbitrary exp system". Alternatively, they could tie it into your "CSR" (Skill Rank), and thus make it coined much like Halo 3. Where your attributed "skill" can only provide you the ability to progress up this ladder, and not winning in Ranked playlists can indefinitely level-lock your "exp career rank", and thus promote healthy, fair, fun competition rather than "Boring, pointless, useless time spent". A resolution to this would simply be to remove "placement" matches from ranked, remove 80% of the "social" playlists, putting them as "Ranked" and providing the same Ranked parameters the Ranked Arena has. Why do I say this? 75% of returning and concurrent players only play Ranked Arena and now the Ranked Slayer playlist that has the same settings as Ranked Arena. This is imperative: Halo's entire core identity before 2010 was based on this very same merit: Your competitive play typically was the standard play, and the "non competitive play" was usually not in matchmaking. In addition - Yes Halo 2 and Halo 3 had "SMG or AR Starts with Radar", however the times have changed for most FPS titles. Their esport is the core of the gameplay, and Halo shouldn't be any different. For those who may say "I can't spent 400 hours of my life every day playing this", well good news: No one is required to do that in Valorant, Counterstrike, APEX, OW2, R6, etc. Why is this an actual requirement only Halo must abide by, rather than acknowledging that no other game has this definitive requirement: And you'll quickly find that the people who say this, don't even like those games. They prefer, and I quote: Single Play Third Person Adventure Games over FPS. Which brings us to an interesting little segway I like to call: "People who think Halo is a casual non-competitive shooter never played Halo and only heard it from a source on youtube, rather than playing the original games back when they were played". This is also why Season 4 and 5 had almost no one playing the "new additions" but they did play, and I specifically quote here, "Ranked Slayer & Ranked Arena" (As these two have been infamously three times or higher in player count than every other playlist). Getting back to the point: There needs to be at least 12 ranked playlists, where your "Skill Rank" now acts as a direct "Skill Progression", just like Halo 2 and Halo 3, and then if exp progression must still exist, it should be tied directly to your skill rank, thus permitting replay value to the game in the core function of the gameplay. And, ergo: The game will rise to the challenge and remain steadily growing with players, rather than "Catching the few thousand who think infection or firefight was fun until they remember it's not and they're bored and want something to spice it up".

This 100% Also does mean that the "Battle Pass" remains the same design, except replace the reward with actual wanted items: Such as weapon coatings & weapon attachments (such as charms). It's no secret, the Battle Pass rarely sells. This is why they are experimenting with new methods of the Battle Pass. The reason why it doesn't sell shouldn't be a shocker: Most players do not care about the lore, nor "armor customization" of Halo. This is literally a niche. The ones who claim "it's not" simply have a vocal minority on KZfaq and Reddit who do not play FPS games: They play RPG games. It's no secret that is hard to unravel: You only need to look at why they have such low prices in the store. Which comes back to the final point: At one point, I recall people claiming that "Halo Infinite store prices were insane" whilst disregarding other stores. A full on massive customization option was $15 in Halo Infinite, whilst a simple weapon skin is $70 on Valorant or CSGO. It defines more so the arbitrary reasoning behind "Why would anyone pay for this" verses "This is so expensive". The notion of "armor" in Halo shouldn't really have been a focus, ever. It failed in 2010, 2012, and especially 2015. I'd argue 2015's Halo 5 was the exact repercussion to why armor is such a hefty focus, despite the reasoning behind the armor "not being a focus" in Halo 5 was solely to the crowd who cared about independent armor customization being such a small niche. 343 use to be very analytical based, and it seems with Halo Infinite: They're responsively impulse based. They drop everything to work on the next "outrage", which lead us to Season 5: One major point Season 5 brings with it is specifically a second Ranked Slayer playlist, but this time with precision weapon starts and no radar. Something people asked for since November 2021, they finally provided it. If you look at the analytics, it's why 75% of players gravitated toward only the ranked offerings, with less than 2% floating toward the "new forge ai content". Larger creators mocked the "Master Chief as reward for thousands of games and tens of thousands of kills", whilst many didn't even realize that's a reward....let alone that the new options exist, because "Forge" and "AI" along with "Custom games" were never really why people played Halo from 2004+. They played Halo for matchmaking, and the "Halo Dance". Something you get with the BR, and even more with the new Bandit Evo. And is immediately lost with Radar because it categorically makes people play more campy and "crouch" verses simply "Playing the game".

