-
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 Reveal Thread - Matchmaking/Multiplayer Details Revealed
- Thread starter Slightly Live
- Start date
Hydranockz
Member
I think your avatar works in this situationGui_PT said:
rar said:
What a joke post, putting in a browser list and calling it a day would be lazy. The amount of work that goes into matchmaking and making it work is anything but lazy. Does it work great 100% of the time? No, but nothing is perfect. It looks like Reach might actually perfect the system by allowing 4 different gametypes to be voted on. I'd much rather have this system than to log on and see 50 rooms of the same gametype and map.
I'd much rather have a nice flow of good consistent gametypes, even if I have to go into MLG to get what I want than to have and play luck of the draw with a browser. Every game on Live that doesn't use MM (L4D) for example has a terrible time getting good games going and generally just doesn't have any legs. There's a reason every popular game adopted MM after Halo 2 did it.
bobs...onGaf
Member
rar said:
I dont agree with a lot of the 'small details' in Halo, but saying they got the foundations totally wrong is silly. They just have a different view on whats good than you do.
Im just glad its them making the decisions and not you :lol
Kapura said:
no way man, its almost like thats its like my opinion or something
Louis Wu said:
where do you get that i 'clearly cant stand' halo?
halo is still fun and better than most everything else, but bungie doesnt get a free pass because all the other studios cant make anything nearly as fun
I cannot conceive of a game that I would consider 'fun' if I thought that the company that made it was "philosophically wrong about most things".rar said:
"I think China does government all wrong - they treat their citizens like crap, they don't care about the living conditions, they block personal growth in the name of 'collective good'. But hey, living there would be fun."
Sure, dedicated servers would offer a better experience most of the time, in terms of latency. But can someone put forth an estimate for the number of dedicated servers needed to handle 1-2 million concurrent users(possibly more than that right at release of Reach)? That is the reason for P2P. Scalability. Given some clever algorithms to utilize leftover upload bandwidth from those with some to spare, and other such optimizations, P2P is a great way to do online, and probably will be the only way in the future.
As far as server browsing and matchmaking, a split approach would probably work for a while after launch, but later in the life span of the game, the populations of both would be conflicting and would probably cause matchmaking issues.
As far as server browsing and matchmaking, a split approach would probably work for a while after launch, but later in the life span of the game, the populations of both would be conflicting and would probably cause matchmaking issues.
DiabolicalBagel
Member
When a huge chunk, or most likely the majority, of your audience are mentally deficient, whiny and impatient children with ADHD that can barely operate their TV remote... server browsers just don't seem like a good idea to me.Mad Max said:
And when they do finally work out how this magic functions, I will absolutely love the long list of identical games with only a few players in each because of "I WANNA HOST!" "No! I wanna host!" bullshittery.
I'll take the matchmaking, thanks.
Louis Wu said:
Nope, because noone has hired me yet.
Although there are PC games which have both, but those games never have real skill based matchmaking like halo. But to me, as someone who plays a lot of games on both my PC and on my Xbox, it makes sense for a dev like bungie to try something like that. Because if it was done correctly it could really be become a "best of both worlds" situation.
@DiabolicalBagel
That's why it should only list dedicated servers, not games someone hosts on their own xbox.
Mad Max said:Nope, because noone has hired me yet.
But to me, as someone who plays a lot of games on both my PC and on my Xbox, it makes sense for a dev like bungie to try something like that. Because if it was done correctly it could really be become a "best of both worlds" situation.
I think UT 2004 had skilled based matchmaking and server lists. I don't recall how well the matchmaking portion function, or exactly how it functioned. Probably just looked at all of the available servers, calculated an average skill level per server, and plopped you in one it thought good.
Devin Olsen
Member
oh shit :lolAchronos said:
heres the basic problem: if i want to play a certain type of game that isnt in matchmaking and i only have 10 friends online, and only 4 of them are playing halo, and only 1 of them wants to play, and i need about 12, where do i get the other 10 from? chances are that there are at least that number of people who would play with me, but the chances that theyre on me and my friends list and recent players list is ridiculously low
so just let me find them, please
so just let me find them, please
The Librarian
Banned
:lolAchronos said:
dslgunstar
Banned
MagniHarvald said:
I'm clearly of a very different mindset than most people when it comes to the AR. I think its balanced because you need to get within range to use it effectively. If you're taking down BR players with it, that means you maneuvered the combat into AR range (either by using the environment, or with grenades, or by retreating or whatever), and therefore earned the advantage and an easy kill. The BR has the advantage at range, and even on the edge of AR range, thanks to increased accuracy and damage per shot.
