{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
11/2/2010 6:13:21 PM
281
Halo Reach's population, declining
Anyone notice this?
I mean really come on.....
Okay yes Reach had big sells and all that but just look at the amount of online player playing at a given time. The most goes up to around 250K at a time. Halo 3 still held up around that same amount around 1.5 years after its release. Reach is barely sustaining this when it has been out for not long at all.
Like this morning only like 60K players were playing. That's terrible for such a new game. Halo 3 like a couple weeks before Reach's release was still able to sustain that amount of players in the morning like 2 years after its own release.
The point I am getting across is, I just don't see Reach lasting as long as Halo 3 did with a decent population playing. Because the numbers will still go down even more when BlackOps releases. You may think it won't because not many people here on the forums will play it, but forum users don't represent that big of an amount of players. So alot, will be leaving for BlackOps and other games releasing.
So honestly, I find Reach a disappointment compared to the other Halo games and I think it shows by its population now to what even Halo 3 was at this time after its own release.
That is all.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] A 3 Legged Goat [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ubercow92 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] A 3 Legged Goat He implied it is because it's "way more popular" than Halo 3. My argument is it's more popular because it's more accessible and more people have Xbox's. [/quote] he didnt actually say that made it better. and yes, while he may think it is better, that is just an opinion. as is yours. but saying "its more popular so it is better" is a little more grounded that "it sucks because i think so"[/quote] I can agree with that. If I ever say "it sucks because I think so" in a thread or reply, then I was likely not paying attention to the way I worded it. Otherwise, most of what I post is an opinion shared by people who are good at the game (which I am not). I'm merely just posting that. Most of those players don't like Arena, and I was just posting that to counter Urk. [/quote] actually, read Corrin_Avatan's post a bit up the page. that more or less sums up its low player count. ranked actually had casuals play it alot. in arena, they dont. do you think players like me who played ranked but not arena are put off because it isnt competitive? surely if it was less competitive, i would like it?
-
[quote]Posted by: urk So, in summary: Reach is currently way more popular than Halo 3 is and remains more popular than Halo 3 was [b]this many days after its release date.[/b][/quote] [quote]Posted by: MightAsWellBeGod I am trying to compare Reach right now, to what Halo was at this time in it's own release.[/quote] [quote]Posted by: MightAsWellBeGod *facepalm*[/quote] [Edited on 11.02.2010 1:01 PM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] freefall722 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] A 3 Legged Goat I was comparing the Ranked playlists in Halo 3 to The Arena. All the competitive, skilled players are disappointed in The Arena, yet nothing is being done about it. It's still a casual playlist--even with the updates. Bungie doesn't seem to understand that. The game has a high population not only because more people have 360s, but because it's incredibly easy. [/quote] Your also comparing 5+ playlists in Halo 3 to the 2 that are in Reach. A lot of people don't play Arena for this reason. Include the populations from swat and snipers (previously ranked only playlists) and the competitive population in Reach is still rather high. Your generic statement that Reach is easier (less competitive) by looking at Arena's offerings isn't really accurate. I will agree however that Arena needs to be beefed up.[/quote] Reach being easy was the argument I used to say why it has a high population. Easy is not a good word though, so if I used that I meant to say "accessible". It's more available to players who haven't played Halo before. There are more training wheels and it's more forgiving.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Corrin_Avatan Arena now, as I see it, is dedicated JUST to people who care about playing competitively: You have prove yourself every single month. This turns off the "casual players" that are in the playlist, which the Halo 3 system didn't discourage. [/quote] Nope. Ask any competitive player and they say it sucks because it does. Take a look at the optimatch forum, obvious how the competitive community hates it.[/quote]Even the competitive community is split on this, just look at the MLG forums where you have a wide variety of opinions. It just goes to show that some people only want to play competitive if the game fits their personal taste, which is understandable but that doesn't imply that the game is not competitive.
