• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Halo 5: Guardians |OT5| Is HaloGAF irrelevant now?

U

ultimota

Member
FUNKNOWN iXi said:
What they could do is add more maps and gametypes to it. Like work on those Halo 2 maps with BR starts, and throw in some gametypes with the "Evolved" settings that has a 4sk H5 Pistol as the starting weapon, no Spartan Abilities, etc.
Click to expand...

i would take some halo 2 variants to keep it in like with the current idea of the playlist but if we were to get evolved i would want it to be its own thing
 
BizzyBum

BizzyBum

Member
Screenshot-Original.png
Click to expand...

Not a bad way to finish the mongoose kills for the master vehicle comm!
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
Trup1aya said:
There's no LAN support
Click to expand...

I don't think this is coming back for a long while for technical reasons. The overhead just isn't there. And it doesn't help that the One still doesn't have truly offline profiles (pretty sure it still requires internet for initial setup)
 
M

Madness

Member
3xVYAcW.jpg


Followup to the last page with regards to HCS events. This lan seems to be horrendously run. Mikwen had complained about HCS Orange County being poorly run. Seems HCS Vegas even worse.
 
Y

YourExWife

Member
BizzyBum said:
It sucks I'll never have a 100% collection because I didn't play the beta so I'll never get those 3 beta emblems.
Click to expand...

I played the shit out of the beta and I'm missing one of them. It's supposedly tied to exp rank in the beta but apparently it's just a crapshoot from what I've read.
 
A

Ade

Member
YourExWife said:
I played the shit out of the beta and I'm missing one of them. It's supposedly tied to exp rank in the beta but apparently it's just a crapshoot from what I've read.
Click to expand...

I played the beta, have the Waypoint emblem and never got any of the in game emblems. 343 forum support couldn't care less.
 
A

Ade

Member
gamerguy2002 said:
got 6/10 of my gold packs. I'm gonna fight this.


EDIT: This is fucking bullshit! are you kidding me?! 1 armor set out of all of them save for Achilles and HCS is locked behind some E-sports team's REQ pack?!? god damnit.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's intentional, SP has randomly shown up and vanished on the req lists for months, and while that pack is the only way to get it, it'll only give you it if you have every other req already. I'm 99% it's not meant to come from that pack.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
How about some good news
Good day!Last week we let you know that we had an issue that resulted in our inability to process some orders for Halo 5: Guardians - Gold REQ. Outstanding orders were processed last night, so you should have received your fulfilment email(s) in the past 24 ours.

Unfortunately, some member orders reached their "retry" limit yesterday and were automatically canceled. If you believe that you are missing an order(s), please respond back to this email. We'll validate your order(s) and provide you with a replacement code for any missing orders that were unexpectedly canceled.
Click to expand...
 
J

jizzlobber

Member
So close!

Just got a killtastrophe in husky raid, full health and killing clueless spawners in their base... just had to pick up a decent weapon out of the dozens laying all over the ground and I kept fumbling with the rubbish, too long before my next kill :(

I really want a naire
 
BizzyBum

BizzyBum

Member
Ade said:
I played the beta, have the Waypoint emblem and never got any of the in game emblems. 343 forum support couldn't care less.
Click to expand...

I can't wait to have to preorder from 5 different outlets and buy 30 packs of Monster to get all the launch swag for Halo 6.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
FyreWulff said:
I don't think this is coming back for a long while for technical reasons. The overhead just isn't there. And it doesn't help that the One still doesn't have truly offline profiles (pretty sure it still requires internet for initial setup)
Click to expand...

But Gears has LAN support. Also, there is no reason that their couldn't be in game profiles that are separate from xbl accounts.
 
S

Samurai G0SU

Member
BizzyBum said:
If 343 is serious about growing Halo eSports, Halo 6 better have LAN support.
Click to expand...

Let's just agree they need a lot of things In the next installment. Things that were present with older titles and were also introduced with 5.

