• 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: Reach |OT6| There Are Those Who Said This Day Would Never Come

senador

Banned
I don't want to take sides (I guess I am) but remember all these "free" services must implement and maintain Xbox apps. Then they must create and maintain functionality for these apps to connect to their servers and provide content or perform a function. Yes, their website counterparts may be free but sometimes these additional bits are extras they didn't anticipate, or a way to make money because their others avenues are mainly free. The protocols, procedures, and implementation for Xbox are totally different than for a website. People still have to work and get paid. Not everything can be free.

Sure, I'd like a better system. Better is always good, but I am happy paying for Gold as it is (if there is another price hike with minimal features though...). I never pay the full price though and always catch a deal. I have a card ready to redeem I got for $35. Perhaps a system like PsychoRaven said would be great. That way people can at least play and do basic functionality. They'd still make a lot too, tons of people would still be willing to pay for the additional content. I would still. I like what I get out of it even if I can watch Netflix for no extra charge on my computer.

Another thing to note is how PSN is free and not up to par of Live (at least IMO) and got the shit hacked out of it. Sure that could happen to anyone but it sounds like they took it less seriously and it was underfunded.

Sure, I'd take dedicated servers in Halo, but I don't really care if they aren't there. What I'd really like to see is more reliable hosts chosen so there is less switching mid game. Surely it won't fully eliminate lag with dedicated servers though, you still have to request and wait for a response as well as the other players with you, so there is still the potential for lag. I believe that PC gaming has less lag, but I don't believe for a second it has no lag. If they can get in dedicated servers without causing other problems in Halo 4 or without having to sacrifice something then I am a fan, otherwise I'm good. Reach has been pretty good to me lag wise.
 
Louis Wu said:
usaAust.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_outlying_territories_by_total_area

Minus Alaska and Hawaii... it is still larger at... 3,119,884.69 square miles.
 
Tashi0106 said:
Doesn't make it not broken

Also Letters, I hate you lol

And how often does it happen? Even if you don't like it, it's not "broken" unless it forces a significant change of play in a majority of instances, and I really doubt something that happens extremely rarely (I can count the times this has happened to me with grenades on my fingers and it's happened maybe once with rockets across all the games) like this counts.
 

Tashi

343i Lead Esports Producer
Thagomizer said:
And how often does it happen? Even if you don't like it, it's not "broken" unless it forces a significant change of play in a majority of instances, and I really doubt something that happens extremely rarely (I can count the times this has happened to me with grenades on my fingers and it's happened maybe once with rockets across all the games) like this counts.

Even once is enough to justify its removal. It adds nothing to the game besides some fuckin chuckles.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
My thought process on Live:

1) I own an Xbox 360 and like to play Halo online.

2) I do not do PC gaming, for several reasons.

3) Therefore, the question is whether I am willing to pay ~$5/month to play Halo online (and stuff).

4) The answer is yes.

It's not any more complex than that.

I don't know jack squat about networking, but Reach is much better than Halo 3 in that regard. I just hope the Firefight/Campaign netcode gets an overhaul for Halo 4. I don't really care how it happens.
 
wwm0nkey said:
I remember when the 360 was first announced we could sell stuff on the Marketplace and Xbox Live was free during the Weekends.

How does that even... what is this i dont.. i cant even begin to ... i accidentally the whole marketplace
 
Tashi0106 said:
Even once is enough to justify its removal. It adds nothing to the game besides some fuckin chuckles.


I always thought those "chuckles" helped make Halo, Halo.

Like when my mongoose wreckage splatters five people :D
 
GhaleonEB said:
My thought process on Live:

1) I own an Xbox 360 and like to play Halo online.

2) I do not do PC gaming, for several reasons.

3) Therefore, the question is whether I am willing to pay ~$5/month to play Halo online (and stuff).

4) The answer is yes.

It's not any more complex than that.