Challenges. This is something I think got worse, not better lol. Rewarding existing is a bit of a misstep. I believe the actual issue with the Battle Pass is literally that it caters to an audience of people that were incapable of playing any FPS already, let alone capable of playing Halo. Effectively, at 4:11, "Getting 15 kills with an AR", is entirely meaningless when you're in a social playlist wherein you spawn with an AR. Not only does it entirely negate the point of "pickups" (and your map weapons being more powerful, specifically power weapons), it directly impacts gameplay overall. It makes people aware of how busted the AR actually is, and how entirely broken it is to play against. A proper resolution to keep challenges is to remove specified requirements, and up the amount of kills. "Get 50 kills, expires in 7 days". For example. This directly then allows all playlists to be considered "progression the battle pass". Additionally, there needs to be one objective per player to receive. This objective must be universal for all gametypes. For example: "Get at least 5 objective primary points". That being flag caps, hill captures, stronghold secures, or extraction points. This can go on. The problems outside of this with the Battle Pass is the content. People do not care about the lore of Halo, let alone the arbitrary requirement of in-game cosplay as a unique spartan. This was never an appeal to Halo before 2010, and to assume 2010 - 2015 would "change this" is entirely astonishing: Since it was the most hated function of Reach & 4 during the time of each's conception. The "misdirect" is believing people view it as fun. They don't lol. it's a misconception. And I understand the whole "Well you don't but others may", but data shows almost no one changes their armor after they changed it the first time. It's almost entirely pointless. Resolving this side of the Battle Pass is so incredibly simple: Let the others exist still in past battle passes, new battle passes receive weapon coatings & attachments. Boom. And like that, the battle pass is now a generic FPS battle pass, and thus will be purchased, accurately, more than HCS skins (Which is currently outpacing it by a hefty margin, and did in year 0 and 1, too).

4:16 These are still highly specific challenges. In order for 75% of the population to receive this, they would be required to find the AR and use it, or play the playlists that have it as default. Entirely removing the weapon from the challenge permits "any weapon applies". Thus, you can get 50 kills with the hammer, or (dare I say), 50 kills with the Bandit Evo. And it'll apply.

There's loads of other FPS's to play; Most are not CoD or BF. These two entries died decades ago, and CoD primarily adapted the classic Halo "comp Halo" design, whilst BF simply never had players on it since late 2000's (Yes, 2000's. Every BF that released post 360 has bombed lol). This is also why "Warzone" is a Battle Royale, and a competitive one at that, whilst entries that are non-competitive, like Destiny 2, are geared more toward an "RPG" crowd. FPS entries are typically highly competitive and highly geared toward a larger player base. Counterstrike 2, Valorant, APEX, R6, OW2 to name a few larger ones. With OW2 still being "low player count" it's at least double Halo Infinite's peak since July 2022. Additionally, there's Battle Royale focused genres, like Fortnite and Warzone: Both cater to a causal competitive crowd -- which not only exists, it's what Halo's "Ranked" gameplay before 2010 catered to originally. This determines that there is minimal information to the player, the players decisions & skill, along with team capability, are what provide the victory, and the win determines a progression, whilst losing does not (and in terms of Halo 2 and Halo 3, losing means you lose progress/derank). An entire missing category of Halo Infinite is the Halo elements of the series; Particularly it's highly competitive tropes; Lack of Career stats page, lack of win/loss ratio, lack of k/d/a ratio, lack of viewing the overall stats for other players, lack of selecting a rival to beat in stats, lack of basic foundational competitive integrity. Hell, even lack of a functioning anticheat in 2023 lol. The problems that persist in Halo Infinite's desync have never been addressed, and many of that can be mitigated by region locking: Which 343 does not due to the sheer lack of players in outside NA regions. To simply put: The problems with Halo Infinite are all due to competitive performance as a basic FPS, verses "useless functional checklist content that almost no one, less than 2%, touches". You have "forgers" making thousands of things with less than 100 downloads on a typical basis. You have people getting paid to hype up Forge Battle Royales that are poorly received. You have people hyping up horrible fan remakes of maps and 343 even adding them into matchmaking, in playlists that end up never getting played and have an outstanding quit rate to where it's a guarantee each match will end in bots. See, the problems that persist with Halo Infinite can be solved if Halo Infinite's developers over at 343 Industries simply stopped listening to goal post changes and scapegoats for "what Halo Infinite can do to become popular", and start reflecting on data & the past. Data shows the Esport for Halo Infinite (and Halo's MLG scene since 2002) had been always the most categorically favored part of the series, and by far: The most played and consistently wanted since it's conception. Hell, there's a reason it was on USA TV and ESPN a decade before the term "Esports" was coined. The problem is that the "community" of a few thousand fans, who have larger youtube channels that receive hundreds of thousands, to millions of views, outshine the vast majority for some reason. 343 simply ignoring the Halo Community for an entire year, will save the game much like it did with Halo 5, which only saw a resurgence after 343 stopped trying to make everything "Warzone focused" because Waypoint believed Halo 5 Warzone would "bring in casuals" (It didn't, people hated pvpve in Halo).