IMO, the only place its really broken is when you spawn with it on a huge, open map full of BR users (such as Valhalla or Sandtrap, etc), or you have an AR vs. AR battle because those battles are almost always mindless rushes ending in melee (not always - skilled players can use grenades, burst fire to separate themselves).
Most of the maps in Halo 3 actually have a deceptive amount of cover and funnels that ensure most (not all, obviously) begin at mid-range, and offer players an exit if they're engaged at longer range by a more equipped player. I don't really feel that vulnerable on Last Resort with an AR, for example, because there are so many routes through the map where I'm never more than a few strides away from a pillar, or a nook, or a tunnel to seek shelter behind. Same for High Ground and Narrows, where elevation
Not a Jellyfish
but I am a sheep
Achronos said:
Amazing. :lol
JaggedSac said:
I don't think that was skill based actually (but I never used it anyway, so who knows), it seemed more like quick game option really. (which a lot of PC games have)
@rar
That's a pretty good example actually, but those games are RTSes, so matchmaking is generally preferable to a serverbrower because you're dealing with a small number of people in each game.
You add the HaloGAF list to your Friends List - takes up one slot, and adds 100 people who like to play Halo more than the average player.rar said:
Then you add community lists like this from other communities (Tied the Leader, Good Game Network, HBO, whoever) - for each one slot you take up on your Friends List, you add another 100 players to choose from.
The likelihood that you won't be able to pull together a group falls the wider you're willing to spread your net. I play alone a lot of the time - but that's MY choice. There's almost ALWAYS dozens of people to choose from playing Halo on my FL, or my Friends of Friends.
rar said:
And that is a valid complaint. As good of a criticism about the game as something about the AR or Laser. Bungie must have thought that it would either screw up their matchmaking system by pulling away people from the population pools, or that not enough people would use it to justify the production costs. Not only that, but pulling people away from other possible new features in order to implement that one. Personally, I would rather them spend their time on something else.
It's never too early to start making funeral arrangements for the BR.
I was thinking maybe I send around a postcard where you guys write down all the ways the BR changed your life. The former poet laureate is a professor at my school so perhaps I can get him to write a part of the eulogy.
Near the end of its life the BR became weaker. The bureaucracy limited its ability to make a difference by spreading it too thin. This does not mean we should forget all the wonderful donging it hath provided.
Any ideas are welcome.
I was thinking maybe I send around a postcard where you guys write down all the ways the BR changed your life. The former poet laureate is a professor at my school so perhaps I can get him to write a part of the eulogy.
Near the end of its life the BR became weaker. The bureaucracy limited its ability to make a difference by spreading it too thin. This does not mean we should forget all the wonderful donging it hath provided.
Any ideas are welcome.
Mad Max said:
They did have ranks, but whether they used them in their matchmaking is something I do not have the answer to. But, if you have the ranks, why not use them. Even if with a simple algorithm.
http://ut2004stats.epicgames.com/index.php?stats=rankings
The Internet. HaloGAF, ForgeHub, HBO, TTL, hell, GameFAQs and Bnet always have people ready to play Halo.rar said:
Repost because I edited it into a post on the last page way late:
It seems a lot of people are offering their anecdotal evidence as to why server browsing does/doesn't work. I, for one, wouldn't mind it, but the reasoning Achronos provided makes sense to me. And I've had problems with it before anyway. So I'm not going to complain.
Edit:
:lol :lol I really love that showGui_PT said:Wait, I gotta find a gif for this
Edit:
Shake Appeal
Member
As someone who got his start playing multiplayer shooters with fucking Doom (IPX bitchzzzzz), the server browser model annoys the fuck out of me. It is occasionally pleasant if it a given server is private and tied to a large, healthy community, but even then it feels stagnant when I am playing the same ten players all the livelong day, and usually on the same three or four agreed-upon maps. It's part of why I haven't been able to get solidly hooked on TF2 at any stage, even through a private server someone I know owns.
In the conventional server browsing model, games feel slapdash, with people dropping in and out, the teams constantly unbalanced, the same dudes donging on everyone over and over, everything at the whims of the server's owner, blah blah. It's like Halo customs, but forever. Jumping into a server fifteen minutes into a game and playing out the dying seconds of an all-but-decided game on a team of six (half of which is a bunch of regulars shredding everyone) versus a team of four is fucking dull.
Matchmaking, for all its flaws, makes the individual games feel more important, and exposes you to more players, more gametypes, more maps, more variety. Sure, people drop out and the teams are often imperfect (but given the complexities involved, the system gets it right an impressive amount of the time: I've played more "50-49" [or equivalent] games of Halo 3 than anything else I can name), but on the whole it feels more like a sport: you're there from the kick-off, and the experience is likely going to be competitive.
