Quantcast
Sony is focusing on Hard-Core Gamers for PS5

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony is focusing on Hard-Core Gamers for PS5

Pemalite said:

/Sip

But you are right, franchise for franchise, Halo is still massive with still a big name in gaming... Let us see what Microsoft can do with Halo infinite. - Will it sell consoles like Halo 3? One thing is for sure... It's certainly going to be a very very pretty game.

^ Basically what I am trying to say. Halo Infinite has a lot to live up to and has a new fresh console with no negatives to drag it down in the dumps.. so far from what we know. No Halo game will match Halo 3's 12m, they are unrealistic expectations and just because a Halo game doesn't surpass or at least match Halo 3's numbers doesn't make the game fall in a decline state.

Halo 1: 5~ million copies.

Halo 2: 8.5 million copies.

Halo 3: 14.5~ million copies.

Halo Reach: 10~ million copies.

Halo 4: 10~ million copies.

Halo 5: 5~ million copies.

Just wanted to point out and fix that you have forgotten to add Reach. Both Halo 4 and Reach sold close to 10m copies each straight after each other. Halo 5 was the only drop from the main games. Which in its defence, was sold on a platform that was heavily criticized and had a lot of community hate where as the 360 was on the opposite side of criticism. Also regardless of Halo 5's flaws, master piece or not.. the game wouldn't have sold much different on the X1. The X1 was a troubled console at launch and Halo 5 felt it in sales but still managed to sell 5m copies. Like I mentioned before with Mario 3D World.. that was a decline from the Mario series only selling 5m, considering its predecessors in Galaxies 1 and 2 which sold 11m to 7m respectfully doesn't mean Mario was in decline, it was brought down by the WiiU which also suffered heavy criticism. We all know Mario isn't in decline as an IP even though its last 3 games were selling less and less. Odyssey fixed it on a successful platform. Halo would be in no different position to Mario 3D Land.

Halo Wars and Remasters are a different series and are a niche product so I don't count them being in the same conversation. Uncharted Lost Legacy sold 2.6m copies compared to Uncharted 4's 10.3m and Uncharted NDC only sold 5.7m copies. 

twintail said:

You're overselling the impact. I doubt we ever see the effects of this policy outside of games that actively serve to create titillation, which is a market that is most definitely niche. Of course, the odd bigger IP could appear. I won't deny that possibility.

DMC5 wasn't a product of the censorship policy (unless Capcom/ Sony state it was). The JPN version wasn't censored which makes little sense considering the other censored games were censored in Japan, and because the policy affects all regions. The JPN version wouldn't be exempt. 

So then we can expect you not to buy a PS5 because Sony will retain their censorship policy?

Personally I wouldn't buy a console to play censorship games when I can get the same games on a PC or other devices that offer the full experience. So it all depends on what Sony offers next gen in 1st party exclusives because other wise I might have the option of PSNow which might be soon to be availably world wide due to Sony's deal with Azure servers. That's a wait and see approach because right now if I can use PSNow to play PS5's 1st party line ups, I would have no other need to buy there actual platform for games if they might be butchered due to there new approach. Again its speculation on what Sony does with there new direction of censoring butts and boobs in there games etc.

Last edited by Azzanation - 5 days ago

Around the Network
Azzanation said:
twintail said:

You're overselling the impact. I doubt we ever see the effects of this policy outside of games that actively serve to create titillation, which is a market that is most definitely niche. Of course, the odd bigger IP could appear. I won't deny that possibility.

DMC5 wasn't a product of the censorship policy (unless Capcom/ Sony state it was). The JPN version wasn't censored which makes little sense considering the other censored games were censored in Japan, and because the policy affects all regions. The JPN version wouldn't be exempt. 

So then we can expect you not to buy a PS5 because Sony will retain their censorship policy?

Personally I wouldn't buy a console to play censorship games when I can get the same games on a PC or other devices that offer the full experience. So it all depends on what Sony offers next gen in 1st party exclusives because other wise I might have the option of PSNow which might be soon to be availably world wide due to Sony's deal with Azure servers. That's a wait and see approach because right now if I can use PSNow to play PS5's 1st party line ups, I would have no other need to buy there actual platform for games if they might be butchered due to there new approach. Again its speculation on what Sony does with there new direction of censoring butts and boobs in there games etc.