Another 3 pages could be made with everyone's list, but I think we all know exactly what they need, minimum,.
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
Trup1aya said:
But Gears has LAN support. Also, there is no reason that their couldn't be in game profiles that are separate from xbl accounts.
Click to expand...

Gears has less networking overhead and requirements than Halo 5.

No vehicles, and therefore none of the physics calculations and networking that come with them. No jumping, so player movement is highly client-predictable. Bodies on death are client ragdolls. Etc.

The current solution would be to let people deploy a dedicated server on a PC on the local network - this may come with Halo 6 anyway since they'd likely have a PC port of it? It's been done before, Section 8 on the 360 let you deploy a dedi for the game on a PC to raise the player cap for games. It was kind of convoluted though since like Halo 2 PC, you needed to register a gamertag for your dedi and all that jazz.

I've been a critic before but with Halo 5, they did at least go all in on the benefits of using dedicated servers. And when you do that you no longer have the tech budget left to run the server and the client on the same machine. Which is required to do LAN without having a middleman PC (or Xbox) running a dedi.
 
VincentMatts

VincentMatts

Member
FyreWulff said:
Gears has less networking overhead and requirements than Halo 5.

No vehicles, and therefore none of the physics calculations and networking that come with them. No jumping, so player movement is highly client-predictable. Bodies on death are client ragdolls. Etc.

The current solution would be to let people deploy a dedicated server on a PC on the local network - this may come with Halo 6 anyway since they'd likely have a PC port of it? It's been done before, Section 8 on the 360 let you deploy a dedi for the game on a PC to raise the player cap for games. It was kind of convoluted though since like Halo 2 PC, you needed to register a gamertag for your dedi and all that jazz.

I've been a critic before but with Halo 5, they did at least go all in on the benefits of using dedicated servers. And when you do that you no longer have the tech budget left to run the server and the client on the same machine. Which is required to do LAN without having a middleman PC (or Xbox) running a dedi.
Click to expand...

P2P has never been a problem before for halo.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
FyreWulff said:
Gears has less networking overhead and requirements than Halo 5.

No vehicles, and therefore none of the physics calculations and networking that come with them. No jumping, so player movement is highly client-predictable. Bodies on death are client ragdolls. Etc.

The current solution would be to let people deploy a dedicated server on a PC on the local network - this may come with Halo 6 anyway since they'd likely have a PC port of it? It's been done before, Section 8 on the 360 let you deploy a dedi for the game on a PC to raise the player cap for games. It was kind of convoluted though since like Halo 2 PC, you needed to register a gamertag for your dedi and all that jazz.

I've been a critic before but with Halo 5, they did at least go all in on the benefits of using dedicated servers. And when you do that you no longer have the tech budget left to run the server and the client on the same machine. Which is required to do LAN without having a middleman PC (or Xbox) running a dedi.
Click to expand...

I was reading your comment and was itching to say they could easily solve this with a dedicated server client. Then you hit the nail on the head.

When we use the word LAN, i don't think we actually mean p2p with a client-host anymore. We call HCS Vegas a LAN despite the fact that they bring custom hardware to the event. It's become a misnomer.

If there's too much overhead, they need to allow us to use an additional xbox/PC as a server. We shouldn't need 343 to bring us a dev kit so that we can run a tournament. I don't see how they could overlook this while having such an esports focus.

So many things that SHOULD have been priorities weren't for some reason.

That said, why is halo5s overhead more prohibitive than previous halo games? The physics models are similar, and the xb1 is more powerful than og xbox and 360. The 60fps target on a weak cpu? I feel like proper prioritizing could have made this work.
 
VincentMatts

VincentMatts

Member
Trup1aya said:
I was reading your comment and was itching to say they could easily solve this with a dedicated server client. Then you hit the nail on the head.

When we use the word LAN, i don't think we actually mean p2p with a client-host anymore. We call HCS Vegas a LAN despite the fact that they bring custom hardware to the event. It's become a misnomer.

