One of the main problems of MS' first party games

[binary solo]

walsufnir said:

binary solo said:

walsufnir said:

binary solo said:

TBH, I think more actual Halo players seem to be a bit pissed at lack of splitscreen than dynamic res. So to the people who matter (i.e. people who might actually buy Halo 5, or more importantly people who might buy XB one to play Halo 5) it seems split screen is a potential deal breaker. And Split screen isn't eyecandy. So at least with your Halo 5 example it's not eyecandy that is most important. Can't really speak to the rest of it, just that this particular point stuck out as being slightly mis-directed re the dynamic res issue.

The main complaint is the 60fps. This is one of the main reasons for dynamic resolution and the main reason for not having split-screen at all.

What do you mean? The complaint is that it shouldn't be 60fps so that it can be full 1080p and/or have splitscreen? That seems a bit strange coming from a multiplayer FPS audience.

So we are getting out of the context now but ok :)

What I meant with this thread is that I think MS should, like Sony, emphasize graphics and eye-candy more than they are doing now. No matter what people think would be important on forums, you have to convince the masses to buy a system, you can't make many [money?] off forum specialists.

So making a game at 60fps means automatically the graphics won't blow your socks off because you have only half the time to render a frame opposed to 30fps.

That doesn't mean I don't want Halo 5 to be 60fps. From a gameplay perspective it is clear that 60fps is the way better option. But it is also the reason why we don't have split-screen now. So MS has to tell people now that, although because of 60fps there is no split-screen, the game will be "better" and I think this is a very, very difficult task to do and most people would probably gladly swap 60fps with split-screen.

Ok, but that takes me back to my point. Splitscreen is the biggest let down for Halo 5, which we assume is a compromise for 60fps and dynamic 1080p. But splitscreen is not eyecandy, splitscreen is actually an important gaming element to many people, especially with fewer and fewer FPS games having splitscreen. For Halo it is a point of difference, which helps sales. Arguably decreasing the eyecandy to facilitate 60fps and splitscreen is the best thing for Halo 5 in terms of hardware selling potential. So the Halo 5 situation runs counter to your thesis that more eyecandy = better Xb one sales. In the case of Halo 5 less eyecandy to allow splitscreen+60 fps would be the better option.

Halo 5 will sell pretty much not one console to people who aren't pretty much Halo fans, or kinda fans. This means MS MUST first appeal to the desires of the Halo fanbase, not the general masses. MS has to convince Halo fans that it's worth buying Xb one to play Halo. Removing an important feature immediately reduces that desire. The kinda-sorta Halo fans will perhaps be disinclined to choose Xb one this gen. Though maybe the kinda-sorta fans don't care about splitscreen and only the hardcore Halo fans do. If this was the thinking of MS when deciding what compromises to make to achieve performance benchmarks then it's a cynical F-you to the Halo fans because MS is chasing the margins rather than appealing to the core.