-
People have school and jobs to go to. Or for unemployed people like myself, New Vegas.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ubercow92 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Corrin_Avatan Arena now, as I see it, is dedicated JUST to people who care about playing competitively: You have prove yourself every single month. This turns off the "casual players" that are in the playlist, which the Halo 3 system didn't discourage. [/quote] Nope. Ask any competitive player and they say it sucks because it does. Take a look at the optimatch forum, obvious how the competitive community hates it.[/quote] and look at this forum, its obvious everyone hates it! oh wait, the million odd players daily disagree. wow, maybe forums DONT represent the whle population, since people who like something dont go on about it as much as those who hate it![/quote] This forum is full of retards who don't understand why it doesn't work.
-
You can find pretty regular (almost daily) halo 3 stats online if you know where to look. I posted em earlier in this thread, in fact.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] AEon Xao [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] urk [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod *facepalm* Not even the employee sees what I am saying. I am trying to compare Reach right now, to what Halo was at this time in it's own release. [/quote] Hits 88mph! Gotta go back in time! [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod Halo 3 like a couple weeks before Reach's release was still able to sustain that amount of players in the morning like 2 years after its own release. ... Reach is barely sustaining this when it has been out for not long at all.[/quote] You were very clearly stating that Halo: Reach was having more difficulty sustaining its online population compared to Halo 3. I'm very clearly stating that your assumption is false. Day and date, Reach is outperforming Halo 3's population significantly.[/quote] I remember seeing 75k(roughly) in social slayer alone, all day every day. So you're trying to tell us that the counter was wrong then and it was still Id per 24 hour period? Even a year/two ago? I think you're either lying or being fed straight from the propaganda mother ship. Either way, you're not going to change many people's mind who were active in Halo 3 and saw drasticly high numbers before hand. Very convenient for it to come out just now that that's the way the stats work. But if you're brave enough and have truthful records for dates 2 months after Halo 3's release and Reaches, post them in a weekly update. Do the same monthly. for a year. Of course, you're not going to post on the main page that Reach is not operating at optimal numbers, or even admit it in the forums. So we know that whatever you post is going to be suspect, as you're not a neutral party.[/quote] Translation: I don't care what you say I'm going to whine anyway.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad Let me explain: You don't know what you are talking about. Numbers go down for every game. They did for Halo 3...in fact, they dropped MORE with Halo 3 than they did with Reach. Here's some interesting statistics I gathered last week: Stats from October 29th, 2007 for Halo 3: Halo 3 Players Online:266,303 Unique Players (Last 24 Hours):1,100,559 Matches Logged (Last 24 Hours):2,468,887 States from October 29th, 2010 for Halo Reach: Total Players Online (24h):1,247,992 Total Games Played (24h):2,978,564 [url=http://web.archive.org/web/20071029213530/http://www.bungie.net/]Halo 3 source[/url] Reach is doing well. The fact that only 60k people were playing on a damned Tuesday morning isn't at all surprising. It's TUESDAY MORNING. I play Reach a quite a bit. Never on Tuesday morning though. Check stats for ANY game on a Tuesday morning. If you can find one, other than MAYBE WoW, that does significantly better than 60k players, I'll buy you a coke.[/quote] October 29th 2007 was a Tuesday, now where's your excuse for Halo: Reach's 60,000 on Tuesday? HMM?? AND it's election day today, most businesses and schools were off today for it. [Edited on 11.02.2010 12:58 PM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Corrin_Avatan Arena now, as I see it, is dedicated JUST to people who care about playing competitively: You have prove yourself every single month. This turns off the "casual players" that are in the playlist, which the Halo 3 system didn't discourage. [/quote] Nope. Ask any competitive player and they say it sucks because it does. Take a look at the optimatch forum, obvious how the competitive community hates it.[/quote] and look at this forum, its obvious everyone hates it! oh wait, the million odd players daily disagree. wow, maybe forums DONT represent the whle population, since people who like something dont go on about it as much as those who hate it!