If there's too much overhead, they need to allow us to use an additional xbox/PC as a server. We shouldn't need 343 to bring us a dev kit so that we can run a tournament. I don't see how they could overlook this while having such an esports focus.

So many things that SHOULD have been odorous m priorities weren't for some reason.
Click to expand...

well they are a studio that was literally put together to make halo. They dont have the experience. It surprises me too that these things seem so complex now when on the OG xbox i used to set up my xbox all the time as a deticated server when playing rainbow six 3. This was like 13 years ago.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
VincentMatts said:
well they are a studio that was literally put together to make halo. They dont have the experience. It surprises me too that these things seem so complex now when on the OG xbox i used to set up my xbox all the time as a deticated server when playing rainbow six 3. This was like 13 years ago.
Click to expand...

Right, It's not like they aren't industry vets, who have been working on halo since Reach, with direct access to MS engineers and tech support or anything.
 
E

E92 M3

Member
343 has dropped the ball with supporting Halo esports and it's honestly a damn shame. I still watch every tournament/pro league event, but won't pretend that it's ok.

How does a Halo game have:

- Ghost melees
- Horrible observer mode
- Unstable servers
- No social matchmaking

Just to name a few.
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
VincentMatts said:
P2P has never been a problem before for halo.
Click to expand...

Previous Halo titles also weren't doing as complex a simulation as Halo 5, nor were trying to hold a locked 60fps.

And it definitely was. If the host got into a bad physics situation in Halo 3, everyone would start lagging as the server process competed with the game simulation for cycles and it would start dropping packets in desperation. They worked around limits in campaign by using lockstep button networking, which let them leave 99.99999% of the simulation on client only.

Halo 1 - lockstep networking, technically the frame relay version of it, so even more locksteppy. No actual game event information was ever broadcast between Xboxes, so this is why if a box left a LAN in Halo 1 the entire game would lock up and then exit. It's "netcode" was more akin to simulating 16 controllers plugged into the host Xbox. (this also why Halo 1 MCC MP is based off the PC version, not the Xbox version, for multiplayer)

Halo 2 - They switched over to asynch code and Havok, which was designed to be networked. However, they also greatly reduced the per-frame update rate of physics calculations, and faked out a LOT of stuff. You'll also notice that any map with vehicles in Halo 2 has extremely simplified geometry, or high use of vis blockers. They also completely turned off ragdolls if the game had > 8 players in it (even on the client) to keep CPU demand down for the host.

Halo 3 - same, a lot of fake outs, and highly constrained Forge budgets to keep the physics overhead from impacting the host. Push to Talk was enforced above a certain amount of players to keep the demands of VOIP networking down for the host. If the game ever became completely overloaded, it's solution was to delete every dynamic object on the map and respawn it in desperation. Hell, even the base Forge variant was very important to the networking code, it basically let the host skip networking a bunch of stuff to keep overhead down.

campaign was lockstep networked, so just button presses passed around and the game was forced to quit out if anyone left. all the heavy lifting was entirely on your client.

Reach - even though they got dynamically scriptable gametypes, the scripting had very little space to work with, and their plans for higher player counts in development had to be scrapped.

the lockstep networking mode had work added to let people safely drop out of a session without ending it for everyone else, but it was impossible to ever let people join one in progress.

4 - is pretty much Reach engine wise so ctrl c ctrl v networking demands and trivia


Fun fact: they were counting networking overhead down to bits and byes so much that they re-used the information on the wire that told other boxes you were jumping to communicate "i'm boosting in my vehicle now" for the Ghost/Wraith (or it was the nose up thing, either way, that's how much overhead they were trying to squeeze out)

anyway tl;dr different games, even ones within the same series, do not have the same demands for networking. You'd probably be surprised if you actually sat down and counted the actual amount of dynamic objects in older titles.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
FyreWulff said:
Previous Halo titles also weren't doing as complex a simulation as Halo 5, nor were trying to hold a locked 60fps.

And it definitely was. If the host got into a bad physics situation in Halo 3, everyone would start lagging as the server process competed with the game simulation for cycles and it would start dropping packets in desperation. They worked around limits in campaign by using lockstep button networking, which let them leave 99.99999% of the simulation on client only.