At the end of the day, there is no speculation. We know what it is Sony is censoring. There is no need for you to reduce underage sexualisation to just "butts and boobs" though. 

You shouldn't let fear of what if maybes be some guide for you. The amount of games we know that have been affected by the policies is incredibly slim. If it was such a huge problem we would have got even more reports by now, but talk has essentially died down on the issue. 

At the end of the day, Sony wont be targeting the niche hardcore you think they will, so no reason to think they will just escalate their censorship policy based on nothings. 

Of course I fully support your decision not to buy something based on company policies. But I do also think that Sony 1st party on PSNow day 1 is a pipedream for the foreseeable future. But you never know, I suppose.



Azzanation said:
Pemalite said:

/Sip

But you are right, franchise for franchise, Halo is still massive with still a big name in gaming... Let us see what Microsoft can do with Halo infinite. - Will it sell consoles like Halo 3? One thing is for sure... It's certainly going to be a very very pretty game.

^ Basically what I am trying to say. Halo Infinite has a lot to live up to and has a new fresh console with no negatives to drag it down in the dumps.. so far from what we know. No Halo game will match Halo 3's 12m, they are unrealistic expectations and just because a Halo game doesn't surpass or at least match Halo 3's numbers doesn't make the game fall in a decline state.

Halo 1: 5~ million copies.

Halo 2: 8.5 million copies.

Halo 3: 14.5~ million copies.

Halo Reach: 10~ million copies.

Halo 4: 10~ million copies.

Halo 5: 5~ million copies.

If a game sells 15 million and a successive game sells 5 million... Then factually and mathematically that is a decline... No two ways about it, you can't argue against plain black and white numbers.
The fact is, Halo has mathematically been in decline since we hit the heights of Halo 3.

That doesn't mean the games are bad, but there is certainly a sales decline... And that will have absolutely zero bearing on future game releases like Infinite either, they of course need to be judged on their own individual merits.

Azzanation said:

Just wanted to point out and fix that you have forgotten to add Reach. Both Halo 4 and Reach sold close to 10m copies each straight after each other. Halo 5 was the only drop from the main games. Which in its defence, was sold on a platform that was heavily criticized and had a lot of community hate where as the 360 was on the opposite side of criticism. Also regardless of Halo 5's flaws, master piece or not.. the game wouldn't have sold much different on the X1. The X1 was a troubled console at launch and Halo 5 felt it in sales but still managed to sell 5m copies. Like I mentioned before with Mario 3D World.. that was a decline from the Mario series only selling 5m, considering its predecessors in Galaxies 1 and 2 which sold 11m to 7m respectfully doesn't mean Mario was in decline, it was brought down by the WiiU which also suffered heavy criticism. We all know Mario isn't in decline as an IP even though its last 3 games were selling less and less. Odyssey fixed it on a successful platform. Halo would be in no different position to Mario 3D Land.

Halo Wars and Remasters are a different series and are a niche product so I don't count them being in the same conversation. Uncharted Lost Legacy sold 2.6m copies compared to Uncharted 4's 10.3m and Uncharted NDC only sold 5.7m copies. 

Still lower than the heights of Halo 3. And if you are going to include Reach we need to include every single other entry into the series as Reach is not regarded as a mainline title.

As for the Xbox One and Halo 5... Remember the Xbox One has sold more consoles than the original Xbox, Halo 2 has still outsold Halo 5. - That is a decline.

Halo 5 is far from a masterpiece though, it came with a plethora of well documented issues and shortcomings.

If you don't count Halo Wars and Remasters because they are a different series/niche product then you can't include Reach, otherwise that is double standards.



twintail said:

At the end of the day, there is no speculation. We know what it is Sony is censoring. There is no need for you to reduce underage sexualisation to just "butts and boobs" though. 

You shouldn't let fear of what if maybes be some guide for you. The amount of games we know that have been affected by the policies is incredibly slim. If it was such a huge problem we would have got even more reports by now, but talk has essentially died down on the issue. 

At the end of the day, Sony wont be targeting the niche hardcore you think they will, so no reason to think they will just escalate their censorship policy based on nothings. 