I don't know jack squat about networking, but Reach is much better than Halo 3 in that regard. I just hope the Firefight/Campaign netcode gets an overhaul for Halo 4. I don't really care how it happens.

I like to role-play that I'm Colonel Holland and I'm actually giving my spartan orders. The delay is satellite lag.

Input lag in campaign is very, very close to gamebreaking in Reach
 

wwm0nkey

Member
StalkerUKCG said:
How does that even... what is this i dont.. i cant even begin to ... i accidentally the whole marketplace
Watch the E3 unveiling of the 360 with the selling Tony Hawk stuff. It was basically how the Diablo III marketplace is going to work but with space bucks. Happy that they never went through with it.
 
wwm0nkey said:
Watch the E3 unveiling of the 360 with the selling Tony Hawk stuff. It was basically how the Diablo III marketplace is going to work but with space bucks. Happy that they never went through with it.

now you mention it i vaguely remember something like that. God what an awful idea.

And i dont know if iv mentioned this but your avatar makes me really really really want halo2 xbla. Team saber engine on top.

Itsnicetowantthings.sad
 
daedalius said:
Oh man the Ark is so good, just hit the Cartographer. I really miss the BR :(

The Cheiftan arena fight is one of the most underrated encounters in any Halo games. Nothing more badass than taking out a hammer-wielding Cheiftan with a shotgun as his pack watches you blow his face off.
 

wwm0nkey

Member
StalkerUKCG said:
now you mention it i vaguely remember something like that. God what an awful idea.

And i dont know if iv mentioned this but your avatar makes me really really really want halo2 xbla. Team saber engine on top.

Itsnicetowantthings.sad
many people on the gaming side have mentioned that my avatar pisses them off in a good way for making them want Halo 2 XBLA

My plan is slowly working!
 

daedalius

Member
Thagomizer said:
The Cheiftan arena fight is one of the most underrated encounters in any Halo games. Nothing more badass than taking out a hammer-wielding Cheiftan with a shotgun as his pack watches you blow his face off.

I didn't even realize you could DO that until I read the AJ post about the level, so I actually did it. However, I didn't take him out with a shotgun, he got owned by plasma pistol + BR combo :)

The Ark is definitely one of my favorite levels out of all the Halos, that is for sure.
 

Tunavi

Banned
I went back to V for the first time since getting accepted to GAF. Dubs threads and piracy boasting everywhere. can't believe I ever posted there.
 

Tashi

343i Lead Esports Producer
Also when the game hitches and it becomes unplayable. You know, it's the framerate is .5 per second. That needs to go away forever.
 

Ramirez

Member
Dani said:
Nothing to do with Kyle. Just disappointed that you'd think that way. Assumed you'd know better. That's all.

lol, I'm just ribbing you man, lighten up.

I still think your stance on just accepting whatever MS delivers is a little whack. Complaining can always lead to good things, Gears 3 & the Reach TU being a few examples.
 

Thermite

Member
Dani said:
Insinuating what you did just because I'm expressing an opinion counter to the majority here agree with, yeah, that is personal.

I have no hidden motive when expressing my opinion on a public forum and don't appreciate anyone suggesting otherwise.

I said what I said because in the original post I replied to, you came off as a Microsoft spokesperson. It was meant to be a bit of a joke.

There nothing wrong with my logic here. Steam and Live are two different products and services that, whilst having many similarities, are separate things entirely.

If you want all of the features of PC gaming, simply stick to PC gaming.

I don't even know how to respond to this. I mean, you're essentially saying if someone thinks that a particular platform has a superior online experience and functionality that they shouldn't ask for those same features to come to another platform. Wow.


Look, A and C aren't going to happen any time soon. Just take a step back and look at how Live has developed and the direction it is heading into.

Did I say they were going to happen? Nope. All I said is that people have a right to express their desires to see such features come to XBL (or any service that doesn't have them for that matter).