Halo 1 - lockstep networking, technically the frame relay version of it, so even more locksteppy. No actual game event information was ever broadcast between Xboxes, so this is why if a box left a LAN in Halo 1 the entire game would lock up and then exit. It's "netcode" was more akin to simulating 16 controllers plugged into the host Xbox. (this also why Halo 1 MCC MP is based off the PC version, not the Xbox version, for multiplayer)

Halo 2 - They switched over to asynch code and Havok, which was designed to be networked. However, they also greatly reduced the per-frame update rate of physics calculations, and faked out a LOT of stuff. You'll also notice that any map with vehicles in Halo 2 has extremely simplified geometry, or high use of vis blockers. They also completely turned off ragdolls if the game had > 8 players in it (even on the client) to keep CPU demand down for the host.

Halo 3 - same, a lot of fake outs, and highly constrained Forge budgets to keep the physics overhead from impacting the host. Push to Talk was enforced above a certain amount of players to keep the demands of VOIP networking down for the host. If the game ever became completely overloaded, it's solution was to delete every dynamic object on the map and respawn it in desperation. Hell, even the base Forge variant was very important to the networking code, it basically let the host skip networking a bunch of stuff to keep overhead down.

campaign was lockstep networked, so just button presses passed around and the game was forced to quit out if anyone left. all the heavy lifting was entirely on your client.

Reach - even though they got dynamically scriptable gametypes, the scripting had very little space to work with, and their plans for higher player counts in development had to be scrapped.

the lockstep networking mode had work added to let people safely drop out of a session without ending it for everyone else, but it was impossible to ever let people join one in progress.

4 - is pretty much Reach engine wise so ctrl c ctrl v networking demands and trivia


Fun fact: they were counting networking overhead down to bits and byes so much that they re-used the information on the wire that told other boxes you were jumping to communicate "i'm boosting in my vehicle now" for the Ghost/Wraith (or it was the nose up thing, either way, that's how much overhead they were trying to squeeze out)

anyway tl;dr different games, even ones within the same series, do not have the same demands for networking. You'd probably be surprised if you actually sat down and counted the actual amount of dynamic objects in older titles.
Click to expand...

My god, how do you know all of this stuff?

Anyway, it sounds like 60fps was the kicker. Still, if targeting esports was their thing, then they needed to allow local server. Priorities.
 
E

Emperor Bohe

Member
i've been out of the game for a long ass time (been playing MCC tbh). just heard that there is an anniversary playlist, might reinstall the game and try it. how long will the playlist stay up?
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
VincentMatts said:
Seems to me like their "priorities" was warzone.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that Warzone and esports were Both focuses, these two items dominated the mp marketing. So in a bit surprised to see that the functionality required to facilitate a good esport is largely missing.


Leyasu said:
Probably the worst gaming related post that I have ever had the displeasure of reading. Lol
Click to expand...

I think his comment is being take out of context. Previous halo games have been able to account for overhead, while still facilitating split screen and LAN.

The switch to dedicated servers has gotten us uncompromising 60fps, Unreliable servers, and no local multiplayer. I'm not sure it was a worthwhile trade off...
 
Leyasu

Leyasu

Banned
VincentMatts said:
Ok champ. Cause P2P was such an un-usable mess for the first 11 years of xbox live.
Click to expand...
p2p was ok in games without matchmaking like r6 for example or playing custom games with your friends in halo. But for games with matchmaking and in particular halo, it was a lag filled nightmare for us Europeans.

COD 4 had decent matchmaking that sort of prioritised good connections, whereas halo would put you into any game no matter the hosts location... Hideous.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
Leyasu said:
p2p was ok in games without matchmaking like r6 for example or playing custom games with your friends in halo. But for games with matchmaking and in particular halo, it was a lag filled nightmare for us Europeans.