Of course I fully support your decision not to buy something based on company policies. But I do also think that Sony 1st party on PSNow day 1 is a pipedream for the foreseeable future. But you never know, I suppose.

These are the things I watch on a weekly basis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA9hLoX7ViY

So this isn't just coming from me. Its a worry but again maybe you are right and that the censorship isn't the same thing we are talking about.

Pemalite said:

If a game sells 15 million and a successive game sells 5 million... Then factually and mathematically that is a decline... No two ways about it, you can't argue against plain black and white numbers.
The fact is, Halo has mathematically been in decline since we hit the heights of Halo 3.

That doesn't mean the games are bad, but there is certainly a sales decline... And that will have absolutely zero bearing on future game releases like Infinite either, they of course need to be judged on their own individual merits.

Still lower than the heights of Halo 3. And if you are going to include Reach we need to include every single other entry into the series as Reach is not regarded as a mainline title.

As for the Xbox One and Halo 5... Remember the Xbox One has sold more consoles than the original Xbox, Halo 2 has still outsold Halo 5. - That is a decline.

Halo 5 is far from a masterpiece though, it came with a plethora of well documented issues and shortcomings.

If you don't count Halo Wars and Remasters because they are a different series/niche product then you can't include Reach, otherwise that is double standards.

Keep in mind a couple things here and that is Halo 5 is also a heavy digital game which would have reduced its own sale numbers (It still wouldn't have gotten any where near close to its predecessors.) Also from what the internet says is that Halo 5 was the biggest and fastest Halo launch ever.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2015/11/04/halo-5-was-the-biggest-launch-in-halo-history/#6c70c6ad9e74

So it might have died off a lot earlier than previous Halo games however it made more money/profits than any other Halo game and more money than any of Sony's 1st party game line up and to what the other Poster is saying that games like Horizon are bigger IPs etc makes me scratch my head. So anyone to say Halo is in decline yet the franchise continues to make more and more money is absurd. Halo is a lot bigger than just video games and it has a much bigger following today than it did before. Halo 5 just didn't have legs and that's because the game did have its fair share of flaws which I 100% agree with you.

Halo 4 made $220m in 24 hours and $300m in 1 week which was considered the biggest Halo launch at the time.

Halo 5 made $400m in its first week which eclipses Halo 4's record. Also at the time Halo 5 broke the Guinness Book of Records for Most-Watched video game. It was also the highest selling Digital game through the Xbox Store at launch week. I think too many are basing the IP's popularity and size off retail sales numbers and not just the entire IP itself. Yes I know its a sales site but to say Halo is in decline, I think money talks here not just retail sales. 

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/halo-5-made-400-million-in-the-first-week/864343eb-ac11-4d24-a465-8157104993ff/posts

Sure Halo 5 declines only in video game sales but as an IP and franchise, its as big as its ever been and one of the biggest in the industry and will see what Infinite offers. I am sure Infinite will be no exception to the rule.

Reach should definitely be included as it is a AAA Halo game and a pre-qual. Doesn't need a number to be counted. Reach is no different to any of the numbered mainline games. Reach is also considered by many as one of the best Halo games ever made and it didn't sell as much as Halo 3. But it doesn't have to. If you don't want to include Reach, than you might as well not include Infinite because there is no number.

Last edited by Azzanation - 5 days ago

twintail said:
Azzanation said:

It might hurt, maybe not at a major cost but will wait and see. PS4 didnt suffer from censorship because it became a thing closer to the end of its life. PS5 will be launching with censorship in mind and where it can possibly hurt them is if there competitors advertise there games as uncut versions etc. It also depends how far Sony goes with the censorship. If major AAA games get affected by it or if its just visual novels etc. But we have seen DMC5 get censored and it wasnt welcomed by the community.

Yes i will not by a platform if the games get censored if i can buy the same game somewhere else which offers the uncut version.

You're overselling the impact. I doubt we ever see the effects of this policy outside of games that actively serve to create titillation, which is a market that is most definitely niche. Of course, the odd bigger IP could appear. I won't deny that possibility.

DMC5 wasn't a product of the censorship policy (unless Capcom/ Sony state it was). The JPN version wasn't censored which makes little sense considering the other censored games were censored in Japan, and because the policy affects all regions. The JPN version wouldn't be exempt. 

So then we can expect you not to buy a PS5 because Sony will retain their censorship policy?