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ubercow92 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] A 3 Legged Goat He implied it is because it's "way more popular" than Halo 3. My argument is it's more popular because it's more accessible and more people have Xbox's. [/quote] he didnt actually say that made it better. and yes, while he may think it is better, that is just an opinion. as is yours. but saying "its more popular so it is better" is a little more grounded that "it sucks because i think so"[/quote] I can agree with that. If I ever say "it sucks because I think so" in a thread or reply, then I was likely not paying attention to the way I worded it. Otherwise, most of what I post is an opinion shared by people who are good at the game (which I am not). I'm merely just posting that. Most of those players don't like Arena, and I was just posting that to counter Urk.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] A 3 Legged Goat I was comparing the Ranked playlists in Halo 3 to The Arena. All the competitive, skilled players are disappointed in The Arena, yet nothing is being done about it. It's still a casual playlist--even with the updates. Bungie doesn't seem to understand that. The game has a high population not only because more people have 360s, but because it's incredibly easy. [/quote] Your also comparing 5+ playlists in Halo 3 to the 2 that are in Reach. A lot of people don't play Arena for this reason. Include the populations from swat and snipers (previously ranked only playlists) and the competitive population in Reach is still rather high. Your generic statement that Reach is easier (less competitive) by looking at Arena's offerings isn't really accurate. I will agree however that Arena needs to be beefed up.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sicfuc yea lets compare a game like h3 wich was when not many people had a 360 yet in 2007 numbers to reach where twice as many have a 360. the numbers mean crap though because reachs population will be cut in half nov 9th mark my words. you will see only 100,000 on at nights during peak hours.[/quote] You know what? If that happens, I'll buy you a coke. You and 100 other haters will run off to BO, where you will promptly jump on their forums and cry every second that you aren't playing the damned game. The rest of the Reach community will quietly move along without you.[/quote] Oh I cant wait, They will be on the Black Ops forums crying about how such and such Perk is way OPed, and how such and such mode sucks, and how such and such Killstreak reward is Blah blah blah blah!!! and how there should be Zero glitches and lag issues, and it will go on and on and on.. Some of them will even tell the CoD devs that they will go back to Reach if they do not fix such and such issue... But lets hope they stay playing Black Ops..
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] urk [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod *facepalm* Not even the employee sees what I am saying. I am trying to compare Reach right now, to what Halo was at this time in it's own release. [/quote] Hits 88mph! Gotta go back in time! [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod Halo 3 like a couple weeks before Reach's release was still able to sustain that amount of players in the morning like 2 years after its own release. ... Reach is barely sustaining this when it has been out for not long at all.[/quote] You were very clearly stating that Halo: Reach was having more difficulty sustaining its online population compared to Halo 3. I'm very clearly stating that your assumption is false. Day and date, Reach is outperforming Halo 3's population significantly.[/quote] I remember seeing 75k(roughly) in social slayer alone, all day every day. So you're trying to tell us that the counter was wrong then and it was still Id per 24 hour period? Even a year/two ago? I think you're either lying or being fed straight from the propaganda mother ship. Either way, you're not going to change many people's mind who were active in Halo 3 and saw drasticly high numbers before hand. Very convenient for it to come out just now that that's the way the stats work. But if you're brave enough and have truthful records for dates 2 months after Halo 3's release and Reaches, post them in a weekly update. Do the same monthly. for a year. Of course, you're not going to post on the main page that Reach is not operating at optimal numbers, or even admit it in the forums. So we know that whatever you post is going to be suspect, as you're not a neutral party.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Corrin_Avatan Arena now, as I see it, is dedicated JUST to people who care about playing competitively: You have prove yourself every single month. This turns off the "casual players" that are in the playlist, which the Halo 3 system didn't discourage. [/quote] Nope. Ask any competitive player and they say it sucks because it does. Take a look at the optimatch forum, obvious how the competitive community hates it.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] A 3 Legged Goat He implied it is because it's "way more popular" than Halo 3. My argument is it's more popular because it's more accessible and more people have Xbox's. [/quote] he didnt actually say that made it better. and yes, while he may think it is better, that is just an opinion. as is yours. but saying "its more popular so it is better" is a little more grounded that "it sucks because i think so"
