Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: multiplayer
  • Subject: multiplayer
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: multiplayer

Sorry can post on forums, I posted "why did Kat die from a spiker shot to the leg while hacking a terminal in mission 8" because someone post the Legit spoiler so i countered it by making a fake spoiler so people think "hey those spoilers arn't real because this guy says they're different. MY punishment..... Permanent ban.

Moderator Notice: This user has been blacklisted from this forum. Until the user is removed from the blacklist, all posts this user has made have been hidden, and all topics created by this user have been censored.
  • 06.02.2009 11:39 AM PDT

-6Fears

Way to many people, major lag. And have you played Big team? it lags alot already.

  • 06.02.2009 11:49 AM PDT

R.I.P xHenshi
R.I.P Heaven's Warrior
R.I.P Chelsey
R.I.P Jake
R.I.P Timothy Karabela
R.I.P America, the Free.
Your life can change directions at any moment. Make sure you live your life to the fullest.

A server that size will cost a bundle. Not only that, Like M.A.G, it will have to have group chat between 7-16 people. No way a game can handle that many people and all of that voice bandwidth.

  • 06.02.2009 12:01 PM PDT

The Kid with Pointy Eyebrows

like a Halo Battlefield

  • 06.02.2009 12:03 PM PDT

Rigor mortis has been kind to you, and left you in a sexy pose!
Cheeky Muslim
God = Lie
Cake = Lie
God = Cake
Wednesday 13 is the best vocalist ever. /fact, not opinion

apart from the lagging thats a good idea

  • 06.02.2009 12:10 PM PDT

The Risk Is Worth The Reward.
Cry Havoc And Let Slip The Dogs Of War.

Its really not a bad idea OP....I think the lag would be far to crazy for something like this to happen.

  • 06.02.2009 12:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

why are u reading this this is private go back to your house!!

drink beer!
drink ale
all hail to the ale

i agree with bigger teamns but 36 or 64 not in the triple figures it would be like a flip book with all the lag!

  • 06.02.2009 12:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

why are u reading this this is private go back to your house!!

drink beer!
drink ale
all hail to the ale

Posted by: pointerelkins
how about lower the total amount of people like make where its 34 people a match. 16 people on one team. 4 people in each group. with there being 4 groups for each team. this would be alot easier and would make the game alot more fun.
YEA that is a bit more realistic LOL

  • 06.02.2009 12:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

why are u reading this this is private go back to your house!!

drink beer!
drink ale
all hail to the ale

BTW im being a bit nerdy here but your math is wrong it woud have to be 32 for 16 a team

  • 06.02.2009 12:24 PM PDT

this is a bad idea. the game is releasing next year, not in 3 like you suggest. it would lag like crazy, and it would lose its arcade-y fun intense firefights.

p.s. quit bumping your thread.

[Edited on 06.02.2009 12:25 PM PDT]

  • 06.02.2009 12:24 PM PDT

Posted by: pointerelkins
one how am i bumping my thread secondly i already posted make the team alot small to 16 people in a team. really bumping is just putting a peroid or something random.


you're double posting when you could easily just edit your previous post. that's against the rules. and forcing player into specific roles is lame and unhalo-like. it would throw off the balance and really kinda suck.

[Edited on 06.02.2009 12:30 PM PDT]

  • 06.02.2009 12:29 PM PDT

Posted by: pointerelkins
i didnt edit it cuse i bet 50$ no one would of re-read it. besides bigger team means more fun. more teamwork. more tatics.more vechile usage. just to me bigger teams mean bigger fun. not like 4 on 4 slayer where u usally got to wait for someone to spawn. with bigger team you will be in combat in 98% percent of the time


so you double posted so people would read it? there's a word for that... bumping.

more players =/= more fun. more players = chaotic mess, more dying, more lag, less personal action, and longer travel times.

when you get more players into the game the less important you are, and the less of an impact you make.

and halo isn't meant to be a vehicle battle game. it's an fps, with vehicles added. you throw in a ton of vehicles then the player who's on foot is hosed.

[Edited on 06.02.2009 12:36 PM PDT]

  • 06.02.2009 12:35 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

18 | Web Designer | DBK Representative

Posted by: AceDread
A server that size will cost a bundle. Not only that, Like M.A.G, it will have to have group chat between 7-16 people. No way a game can handle that many people and all of that voice bandwidth.


With microsofts party system you wouldn't need voice chat to be supported. The problem with that is you can't meet new people. Maybe they would split up the teams like they do in 1 vs 100. Your paired with four people who you can talk to. It's just a thought. There are always ways around everything, and if there aren't then their are alternatives.

don't double post.

[Edited on 06.02.2009 1:00 PM PDT]

  • 06.02.2009 12:59 PM PDT

Posted by: pointerelkins
i have alot of friends and i want them to all play together i can go into big team battle but we will be in different teams. like if i had 13 people want to play it just seems out of hands. if theres more people there would be Less travel time. i didnt double post i said ok lets change it to 32 people.


so you're telling me, in a massive level that the walking distance to the opponents base is SHORTER?! wrong.

  • 06.02.2009 1:06 PM PDT

even on a map like sand trap it would be crowded, and with all that onscreen action it would lag like a mother.

  • 06.02.2009 1:13 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2