Dedicated servers? Yes, please. Server browser/searching for customs? Fuck. That.
In the conventional server browsing model, games feel slapdash, with people dropping in and out, the teams constantly unbalanced, the same dudes donging on everyone over and over, everything at the whims of the server's owner, blah blah. It's like Halo customs, but forever. Jumping into a server fifteen minutes into a game and playing out the dying seconds of an all-but-decided game on a team of six (half of which is a bunch of regulars shredding everyone) versus a team of four is fucking dull.
Matchmaking, for all its flaws, makes the individual games feel more important, and exposes you to more players, more gametypes, more maps, more variety. Sure, people drop out and the teams are often imperfect (but given the complexities involved, the system gets it right an impressive amount of the time: I've played more "50-49" [or equivalent] games of Halo 3 than anything else I can name), but on the whole it feels more like a sport: you're there from the kick-off, and the experience is likely going to be competitive.
Dedicated servers? Yes, please. Server browser/searching for customs? Fuck. That.
Just played the one. You should have joined us for some social. I just don't want to play BTB. At least in social there's a better chance of having my BR actually work.Nutter said:So how did those ranked games go?
At the very least you probably didnt complain about me being host
Shake Appeal
Member
Montage of four-shots and donging with this classic as the soundtrack.kylej said:
lybertyboy
Thinks the Evil Empire is just misunderstood.
OuterWorldVoice said:
Now with 100% more Gauss.
DiabolicalBagel
Member
GAF Halo 3.Schmitty said:
Related, kinda. Looking for able bodied BC2-ers.
Tired of the incompetent fools I'm being handed as a so called 'team' who fail to comprehend that the objective is neither to determine who out of all of us in the game has the nicest leaves on his ghillie nor is it a helipad dance competition.
Feel free to add me if you are also sick of morons.
InvincibleAgent
Member
Here you go:
or
Schmitty
Member
Alright, FR sent to GAF Halo 3. Hopefully I can play some games in the near future when my roommate's Xbox gets fixed.
Gotta love the posters on Bungie.net
"Why so many people are skeptic about Reach [50's will understand]"
Gotta love the posters on Bungie.net
"Why so many people are skeptic about Reach [50's will understand]"
How dare you...Louis Wu said:
The one thing I really don't like about MM is the shear amount of time I spend searching for matches as opposed to actually playing the game. I wouldn't be surprised if 1/3 of my time with Halo 3 has been searching for matches, waiting in lobbies, and voting/loading maps. Little concerned about them making social matches set up more like ranked matches because the wait times for ranked are even longer when it's looking for parties.
As for max player limit, glad it's still at 16. I talked about the drawbacks of increasing it a while back, things like diluting the amount of maps per game size and lag, not to mention Halo's small team games are excellent.
Captain Blood
Member
It would have been interesting to see what Bungie could have done with a larger player count but I really haven't ever been playing a BTB match where I thought "Man I wish there were more people on this map."
I don't think Bungie should have any play lists support more than 16 players -- I don't think having a larger map or more players supported than that would really be an improvement. Bungie should, however, at least give that option for custom games or maybe special events (like their double XP weekend playlists). Sometimes 16 players isn't enough when me and a bunch of my friends are just dicking around =[Captain Blood said:
EDIT: I sent an invite to GAF Halo 3 (TheGuyBhindYou). I play Halo 3 at least once a week, so hopefully I'm not too annoying to play with =P
Not a Jellyfish
but I am a sheep
ManCannon said:
I approve of this "Success".
Matchmaking is terrible. It's right up there with the current DLC model and episodic gaming as one of the worst things to happen in console gaming over the past decade. It's fine in most games because you're often given a base soldier and have an option of giving that soldier a fairly exstensive combination of weapons that you like, but in Halo Bungie decides all that. Playing AR starts on anything isn't fun at all. Duals is even worse. All this talk of load outs in Reach is good, but I'm remaining cautious. Nothing beats giving gamers all the control. If people want to play Avalanche BRs all the time... Then let them. That's what they want. They don't want to play Duals on Snowbound or Swords on Sandtrap. That is crap. Some of you dudes really overstate the difficulty of dealing with a list. The one hope I have for Reach is that the matchmaking is as good and fast as the one that was in Halo 2.
Captain Blood
Member
Kenak said:
I can see that but I hardly think bungie focusing their manpower toward the "dicking around crew" is best for the game
Slightly Live
Dirty tag dodger
Kuroyume said:
So terrible that millions of player constantly go back to the experience time after time, year after year. Yep, you're right.
You may not like it, but try staying away from making blanket statements that clearly not everyone shares.