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sicfuc [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DoctaJoE Oh look, another moron posting on Bungie.Net. There were WAY less 360 owners at the time Halo 3 came out compared to Reach. That is the only reason Reach sold marginally better.[/quote] But you can't back that up for crap. I don't doubt that moar people own tree sitties these days. And I don't doubt that many people who would have bought Halo 3 right out the shoot had to wait until Christmas when they got their brand new exbawks. But you can't back up anything you're saying unless you compare more numbers. You are blindly grasping at what may or may not be a relevant detail. What's more: You're basing an assumption that people thought Reach would suck, so they didn't buy it (you're claiming that more people SHOULD have bought it, but didn't..at least, that's what you're inferring). Everyone was in love with Reach for a full two weeks into the release. It was only after that did the haters come out of the woodwork...just like they did with H3. I don't have a problem with linking a few semi-related stats together, but you'd better be able to back it up, or at least try to make some reasonable point with it. You do neither.[/quote] get off bungies D for one min and just acecpt that reachs numbers are horrible for the last halo.[/quote]We will as soon as you stop riding the hater's bandwagon
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sicfuc get off bungies D for one min and just acecpt that reachs numbers are horrible for the last halo.[/quote] That's the thing: THEY AREN'T. I've shown that several times in this thread, and urk confirmed what the stats I dug up showed.. Read and be enlightened.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] A 3 Legged Goat [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ubercow92 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] A 3 Legged Goat [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] urk The numbers you're using are not comparable. Halo 3 is displaying its total player count over the last 24 hours. Halo: Reach is displaying how many players are online [i]right now.[/i] Halo: Reach has way more active players and the attrition rate is much, much lower than it was for Halo 3. So, in summary: Reach is currently way more popular than Halo 3 is and remains more popular than Halo 3 was this many days after its release date. Yay, science! :D[/quote] That's only because more people have Xboxs and Reach is a more casual game, thus appealing to a wider demographic of players. The "ranked" replacement "Arena" is seeing far less players than the ranked in Halo 3 was. Let's face the facts--there is no competitive outlet in Reach at all. [/quote] so it having a higher playercount is proof it is failing? thats funny, because i am sure if it had a lower one you would say thats is because it is failing[/quote] I was comparing the Ranked playlists in Halo 3 to The Arena. All the competitive, skilled players are disappointed in The Arena, yet nothing is being done about it. It's still a casual playlist--even with the updates. Bungie doesn't seem to understand that. The game has a high population not only because more people have 360s, but because it's incredibly easy. [/quote]Um, actually, your argument is fail, Goat. You're saying "Because all the ranked playlists in Halo 3 had higher numbers than Arena does now, the game is fail." Yet, let's look at this: Ranked Playlists in Halo 3: Lone Wolves Team Slayer Team Swat Team Doubles Team Snipers MLG MLG FFA Now, I never played any of these playlists "competitively", but I played in them. The only reason I played in the "Social" playlists was when I needed to allow someone else to play with me who didn't have a gamertag. Honestly, lots of people played in those playlists who weren't playing "competitively", or, on the other hand, were actually playing to get their numbers up. Arena now, as I see it, is dedicated JUST to people who care about playing competitively: You have prove yourself every single month. This turns off the "casual players" that are in the playlist, which the Halo 3 system didn't discourage.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad Needed: Linky to where I can see the stats, address to where I can send your coke.[/quote] What a standup guy
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sicfuc yea lets compare a game like h3 wich was when not many people had a 360 yet in 2007 numbers to reach where twice as many have a 360. the numbers mean crap though because reachs population will be cut in half nov 9th mark my words. you will see only 100,000 on at nights during peak hours.[/quote] You know what? If that happens, I'll buy you a coke. You and 100 other haters will run off to BO, where you will promptly jump on their forums and cry every second that you aren't playing the damned game. The rest of the Reach community will quietly move along without you.[/quote] ^Implying that the forums comprise of the majority of Reach's population.[/quote] Actually, I'm implying that they [i]don't[/i].