They're community maps. So if I had to be entirely honest with you, they're likely "factored in", but they're probably so abysmal that it'll make you question why someone would do this -- and probably blame 343 instead of the community member. 343 would have had better luck, again, doing it themselves in forge rather than "paying community members loads of money to do it" (Which they did, ever wonder why the community is so vocal on youtube but people hate forge maps in halo infinite as much as they do? 85% quit rates on Forge maps, for example lol).

You're actually the core focal audience for such elements as the "party social games", the "battle pass" along with "events". Most of the multiplayer in Halo Infinite is geared toward those who love the lore and books of the series, rather than those who played multiplayer Halo games.

@@anonymous7564 👍

So Halo died in 2004?

To put this into perspective: Halo 2 and Halo 3 had a far more intense and methodical, and primary subset of playlists, all geared toward skill rank association. This was then removed in 2010; All over 12+ playlists, that were all ranked, were removed in 2010 - 2015 for "social" queues to clone a Call of Duty "social games" approach. An approach that, upon Reach & 4, would tank the population of Halo and continues to do so. Halo 2 created the first "Skill" matchmaking with elo, and Halo 3 transformed that elo into mixing it's design with exp, and locking that exp behind skill rank, which was labeled as 'true skill'. Halo 2 & Halo 3 were games, at it's multiplayer standpoint, designed to provide progression only when you win, and match you only against people within a 13% factor of your skill. In terms of 1-50, this is "If I'm a 20, I can only match 16 - 24". In terms of Halo Infinite, that's "If I'm a Diamond 3, I can only match Diamond 1 - Diamond 5". This existed in both "unranked" (then later coined "social" for Xbox 360) and all Ranked playlists. Social of 2 and 3 took a combined average of your rank, whilst each ranked playlists had it's own skill progression tree. If you were a 50, for example, in 8 out of the 11 ranked playlists in Halo 3, you were going to likely match 50's in social. The difference, however, is that "social" was 5v5 and on less serious maps. You didn't play Heretic of The Pit. You played High Ground and Isolation lol. (I'm aware of MLG Isolation V1 settings). To take this a step further: All progression rewards were locked to winning and seemingly were locked to being better than opponents. You could not win anything from simply playing social, you were required to play ranked in this period of time. There was no "General Grade 3" if you didn't get a 50 in one of the numerous skill rank playlists with heavy sbmm, for example. Comparatively, you may be thinking about Call of Duty. In this era, Cod didn't have sbmm. It's skill-matchmaking was based on win engagement and win percentage, much like Halo Infinite's from launch. Moreover, this meant that a "good player" in cod would pair against bad players concurrently, and allow themselves to sort of pub stomp. Halo 2 created the first skill ranked progression, skill matchmaking solution, and halo even coined the matchmaking solution of 'true skill'. So unless you mean "Halo died in 2004", you're sorely mistaken here. And most of those who played multiplayer back in this era, didn't even play the campaign. Halo was the first game to implement any of these back in 2004, almost a decade before even counterstrike had the same solution, let alone 7 years before starcraft 2 and league of legends.

How come?