COD 4 had decent matchmaking that sort of prioritised good connections, whereas halo would put you into any game no matter the hosts location... Hideous.
Click to expand...

The conversation was about esports. Halo 6 needs to have reliable dedis for match making, and some sort of local MP support for live events, be it p2p or a local server support.

P2p was an infinitely better solution for Halo esports than what we have now
 
Leyasu

Leyasu

Banned
Trup1aya said:
I think his comment is being take out of context. Previous halo games have been able to account for overhead, while still facilitating split screen and LAN.

The switch to dedicated servers has gotten us uncompromising 60fps, Unreliable servers, and no local multiplayer. I'm not sure it was a worthwhile trade off...
Click to expand...

The servers are not unreliable, it is 343s absolute fucking stubborn refusal to give us a choice on the region where we play. They seem unreliable because we are constantly changing locale.

If 343 had made match quality one of the priorities straight away, they may have retained a bigger player base outside of the U.S. Instead they didn't give a fuck, and helped bury their game quicker. When they finally acted, it was already too late.

Such a shame. I can't bring myself to start this up anymore, and when it works its easily one of my all time favorite games.
 
VincentMatts

VincentMatts

Member
Trup1aya said:
It seems to me that Warzone and esports were Both focuses, these two items dominated the mp marketing. So in a bit surprised to see that the functionality required to facilitate a good esport is largely missing.




I think his comment is being take out of context. Previous halo games have been able to account for overhead, while still facilitating split screen and LAN.

The switch to dedicated servers has gotten us uncompromising 60fps, Unreliable servers, and no local multiplayer. I'm not sure it was a worthwhile trade off...
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Leyasu

Leyasu

Banned
Trup1aya said:
The conversation was about esports. Halo 6 needs to have reliable dedis for match making, and some sort of local MP support for live events, be it p2p or a local server support.

P2p was an infinity better solution for Halo esports than what we have now
Click to expand...


I can't understand why they don't have the option to use an Xbox as a dedicated server like r6 used to...

I don't want to shit on 343, yet the questions need to be asked about them.

Talking about things that make wanna shake 343 members. But what the fuck were they thinking when they altered the god tier beta aiming, to the fucking mess (that I cannot get right) that they thought was good enough to release the game with..
 
BizzyBum

BizzyBum

Member
Leyasu said:
Talking about things that make wanna shake 343 members. But what the fuck were they thinking when they altered the god tier beta aiming, to the fucking mess (that I cannot get right) that they thought was good enough to release the game with..
Click to expand...

Yeah, something got screwed up with the aim system. Halo 5 PC is great, and even custom games on Xbox are good. Matchmaking aim is usually just a laggy mess that you just get used to but notice immediately if you play any other FPS.
 
T

Trup1aya

Member
Leyasu said:
The servers are not unreliable, it is 343s absolute fucking stubborn refusal to give us a choice on the region where we play. They seem unreliable because we are constantly changing locale.

If 343 had made match quality one of the priorities straight away, they may have retained a bigger player base outside of the U.S. Instead they didn't give a fuck, and helped bury their game quicker. When they finally acted, it was already too late.

Such a shame. I can't bring myself to start this up anymore, and when it works its easily one of my all time favorite games.
Click to expand...

The servers ARE Unreliable. Even custom games randomly drop players. Even at UGC when everyone was on the same godly connection.

Server selection would've helped the international audience a bit, but there are still other networking issues at play.

Luckily they are finally pushing an update to help research the lag out and ghost melee issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Xbox announces that future Halo games will be developed on Unreal Engine 5
4 5 6 7 8
369
13K
King Dazzar replied
Rumor: 343 Industries Will Only Supervise Development of Future Halo Games
Rumor Platform 2 3
104
7K
StreetsofBeige replied
So is Halo MP stuck to be an arena shooter forever?
2
60
2K
sainraja replied
Halo Infinite Firefight Announced - December 5th
News 2
98
9K
twilo99 replied
Halo Infinite | Live Stream Recap | Jan 2024
23
2K
RPS37 replied
Top Bottom