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DoctaJoE Oh look, another moron posting on Bungie.Net. There were WAY less 360 owners at the time Halo 3 came out compared to Reach. That is the only reason Reach sold marginally better.[/quote] But you can't back that up for crap. I don't doubt that moar people own tree sitties these days. And I don't doubt that many people who would have bought Halo 3 right out the shoot had to wait until Christmas when they got their brand new exbawks. But you can't back up anything you're saying unless you compare more numbers. You are blindly grasping at what may or may not be a relevant detail. What's more: You're basing an assumption that people thought Reach would suck, so they didn't buy it (you're claiming that more people SHOULD have bought it, but didn't..at least, that's what you're inferring). Everyone was in love with Reach for a full two weeks into the release. It was only after that did the haters come out of the woodwork...just like they did with H3. I don't have a problem with linking a few semi-related stats together, but you'd better be able to back it up, or at least try to make some reasonable point with it. You do neither.[/quote] get off bungies D for one min and just acecpt that reachs numbers are horrible for the last halo.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] MightAsWellBeGod [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] S1LENT EARTH 3 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad Reach is doing well. The fact that only 60k people were playing on a damned Tuesday morning isn't at all surprising. It's TUESDAY MORNING. I play Reach a quite a bit. Never on Tuesday morning though. Check stats for ANY game on a Tuesday morning. If you can find one, other than MAYBE WoW, that does significantly better than 60k players, I'll buy you a coke.[/quote]reach isn't doing that well for a brand new game. MW2 is -blam!- on Reach's population with about 368,000 current players in playlists and MW2 is a year old. And this morning MW2 had 135,000 online in playlists. So can I get that coke? So ask yourself how is bungie going to keep its population when blackops comes out? Don't say map pack because that would be nowhere near blackops population two weeks after black ops comes out. If MW2 is beating the reach population how will reach do against all of the new titles that have come out or going to be released.[/quote] Well said.[/quote]What the hell does MW2 population have to do with Halo? Remember CoD4? Had more players than Halo 3 did every week with very few exceptions. Stick to Halo games here otherwise it will only get worse for you.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] S1LENT EARTH 3 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad Reach is doing well. The fact that only 60k people were playing on a damned Tuesday morning isn't at all surprising. It's TUESDAY MORNING. I play Reach a quite a bit. Never on Tuesday morning though. Check stats for ANY game on a Tuesday morning. If you can find one, other than MAYBE WoW, that does significantly better than 60k players, I'll buy you a coke.[/quote]reach isn't doing that well for a brand new game. MW2 is -blam!- on Reach's population with about 368,000 current players in playlists and MW2 is a year old. And this morning MW2 had 135,000 online in playlists. So can I get that coke? So ask yourself how is bungie going to keep its population when blackops comes out? Don't say map pack because that would be nowhere near blackops population two weeks after black ops comes out. If MW2 is beating the reach population how will reach do against all of the new titles that have come out or going to be released.[/quote] Needed: Linky to where I can see the stats, address to where I can send your coke.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DoctaJoE Oh look, another moron posting on Bungie.Net. There were WAY less 360 owners at the time Halo 3 came out compared to Reach. That is the only reason Reach sold marginally better.[/quote] But you can't back that up for crap. I don't doubt that moar people own tree sitties these days. And I don't doubt that many people who would have bought Halo 3 right out the shoot had to wait until Christmas when they got their brand new exbawks. But you can't back up anything you're saying unless you compare more numbers. You are blindly grasping at what may or may not be a relevant detail. What's more: You're basing an assumption that people thought Reach would suck, so they didn't buy it (you're claiming that more people SHOULD have bought it, but didn't..at least, that's what you're inferring). Everyone was in love with Reach for a full two weeks into the release. It was only after that did the haters come out of the woodwork...just like they did with H3. I don't have a problem with linking a few semi-related stats together, but you'd better be able to back it up, or at least try to make some reasonable point with it. You do neither.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] S1LENT EARTH 3 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Rugtoad Reach is doing well. The fact that only 60k people were playing on a damned Tuesday morning isn't at all surprising. It's TUESDAY MORNING. I play Reach a quite a bit. Never on Tuesday morning though. Check stats for ANY game on a Tuesday morning. If you can find one, other than MAYBE WoW, that does significantly better than 60k players, I'll buy you a coke.[/quote]reach isn't doing that well for a brand new game. MW2 is -blam!- on Reach's population with about 368,000 current players in playlists and MW2 is a year old. And this morning MW2 had 135,000 online in playlists. So can I get that coke? So ask yourself how is bungie going to keep its population when blackops comes out? Don't say map pack because that would be nowhere near blackops population two weeks after black ops comes out. If MW2 is beating the reach population how will reach do against all of the new titles that have come out or going to be released.[/quote] Well said.