@@FANTAVISION The answer from this player will be: "Because it's too competitive and not enough vehicles". A quick search shows they play primarily War Thunder. However, the real answer is because there's almost no competitive locations within Halo Infinite that were standard in Halo 2 and Halo 3, let alone the previous entry: Halo 5. Halo was highly competitive. The misdirect is the 15% of unique players who think it was "never" (Because they didn't play halo 2 or 3 matchmaking, they started with reach & 4). Consider that Halo 2 and Halo 3 had upwards of 12+ (more) ranked playlists, wherein the player only received progression for winning, and the moment they lost, they received regression (derank). This solution was the 1-50 "ranking" system, which before 2010 -- was the only form of competitive matchmaking that even existed, and it was the primary subset of Halo and what provided 85% of Halo Players before 2010 (metric found on Bungie's website before them cleaning, you can use wayback machine & Google) the ability to play Halo the way they liked: With various options of (Ranked, because it's Halo and only had ranked) "Matchmaking Playlists". Moreover, the major addition they actually added to the overwhelming majority of players was Ranked Slayer, which featured no radar & precision weapon starts: Something that was asked for in November 2021 by hundreds of thousands (or millions) of players across multiple platforms: 343 finally added it, 2 years later, and did not advertise it. They also hid it below numerous "social" and "community" playlists, both of which were never a thing within Halo. The way Halo can actually make a comeback is by 343 understanding that the Halo Community only speaks for a very, very small portion of people who will play Halo. The "target audience" of the Halo Community is usually not even interested in multiplayer Halo, but particularly campaign and lore, along with "cosplaying as a Spartan in the Halo Universe" over playing Halo Infinite's multiplayer. So as described in various other ways how to save Halo Infinite: 1) - Consolidate "social" queues to only 4 - 6 (max w/ rotationals) social playlists, just like Halo 2 or Halo 3. 2) - Make 12+ Ranked Permanent playlists, removing "MMR" and having zero placement matches, starting every player from 0 and providing this as the new "major" Progression Solution. 3) - Tie the "Exp progression" into this, and permit that, just like Halo 3, you were required to play ranked playlists in order to progress your Exp Progression. Thus, permitting that the "reward" for going up in Exp was also linked to getting better at the game. Small rewards are important, however the important goal is to *not* permit "time spent in game rewards" This system is predatory based on your time spent, and thus is considered "bad" typically. 4) - All Ranked Playlists, where applicable, must remain the same meta as Ranked Arena. Yes, "Esports" will then control the rest of the playlists. Why? Because this is Halo, this isn't Fall Guys. Halo Esports typically is conservative: They "Always try to go back to classic Halo as much as humanly possible" and 343 tries to mix things up with that formula. Simply put, this is exactly what every other playlists needs. No one enjoys "holding the right trigger / mouse to get kills with hefty aim assisted weapons". 5) - Battle Pass must no longer have armor, and going forward should only have weapon coatings & attachments. Progressing the Battle Pass should be "general", thus permitting every playlist can progress it, requiring some to play "Objective" playlists as well. We should never be required to use one singular weapon in Halo, let alone permit that weapon to be the starting weapon, a pickup, or power weapon. 6) The Primary Battle Pass should be geared more toward "Ranked" play, permitting that "social" should only have a unique "community/event/operations" battle pass that rewards armor. 7) Every three Seasons comes with brand new all ranked meta changes. Requiring entirely new "Gameplay" function from the game. This should be: January - October all with the same meta, and then after Halo World Championship every year, the meta shifts. 8) If a Battle Royale does occur, much like Clan Matches, FFA, Doubles, Snipers, Head to Head, swat, etc; This needs to be a unique ranked playlists (Yes, ranked), and needs to permit competitive integrity with unique tournament settings applied. This definitively means, yes, our "battle royale" will be like every other battle royale: Competitive focused. Finally: 9) Remove "community" and replace with "social" from nomenclature. 343 pays community members for existing, whom then destroys the reputation of Halo further and further segregates the players from the community, and pushes the overwhelming majority of people to hate 343 directly for this, rather than simply acknowledging that they "truly believed" the community spoke for most players. The "community" speaks for about 10 - 15% of players on a typical basis, smaller or larger scale. Making a game centered to 10 - 15% of players, and even lower percentage as forge (2%) and party games (1%) definitively destroys the capability of people playing Halo as an FPS, and thus permits people who play primarily Jack Box to play Halo. Since this isn't an actual audience, Halo remains buried underneath the dirt. The FPS community has a whole thinks Overwatch 2 is dead, yet it has over 100k consistent players. Halo Infinite's Season 5 saw a peak of 60k. Consider that 40,000 -50,000 of those players only stayed within Ranked Arena & Ranked Slayer (Which was only one minor change to this update) and you'll quickly notice the discrepancies. Firefight launches, no change in player count. People will "hate it" because it's not "exactly what they envisioned" (Aka, they never realized how boring it actually is), and then the community will blame "the pros" and "competitive focus" instead of acknowledging that people simply dislike casual and party Halo.