The comparison with bloom here is silly. The majority of Reach players haven't cared about bloom at all, just a very small yet vocal minority. The TU changes and the TU playlist shows us the reaction. We're getting a token Zero-Bloom gametype. The majority of players will be playing with 15% bloom reduction and most won't even notice that.

Is the comparison so silly? I don't know, I don't think it is at all. My point was that if people never complained about something that was less than desirable, or made suggestions on how to improve an experience, would any company really just decide to make changes out of the blue? I'm not so sure. If it isn't broke, don't fix it.

Bottom line is, I don't think dedicated servers are a magical cure all. The way folks have brought up dedicated servers here recently is that they will solve all, if not most of, the connection problems Reach has. It wouldn't and won't.

I don't think they're a magical cure either. What I do think is that it makes the online gaming experience better. Which do you prefer: European hosts or European dedicated servers?

Microsoft has been promoting Live as the premier P2P online solution along with their TrueSkill matchmaking service. Halo has been the poster child of the service since Halo 2 launched.

People credit Bungie for most of the online functionality in Halo 2, Halo 3 and Reach but forget how aggressively Microsoft invested in this particular area and the technology involved due to the fact that Halo was their shining example of how the service worked.

Trueskill, matchmaking, and all the other online functionality really doesn't have much to do with how a bullet is perceived on host and off, does it? Maybe I'm wrong here, but I don't think it does. If someone who shouldn't be getting host, does (and there are plenty of instances where this happens), it makes the experience completely unenjoyable for everyone involved except the host.

Why should I have to put up with a sub-standard connection when playing with American players? That what dedicated servers would do. Right now the game selects what it thinks is the best host. That means some games I have the chance of playing with a better host for me with little noticeable impact on other players.

Are you really telling me that you have a more enjoyable experience with a random, unknown American host than a dedicated server that is in the US? Really?

And when US players join non-US servers? Well, they would quit. Going by the reaction here to non-American hosts right now, many of you just wouldn't accept playing under those conditions but you'd all happily accept the opposite just because of majority rule.

I definitely wouldn't. Again, wouldn't region filtering help keep US folks again US folks, and European folks against European folks? Granted there will be definitely be situations where, in order to get a game, you'll be matched up against people outside your region, but I still can't help but feel a dedicated server would be better than p2p. At the very least, you wouldn't have to worry about a single person having an automatic advantage due to him/her having host.

Non-American countries would have real issues sustaining healthy numbers to justify the server costs. American would have dozens if not hundreds of servers for sure. It's everywhere that won't have that infrastructure.

Smarter men than me or you could find a bunch of solutions to this problem, I'm sure, but two simple solutions come to mind: A)only get enough servers that the costs handle for non-NA residents and B) allow p2p to handle the situations where the UK folks are playing with UK folks while the servers are full.

I think I've explained how I think it would. Joining any server not located in your particular region would be instantly obvious and off-putting. Never mind the constant and consistent permanent disadvantage non-local-to-the-server players would have.

The only folks that would see a substantive benefit would be the average American player. I don't think it's worth violating the current ecosystem to get this result and not, at what I think would be, at the cost of the players from other, small, territories.

Joining any host that isn't located in your particular region is definitely obvious and off-putting. I really don't see how an individual host is better than a dedicated server. In or out of the country.
 

Slightly Live

Dirty tag dodger
Ramirez said:
lol, I'm just ribbing you man, lighten up.

I still think your stance on just accepting whatever MS delivers is a little whack. Complaining can always lead to good things, Gears 3 & the Reach TU being a few examples.

I dunno dude. I've been vocal on wanting bloom gone for some time. I've also been quite up front about my many disappointments with Reach and how it's been handled.

I simply think, on this issue, dedicated servers will screw me and over non-US folks over. I'd rather see a refinement on the current netcode, improved host selection and the lessening of the horrible host switching mid-game.

And the high priority to deal with quitters that has been plaguing Reach. I think it's a major issue both Bungie and 343 are looking over.

