{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
5/28/2013 7:54:03 PM
13
Halo 4 is the worse of the two. The Xbox One can be released and be improved with software updates, good games, good experience (just like the 360 was over its lifetime) but Halo 4 is done. It can never be redone, it's just a pile of unchangeable shit.
At least the Xbox One still has potential.
English
-
Based on good sales and good population, Halo 4 was a success.
-
It barely sold more than reach even though the xbox population increases since the release of reach and it now has less than 40,000 people on on the weekends.
-
Through the entire day? No. At one time? Yes, just like every other Halo game.
-
The population isn't so good now.
-
Actually, it is.
-
If you say so. I don't think number 6 on the XBL charts is very good, nor do the playlist numbers appear all that impressive.
-
Number 6? As in 6 out of 200 (Or more.) games? That's pretty damn good. Also, Halo 4 record population different than past Halo games, but apparently, not only was 343 too foolish to say this, but everyone also takes Halo 4's real time population as if it were it's all day population.
-
Edited by Spartan Palmer: 5/28/2013 10:35:56 PMI would consider number six bad for a triple A title like Halo. Fifa 13 and modern warfare 3 and mine-craft are ahead of it. Pretty sad that a two year old game is ahead of it, considering the sequel to the two year old game already came out. E
-
Not really sad at all. People aren't like how they were in before '10. Again, it's still 6 out of like 200-300 games. The Call of Duty franchise is a juggernaut. By that logic, games like Gears and many other titles that came out this year and last year are sad.
-
Halo 4 is behind Minecraft. 6 out of nearly 200 is impressive at face value, but compared to where prior Halo games were in their prime, it is inadequate to say the least.
-
Can we skip to the part where somebody explains how population count has any bearing on a game's quality? Halo 2's multiplayer was absolutely rife with glitches, button combos and modders but it was the most played Xbox game even through 2006-7. This was because there were no other FPS games that were really competing with Halo at the time, after Halo 3 a wealth of new FPS games came out (most notably COD) which have ensnared the new generation of gamers. Why does Halo have to be top dog of XBL to be good? This is the vibe I'm getting whenever people use the population argument...
-
If it keeps slipping down, it just makes me question if it is good or not. I already don't think it is, you know that. Truthfully, I don't use the population argument all that much, I just don't buy that the population is all that good. You are correct, Halo 2 was the trendsetter, but Halo 3 did weather many new titles in its time. Reach and Halo 4 took huge hits. Some use the population arguments when talking about the quality of matches. If too many people leave, then you might have a vast gulf in skill and thus a vast difference in the quality of matches. I know TruSkill is in play, but sometimes I really wonder if the people I play against really should be the people I'm playing against.
-
The fact that Halo 4 is behind Minecraft it irrelevant. That game is very big. Also, due to Call of Duty, Fifa, Minecraft, and alot of other games being very big, of course that will have a great affect on how Halo 4's population does. Back then, when Halo 3 was out, not many other games were coming out as fast as they are now. Honestly, if 343 were to make Halo 5 a reskined Halo 3, it would do terribly. In this time, games gotta' make gamers wanna' play. It must be new, exciting, not repetitive, and fun.