Correct. Say, hypothetically, you worked the exact same amount of hours it takes you to unlock Master Chief's armor. How much money would you have? Now ask yourself: Is it worth that amount of money if it was put into the store? And the answer is no lol. Because they added that for the "Halo Content Creator", not for the Halo Player. This is ironically exactly a "chore" rather than an alternative, which would be level lock your exp progression to your skill rank (CSR) in order to provide reward incentive to play. One of these is a chore with barely any real reward worth the price, the other is an accomplishment with barely any hours put in, but one that requires and permits replay every single season.

@@anonymous7564 it took about 200 hours

@@YFTMz If you got paid $15/hr for 200 hours that'll amount to $3,000 USD before taxes. Would you pay $3,000 in the store for this? If the answer is no, do you see why this is actually not good? lol.

@@anonymous7564 +?

@@YFTMz If you got paid $7/hr, that would be $1400. Or if you got paid $1/hr that's $200. 200 hours in a month is roughly 28% of the time for an entire month. To put this into perspective, it takes a player roughly 30 games to get to Onyx if they rank Diamond 1 and win. That is roughly 6 hours. It takes 200 hours to get a reward that would take 6 hours typically by adding "skill" of winning into the metric. The funny part is the person who will argue against making a game like Halo 2 and Halo 3 again, that is a game wherein primary progression is skill of winning, it'll be argued as "i don't want the game to be a chore and I can't play 10 hours a day", whilst actually not understanding that in classic Halo and even in the modern system: It's not required to do that for skill ranking. It's only required to do that with Exp ranking, because Exp, or "total time played" is based on putting in a large quantity of hours; Skill is required on the permissible notion of improving based on trying. Or again, Halo 2 and Halo 3 (And even CE, since CE founded MLG).

Agreed, however, the people who launched the game in its middling state are gone.

Getting rid of those potatoes who were badly leading 343 Studios for over a decade was the best thing that ever happen to Halo. Things have changed for the better. Now, if we could only get a proper Halo TV show.

⁠@@FANTAVISIONso what? Now all of a sudden they should be forgiven? The shame 343 put the halo name through in the last few years is not just something to sweep under the rug. Them fixing their game is not something that should be praised or brought attention to, new people or not, because they doesn’t deserve it.

@@teamtrpt8216I’ve definitely not swept it under the rug, and I’ve made plenty of videos about what they’ve done wrong. However, just as they deserved the bashing for the wrongs, they deserve credit for when they do something right.

Nah man stop this mentality of “it shouldn’t have launched like this” We get it - it shouldn’t have. But should the game be condemned to be whack forever because of it? NO. The game is actually in a good place , stop being negative for the sake of it smh

That's a bit dramatic don't you think?

Halo didn't die with Bungie, but Bungie was the last developer to make competitive Halo games, being that Halo Reach was created by most of the same team as Halo 4. Which is why both have perks, loadouts, and unique art styles away from the classics...with unique stories and both remove chief from center stage.

Cringe 💀💀💀 mejor vete jugar destiny 2

@@FANTAVISION I don't think so. It seems like Microsoft cares less and less about quality since the Xbox one. Except forza

​@@FANTAVISIONit's insanely dramatic lmao

It already has, the ironic part is how much the Halo Community denies it lol.

"no weapons other than bandit and bandit with scope" ? What do you mean? There's at least three times the sandbox elements in Halo Infinite's maps than Halo CE, 2 and 3 on traditional basis. SBMM is part of Halo, the problem is the lack of SBMM within Halo Infinite unless you hit Onyx 1600. The "skill" based matchmaking of Halo Infinite focuses on winrate rather than a simple "match based on the same level". Correctly speaking, Halo Infinite "Social" also has zero SBMM parameters, and only certain playlists have Team Balancing applied. This determines that only two playlists (Ranked Arena & Ranked Slayer) even use MMR, and it is only "Skill Based" after Onyx 1600, not before Onyx 1600.

@@anonymous7564 bro half of the weapons from all previous halo games are missing.. carbine, smg, laser, beam rifle, brute shot, saw, on and on.. yeah matching in general seems broken..