My apologies if I've taking the light ribbing a bit too thick here.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
Thagomizer said:
I like to role-play that I'm Colonel Holland and I'm actually giving my spartan orders. The delay is satellite lag.

Input lag in campaign is very, very close to gamebreaking in Reach
To the spoiler: I think input lag is game breaking, full stop. If I have more than a tiny bit of it, I quit out. More than a half second input lag renders FF/Campaign nearly unplayable for me. It's totally unacceptable.
 

wwm0nkey

Member
Tashi0106 said:
What other games does that happen to? I just know it happens to Halo 3 and Reach
Pretty much every game, hopefully the new Dashboard fixes this problem.

I really do have this problem in every game since the NXE
 

Louis Wu

Member
Not really arguing for one side or the other, just adding some data that supports Dani's point that Americans (and I certainly include myself in this generalization) tend to miss some of the stuff that players in other countries deal with. This was posted today on the HBO forum by someone who lives on Reunion Island (off the coast of Madagascar) in response to a discussion about dedicated servers, and it certainly opened my eyes to a problem I didn't even realize existed.

Imrane-117 said:
I live in Reunion Island and Gears of War 3 multiplayer doesn't work at all, since nobody play this game where I live. Since the launch day, I think I found three or four players and they were all Reunion inhabitants, so I guess it'll be impossible for me to find players from all over the world, as in Halo or other games. Gears of War 3 is exactly what I don't want for Halo 4 : I think Epic's servers consider me as a low connection, so they're excluding me because I live far away from America or Europe. But when I play in custom games with my friends from Europe (France, Belgium...), it works well. Enventually, if Halo 4 is like Gears 3, I simply won't be able to play online (except for custom games), and it would suck so much, because I'm playing on Xbox Live since Halo 3 without any big problems...
 
GhaleonEB said:
To the spoiler: I think input lag is game breaking, full stop. If I have more than a tiny bit of it, I quit out. More than a half second input lag renders FF/Campaign nearly unplayable for me. It's totally unacceptable.
Mine tends to be really bad for the first minute then smooth out, but if it stays bad, I usually bail. Did Halo 3 have this problem? I honestly can't remember.

EDIT: as someone who knows absolutely nothing about networking, is it possible to have both? Meaning, playlists X, X, and X are servers, and everything else is P2P?
 

MrBig

Member
Thagomizer said:
EDIT: as someone who knows absolutely nothing about networking, is it possible to have both? Meaning, playlists X, X, and X are servers, and everything else is P2P?
Yes. Which is why it is baffling that someone could argue against dedis.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
Thagomizer said:
Mine tends to be really bad for the first minute then smooth out, but if it stays bad, I usually bail. Did Halo 3 have this problem? I honestly can't remember.
Campaign did, yes. Campaign/Firefight and Multiplayer use different networking models.
 

Plywood

NeoGAF's smiling token!
A27 Tawpgun said:
Using jetpack on Asylum. Have you no Halo Honor?

Actually, you could say you figured out Halo Reach.
The AA's are the CoDification of Halo brah.

Besides I only rocked Jetpack cause it was Asylum KotH and you gotta get the enemy team out ASAP.

Also just checked my Double Team record.

8BdON.png


1062 wins 82 losses.

dat high score
 
Dani said:
Have you had your head in the sand? There's been a stream of posts on here whining about hosting during Halo games. Bad hosts, foreign hosts, Mexican hosts. Not being able to select host during Customs.

It's all just petty whining. And yeah it's coming from over-entitled American players that have no idea about the playing conditions for non-American players.

I suspect that an average match for for any of the non-American players here would send the American folks here that regularly whine about host and bad connections straight into an insane asylum.

From the perspective of a non-American player, I honestly think folks are being entirely unrealistic and entitled with what they expect when playing a video game on a console with players across the globe.
Dani, it makes me uncomfortable when you put it like that. Jeez. :(
 
Top Bottom