Eeeeerrrr he haven't bought a PS4 even before the censorship and with a lot of exclusives. Perhaps also didn't buy PS3 as well. So it isn't really censorship what prevents him from buying PS5.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
Azzanation said:

Keep in mind a couple things here and that is Halo 5 is also a heavy digital game which would have reduced its own sale numbers (It still wouldn't have gotten any where near close to its predecessors.) Also from what the internet says is that Halo 5 was the biggest and fastest Halo launch ever.

Great. It is good that you recognize that mathematically that Halo has been in a sales decline.
That doesn't mean Halo: Infinite will continue that trend, that title needs to be judged upon it's own merits.


Azzanation said:

So it might have died off a lot earlier than previous Halo games however it made more money/profits than any other Halo game and more money than any of Sony's 1st party game line up and to what the other Poster is saying that games like Horizon are bigger IPs etc makes me scratch my head. So anyone to say Halo is in decline yet the franchise continues to make more and more money is absurd. Halo is a lot bigger than just video games and it has a much bigger following today than it did before. Halo 5 just didn't have legs and that's because the game did have its fair share of flaws which I 100% agree with you.

I think Halo 4 dive bombed in population faster than Halo 5 though.
Either way... Sales to date, Halo 3 is the pinnacle of the franchise in terms of overall sales.

Games like Horizon and so on... On a franchise level are not as big as Halo, Halo has accumulated a ton more cash... And has allot more "loot" to go with it in general, not to mention has extended into lots of other media... And it simply has more entries.

Azzanation said:

Sure Halo 5 declines only in video game sales but as an IP and franchise, its as big as its ever been and one of the biggest in the industry and will see what Infinite offers. I am sure Infinite will be no exception to the rule.

The IP is still massive, there is no arguing about that. Microsoft's presentation at E3 emphasized that very fact... They have clearly sunk a shit ton of manpower/resources and cash into infinite, that wouldn't happen if the IP was small.

Azzanation said:

Reach should definitely be included as it is a AAA Halo game and a pre-qual. Doesn't need a number to be counted. Reach is no different to any of the numbered mainline games. Reach is also considered by many as one of the best Halo games ever made and it didn't sell as much as Halo 3. But it doesn't have to. If you don't want to include Reach, than you might as well not include Infinite because there is no number.

No. Reach shouldn't be included, it's not a numbered mainline entry.
It's a spin-off title that focused on only the events of Reach and not the chronicles of Master Chief's overall-arching story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_(franchise)#Spin-offs

Otherwise we should include: ODST... Otherwise it's goal post shifting in order to suit the argument to your own benefit, which is a logical fallacy.

As for Infinite, it should be the closing of the Reclaimer Saga. Aka. Halo 6. - If that changes, then yes, it should be excluded.



Pemalite said:

No. Reach shouldn't be included, it's not a numbered mainline entry.
It's a spin-off title that focused on only the events of Reach and not the chronicles of Master Chief's overall-arching story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_(franchise)#Spin-offs

Otherwise we should include: ODST... Otherwise it's goal post shifting in order to suit the argument to your own benefit, which is a logical fallacy.

As for Infinite, it should be the closing of the Reclaimer Saga. Aka. Halo 6. - If that changes, then yes, it should be excluded
.

I am very confused on why you wouldn't include Reach. Reach is part of the main games as its a prequel to Combat Evolve. Infinte isnt called Halo 6 and its a sequel to Halo 5.

I have no issue with including ODST into the debate however that was more an expansion pack to Halo 3 hence why its called Halo 3 ODST.

Reach has one of the biggest production values and is up there as one of the biggest in the series. Just because MS didnt slap a number on it doesnt mean its not mainline. Would you prefer if MS called it Halo 0? Either way its a mainline Halo game same as Infinite. 

Last edited by Azzanation - 4 days ago

Azzanation said:
twintail said:

At the end of the day, there is no speculation. We know what it is Sony is censoring. There is no need for you to reduce underage sexualisation to just "butts and boobs" though. 

You shouldn't let fear of what if maybes be some guide for you. The amount of games we know that have been affected by the policies is incredibly slim. If it was such a huge problem we would have got even more reports by now, but talk has essentially died down on the issue. 