@@user-ht5zs1dx3q So your belief is that those weapons are missing and thus there is only "one weapon"? Or is it that those weapons are missing and they should "also" be added? I do believe a large quantitively reasoning to why 343 removed those, from the first place, is because the "Halo Community" (Not the competitive one, the one that thinks Halo was never a competitive game) believed those weapons were "underpowered, unbalanced, and need buffs". 343, by their nature, then made "new versions of the same weapons" in the design philosophy of "Sandbox shooter" rather than Halo's intentional game: Halo. Matchmaking is broken mostly because 343 listened to "community" feedback before release that determined originally "Halo would be more fun if they were to win more" and then post release "Halo would be more fun if I am getting loads of multikills, even if I lose". CSR Matchmaking only exists post 1600 because Snip3down complained. If, by chance, all of the pro players made noise (and did it loud), Infinite would actually be closer to Halo 3 than it is Halo 4.

@@user-ht5zs1dx3q Let's also break down what each of those weapons intended role was. Carbine: This was your "descope" weapon. It was designed to push players out of scope. The "Bandit" was designed as a replacement for this, which lead to a lot of problems with aim assist in Infinite (As 343 kept bumping it up instead of lowering it), which lead to the Bandit Evo being born. SMG: Designed as a "noob friendly" melee weapon. Yes, melee lol. Just like the AR, this was designed for close-quarters combat. In Halo 2, this was intended as a "duel wield" weapon, which would improve ttk but will sacrifice close-quarter combat and limit the amount of kills you can receive in succession due to slow reload and total amount of bullets in clip to kill. Beam: This was an alternative snipe that provided more aim assist. Brute shot: This was a 'pickup to drop shield weapon'. Although it worked to kill, it was actually not as often since there wasn't as many bullets. Much like the shotgun in H2, this was designed more toward "shoot + melee" rather than "shoot". This would be considered a "noob" weapon, as it was designed to help novices achieve a faster ttk without actually aiming good. Saw: This was an overpowered AR that had an even longer range than the already insane range of the H4 (then H5) AR. Infinite's AR is already a "Saw", in that it has a faster TTK (1.15s) and a long distance range -- but without a scope. Additionally, the Commando acts as a pure replacement while requiring precision to shoot, reforming the "Saw" from "automatic kill" to "You have to at least aim it and know how to fire it to achieve fast ttk". Effectively, the Commando is a Halo CE, 2 and 3 principle design balance of the Saw. Meanwhile, in ce, 2 and 3, Halo's sandbox was geared toward accuracy verses assistance. The faster the time to kill, the lower assistance you had. Additionally, the more assistance you had, the less range would occur, and the more it was geared toward "close quarter".

@@user-ht5zs1dx3q With how Halo Infinite's "social casual party" as a focus; thus trying to turn it into a "party sandbox shooter"... and make each weapon balanced at an "overpowered" design philosophy than intended. Such weapons as the Brute Shot will end up 1-shotting opponents, and the Beam will be like the Nornfang. The Saw will be a starting weapon and have more aim assist, and weapons like the "laser" will not come close to destroying vehicles. The SMG will be an overpowered aim assist canon like the AR, and most players will hate that it is added. Alternatively, if they put each back in their respective roles, the Halo Community will claim that it's "unbalanced and heavily geared toward precision weapons" instead of acknowledging that Halo is, in fact, a precision weapon centric game when you're capable of shooting with thumb sticks.

Damn bro, you out here acting like Halo Infinite is the only game with microtransactions. I agree the prices for the stuff in the shop is ridiculous, but they are also industry standard at this point. That doesn't make them any better, but I do what I do with all other free-to-play games, ignore the shop. Insulting people for their opinion sure isn't going to change anyone's mind btw. And no, this isn't sponsored, I'm just a fan of Halo and would like to see it make a comeback.

Shut up n go play spider bug 2 lol lol all the other Halo games are trash compared to infinite lol lol none of your old Halo games can do what Halo infinite does

Ranked Arena and Slayer, I'd say yes currently. The moment 343 pushes back and puts radar and AR back in Slayer, much like they added the mangler and hammer to it, the more it'll push people away from that playlist and then the games population will, again, plummet. Halo was one of the absolute dumbest ideas for a party social casual game post cod "casual fps game" boom. But Halo's competitive design pre 2010 was what made it shine out beyond call of duty's attempted rise before it.