Halo 2 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: halo 2 mentioned negatively on gamespot
  • Subject: halo 2 mentioned negatively on gamespot
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: halo 2 mentioned negatively on gamespot
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: fludblud the destructor
console games having no ability to have massed multiplayer online gaming??


Most of you don't seem to understand what that statement means. 16 players is not massed multiplayer online gaming (MMOG). In the field of online multiplayer games, 16 is pretty low. . . and in comparison to many MMOGs downright pathetic

That statement, however, is not exactly true. Look at Phantasy Star Online, for the Gamecube. That's a MMO, if not necessarily a great one on a console. However, I can see his point. I doubt LIVE games will soon, if ever have games with very large numbers of players (50+ for large games, 1000+ for MMO style).

One day consoles will be capable of fufilling this man's dreams, but that day is deep in the future, and I can guarantee Halo2 won't come anywhere close to his ideals. Heck, I don't think there's anyone who wouldn't want to be able to play a console MMOG. That's one thing that disappoints me about Halo2, and something I'd really like to see for FPS's of the future (think planetside).

I know you guys will defend every aspect of Halo2 nomatter how wrong you are, so I'll let anybody who thinks objectively consider what I said because I can't be bothered to mess with naysayers and fanboys.

  • 06.09.2004 9:31 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Interesting artical, but unsure if its really that true. Most of how well a game and how many players a game can support comes down to how a server is set up, and mostly down to how much bandwidth you give it. Yes its possibe to get a game going with 16 players on Halo, and the like...and as the artical says theres games coming out with 150-200 players in it. That to be honest isn't really that impressive when looking at old MMOG technology you get 5k-500k people playing. Its all down to server bandwidth and hardware. I believe MS themselves set a record recently in Eve where they had over 7500 players together at once. Thats quite some going for the server load, but in games like that with 56k modem users its hard to accomplish it without severly limiting the amount of data being sent...you couldnt do that with a game like Halo2 due to the shear amount of data flying around for jumps, vectors of each round flying armour, damage to vehicles etc. If you make a simple game you can, but if its that simple will anyone really play it?

MMOG's (games like SWG, Eve, Planetside etc) are alot more simple in how they send data around....alot are almost turn based or timed severely. Which on a game like Halo wouldn't work due to the need of alot of data being moved around and very quickly, so having hundreds of people just isnt economic. Nice if it could be, but realistically its not going to happen short of us all having T3s at home and running a server off the back of a OOC3. I do long for the day when a MMOG could handle that kind of data, and speed and gameplay like Halo and other FPS, but currently technology is lacking sadly. If you do do it, you have to make compromises sadly, so games which will be playing with 200 users in a FPS will have to be quiet limited in what they do to things like scenery, fragging people, and bullet tracking.

  • 06.09.2004 9:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

[color=lime]I would own that piece of -blam!- with my xbox controller ANY day.

Honestly, when I play Halo, I can't see how much more responsive it can get. Any more responsive, and my thumbs/fingers would be moving faster then my own brain. [/color]

  • 06.09.2004 10:06 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Has anyone actually played a 30 vs. 30 game with the Battlefield engine? It isn't a game; it's chaos. There is virtually no team-work involved whatsoever. That in comparison to a 4v4 Halo CTF match really makes MMO look utterly stupid.

  • 06.09.2004 10:06 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: ajenteks
Has anyone actually played a 30 vs. 30 game with the Battlefield engine? It isn't a game; it's chaos. There is virtually no team-work involved whatsoever. That in comparison to a 4v4 Halo CTF match really makes MMO look utterly stupid.


Very true, but when you get into hundreds and thousands of users different things happen. People get socialable also, dont always fight, and you form sub teams and smaller groups. An interests (yet very old) game was Allegiance, another MS game about 6 years old now. Its a space shooter with real world physics. It could handle 200 people simultaniously ingame. But in situations like that you had some people in one team being solo artists flying around shooting, others in twos with someone as a wingman, but also groups of players together on Cap Ships where one drove, another bombed, and another 10-14 players on turrets on it. That was so much fun. It wasn't really an astounding game or a MMOG as such, but it was a fantastic technology demonstrator. A game like that though worked by having one guy set up as a supreme commander, who didn't run around shooting, he sat looking at a world map and told the players to go xyz etc...his view of the game was more that of a RTS, but it all came down to if the players followed his orders, and if his orders were good hehe.

Now, in the distant future when DSL is long forgotten and everyone has a ethernet connect to the net *dreams* a game like Halo for example could then support thousands of players, effectively turning it into a MMOG. Hundreds of people running around with teams in hogs, mass armys of players as Marines running at millions of Covenant advance on you...mwhaha...really brings the war to life wouldn't it *dreams*.

  • 06.09.2004 10:50 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Ive played lots of FPSs on both PC (Jedi Knight 2 Counter Strike and UT 2003 and Battlefield 1942 even though I didn't like it) and on the Xbox (Unreal Championship Ghost Recon and Return to Catsle Wolfenstein) and beleive me 8v8 is good enough. Any time I got in the big game of say 16v16 there was no strategy it was all rush then two minutes later you died rinse, lather and repeat I had lag issues and almost all the maps were not suited for these massive amounts of players. Can you imagine playing Blood Gulch with 64 ppl? Ill take 8v8 with voice communication and team work over 32v32 laggy slaughtering grounds anyday

  • 06.09.2004 12:37 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

gamesarefun i like your sig i agree except zelda and halo 2 are tied

  • 06.09.2004 12:52 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i heard typhoon rising has over 100 players possible

  • 06.09.2004 12:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

on halo for pc sometimes even 16 players is too much.. think about 40. i dont think that would be fun at all

  • 06.09.2004 12:55 PM PDT

SB-117

Why is SO MANY players neccessarily better??? 16 players is fine for furious fragging on a medium map! Who wants to play against an army of strangers? Not me! Constantly searching for your best mate in order to frag him is much more fun than fragging faceless foes! And its only possible in smallish games! Sure 100+ is hectic but wheres the strategy?

I think this guy is just upset that he never played H2 at E3 but this is just my opinion.

  • 06.09.2004 1:05 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

It has been my experience that Gamespot continually tries to "go against the grain." It seems to me, that this was nothing more than a desperate attempt to get attention.

That being said, Halo is obviously centered around close-knit strategy, teamwork and communication. As mentioned in preceding posts, how personal and tactical can a game with hundreds of scattered, misguided players truly be?


[Edited on 6/9/2004 1:11:39 PM]

  • 06.09.2004 1:05 PM PDT

R.I.P Steve Irwin...you will be missed

Jerry: "Ah, you're crazy."
Kramer: "Am I? Or am I so sane that you just blew your mind?!"

Join Date - 4/19/2004

gamespot is now officially trash

  • 06.10.2004 11:02 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2