At the end of the day, Sony wont be targeting the niche hardcore you think they will, so no reason to think they will just escalate their censorship policy based on nothings. 

Of course I fully support your decision not to buy something based on company policies. But I do also think that Sony 1st party on PSNow day 1 is a pipedream for the foreseeable future. But you never know, I suppose.

These are the things I watch on a weekly basis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA9hLoX7ViY

So this isn't just coming from me. Its a worry but again maybe you are right and that the censorship isn't the same thing we are talking about.

This is my first time checking out this channel and it comes across as disingenuous. I'm not sure what the rest of the videos are like but I feel as if this guy is cherry picking his info instead of looking at all of the facts.

1) He quotes Sony on their censorship stance as a whole. This is fine but what he quotes makes it seem as if Sony is censoring any game for whatever reason they see fit. We know this is not true. They are censoring sexual related scenes related to underage looking characters: it is a very specific thing which this youtuber chooses to ignore.

2) He states that Sony is only doing this to protect children and leave it at that, when Sony's official explanation goes further into other reasons. 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sony-cracks-down-on-sexually-explicit-content-in-games-11555427944

3) To support Nintendo, he uses Wolfenstein and Doom as examples: games that have zero connection to Sony's policies. He is trying to avoid what Sony is actually censoring, underage characters in sexual situations.

4) The site he uses as a source for censored games isn't even remotely accurate. Just one look through it and you would notice that. Some examples include:

Catherine wasn't censored by Sony. It wasn't even censored. it was adjusted to be more trans friendly. 

Yuno is censored only in the West, which is not the Sony policy (which affects all regions). It is censored on the Switch too. Funny how he chooses to ignore that.

He mentioned DMC  but as already discussed, it wasn't Sony policy since the JPN version was untouched. So he just ignores what the policy actually covers.

5) Nintendo VOWS to not censor is a sensationalist title that doesn't reflect the quote his uses from Nintendo.

So yeah, the vid is just straight up misleading. 

DonFerrari said:
twintail said:

You're overselling the impact. I doubt we ever see the effects of this policy outside of games that actively serve to create titillation, which is a market that is most definitely niche. Of course, the odd bigger IP could appear. I won't deny that possibility.

DMC5 wasn't a product of the censorship policy (unless Capcom/ Sony state it was). The JPN version wasn't censored which makes little sense considering the other censored games were censored in Japan, and because the policy affects all regions. The JPN version wouldn't be exempt. 

So then we can expect you not to buy a PS5 because Sony will retain their censorship policy?

Eeeeerrrr he haven't bought a PS4 even before the censorship and with a lot of exclusives. Perhaps also didn't buy PS3 as well. So it isn't really censorship what prevents him from buying PS5.

Uh, I see... ok then.



Azzanation said:
twintail said:

The PS5 is not for a niche hardcore audience, at least not how we understand it now. The simple fact that it will have PS4 BC should already tell you that an entire gen of software (hardcore and casual) will be available day 1.

All comsoles next gen will have BC so its not a stand out feature if its the standard.


I don't agree with censorship. I have made that clear in previous threads. But that doesn't change the very minimal impact it has on Sony. It hasn't affected PS4 sales, so why would it affect PS5 sales? You are more en within your right to buy Visual Novels on other platforms. It's a niche genre. And like indies, there isn't going to be an exodus of this type of game on PS consoles as long as Sony continues to have a sizable share of the market. Is this censorship for the sexualisation of minors going to stop you from ever buying a PS5?So from hurt them to a minor disappointment? So it is not a problem that is going to affect them. 

It might hurt, maybe not at a major cost but will wait and see. PS4 didnt suffer from censorship because it became a thing closer to the end of its life. PS5 will be launching with censorship in mind and where it can possibly hurt them is if there competitors advertise there games as uncut versions etc. It also depends how far Sony goes with the censorship. If major AAA games get affected by it or if its just visual novels etc. But we have seen DMC5 get censored and it wasnt welcomed by the community.

Yes i will not by a platform if the games get censored if i can buy the same game somewhere else which offers the uncut version.

PotentHerbs said:

Halo has seen a sales decline since the launch of Halo 3, Gears of War has been declining since the 2nd entry, which in comparison to Uncharted and GOW, have seen increases in sales for every major entry in the series. The GOW reboot boosted the franchise into 10+ Million territory, turning it into a juggernaught, not saving it from a decline. 

Bundles boosted UC4 sales for sure, but the same could be said about Halo 3's bundling, and only one of these franchises have sold 15+ Million for a single entry. I'm sure MS counted digital codes for Halo 4 sales like Sony has done for their titles. The user base of the Xbox didn't impact the original Halo at all, and it didn't help Halo: Reach sell more than Halo 3. You're also excluding titles like GT5 and TLOU in your comparison of 360/PS3 exclusive software. Uncharted already surpassed Gears in the PS360 era.

Its not far fetched to assume franchises like Uncharted, Horizon & TLOU will surpass Halo in popularity. These are franchises that can sell 15+ Million on the PS4. I wouldn't be surprised to see TLOU: PT.II sell more than 20 Million. Those Rare IP's are not juggernaughts at least in a commercial sense. Minecraft and Halo are the only juggernaught IP MS owns, and for the former, its a series created before the MS acquisition, and is available for every platform.

Would those games sell there figures if the PS4 was sitting on 40m consoles like the X1? If you half the sales there numbers sit roughly around the same.

Halo 4 went on to sell close to 10m copies. Not sure how thats a decline considering it wasnt heavily bundled like Halo 3.

Halo 5 went on to sell close to 5m copies on a platform half the size of the 360 so if the X1 had 90m consoles sold, expect close to 9m sales for Halo 5. These are assumptions however it can play a key roll in selling games.

My point still stands. Just because Mario 3D World sold little on the WiiU doesnt mean the IP is smaller. Takes one good entry to bring the figures back up on a successful console. Much like your point with GOW. Needed a reboot on a high selling system to reach its numbers.

Your point also doesnt make sense. Are you going to tell me Days Gone is bigger than Halo because it has outsold Halo 5? Haha come on now.

Also it doesnt matter who makes the game. The IP is still an IP. Star Wars changed hands to Disney and Star Wars hasnt shrunk in size, in fact its even more popular regardless of its reviews.

Who said anything about Days Gone? Its simply not far fetched to assume Horizon, TLOU & Uncharted will surpass Halo in popularity for the coming generation. These are titles that can sell upwards of 15+ Million, move hardware, garner critical acclaim, and are expanded upon in other forms of media. What more proof do you need?

Those sales figures show a decline in the Halo franchise lol. Can it do better? Sure. Will it do better? That's yet to be determined. And again, user base is not the only variable to consider when it comes to sales. Halo's popularity has been shrinking for years. A big factor to this is the COD franchise and the amount of multiplayer games in general. Halo used to the biggest FPS brand in gaming. Not anymore.

How come Halo 5 couldn't out sell Halo 2 despite the former having the advantage of a much larger user base? 

Last edited by PotentHerbs - 4 days ago

Azzanation said:
Pemalite said:

No. Reach shouldn't be included, it's not a numbered mainline entry.
It's a spin-off title that focused on only the events of Reach and not the chronicles of Master Chief's overall-arching story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_(franchise)#Spin-offs

Otherwise we should include: ODST... Otherwise it's goal post shifting in order to suit the argument to your own benefit, which is a logical fallacy.

As for Infinite, it should be the closing of the Reclaimer Saga. Aka. Halo 6. - If that changes, then yes, it should be excluded
.

I am very confused on why you wouldn't include Reach. Reach is part of the main games as its a prequel to Combat Evolve. Infinte isnt called Halo 6 and its a sequel to Halo 5.

I have no issue with including ODST into the debate however that was more an expansion pack to Halo 3 hence why its called Halo 3 ODST.

Reach has one of the biggest production values and is up there as one of the biggest in the series. Just because MS didnt slap a number on it doesnt mean its not mainline. Would you prefer if MS called it Halo 0? Either way its a mainline Halo game same as Infinite. 

Halo Reach is a spinoff, it's not a numbered entry into the main Story arc trilogies. - Halo Wars was also a Prequel.
Otherwise we should be including ODST as well.

Infinite isn't out yet, if it's not regarded as a canonical direct sequel to Halo 5, then it certainly shouldn't be included.

Halo Reach was the highest selling spin-off title in the Halo franchise, no doubt about it.