Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Poll [44 votes]: should bungie turn the multiplayer up to 11........er 36 or maybe 64!!
  • Poll [44 votes]: should bungie turn the multiplayer up to 11........er 36 or maybe 64!!
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: should bungie turn the multiplayer up to 11........er 36 or maybe 64!!

Poll: should bungie turn the multiplayer up to 11........er 36 or maybe 64!!  [closed]
YES more people more xplozionz more awesome:  39%
(17 Votes)
NO 16 is too many as it is:  27%
(12 Votes)
maybe only if it is optional as a playlist:  34%
(15 Votes)
Total Votes: 44

so does any one else want a bigger multiplayer in halo like battlefield or many others out in the world I'm sure bungie could do it and well what does the community think?

  • 10.25.2009 7:11 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

16 people is enough... Any more than that would be pure chaos, and wouldn't be fun at all.

  • 10.25.2009 7:12 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Senior Mythic Member

Proud frenchie, elite fan, anthro artist not hellbent on yiff convention/pics/whatever, mature and intelligent forum guy, 4chaner, halo 2 lover and halo 3 hater.

64 people spamming grenades? no thanks.
besides, the xbox wouldn't be able to keep up with that, and there'd be so much lag...

  • 10.25.2009 7:22 AM PDT

that's true in its current iteration but there's that other game out there on the P$3 that has over 200 players. although if they made halo like that it wouldn't be halo, it would be kina nifty to see a game in the haloverse like that at least to me

  • 10.25.2009 7:24 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Senior Mythic Member

Proud frenchie, elite fan, anthro artist not hellbent on yiff convention/pics/whatever, mature and intelligent forum guy, 4chaner, halo 2 lover and halo 3 hater.

there is only one game on the PS3 has 256 players and it uses dedicated servers.

so, we know reach is probably not going to use dedicated servers... do you think you could host a game with 64 people? your xbox doesn't have enough processing power to synchronize everybody at every single moment on the map, while applying all textures, sound effects, visual effects, etc (and the map would need to be huge to have 64 players... 3 times sandtrap, at least).

this, plus again, the lag would be horrible.

[Edited on 10.25.2009 7:29 AM PDT]

  • 10.25.2009 7:29 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member

READ:

Sending me a group invite or some kind of other pointless, time wasting advert gets you blocked. Don't bother wasting your time. kthnxbai

I would only want more than 16 players if the maps were large, and if there were dedicated servers. Maybe beef it up to like, 18 players for custom games or something, but i'm not expecting anything more than 16 player multiplayer.

  • 10.25.2009 7:36 AM PDT

Intoxicated Warthawg driver for Hire
Posted by: AquaBlader
CTF is god. Praise his name. For the flag is his holy messiah.

Posted by: Bricypoo Nobody quotes me and puts me in their signatures It makes me sad ... :(
My third montage!

BF enjoys a 12v12 set up. It can be quite enjoyable at time. Other times I've seen it lag horribly. I'd love to see perhaps 10v10 or 12v12 for Halo, the main issue is simply lag. If bungie were to add a search by region as well as connection that MIGHT help. I'm not sure about the current netcode either. The system would most likely need to be significantly reworked for increased players in MM to work.

  • 10.25.2009 7:40 AM PDT

ok i get the lag argument but I think it could be done lag or no besides if they did push it up that high I doubt they would make it required or at least make it so teh uber l33t MLG guys could have the smaller areas and what not I just believe Halo could go bigger and still be fun.

  • 10.25.2009 7:43 AM PDT

16 is perfect.

  • 10.25.2009 8:55 AM PDT

Battle field has mmore pplayers playin I think it's possible and I think they should.

  • 10.25.2009 9:17 AM PDT

I have to say 16 is good but i just want sequels or whatever to previous games to be bigger and better than the previous and with them regearing everything I see no real reason y they cant do this and it not be good heck one of the release 360 games Perfect Dark did it, not well and i know it had laaaaaag, but for crimaney sakes this is bungie

  • 10.25.2009 9:28 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Legendary Member

Hello! I'm a male!

Posted by: DebatingBoot
16 people is enough... Any more than that would be pure chaos, and wouldn't be fun at all.
Sais you! Pure chaos is the ultimate fun in any first persons shooter game!

[Edited on 10.25.2009 9:39 AM PDT]

  • 10.25.2009 9:36 AM PDT

ok a little insanity is fun but that depends on the circumstances if its a custom game sure ok if blam! hits the fan then at least your with your friends but if your in a ranked and some times social matches people just get mad and quit

  • 10.25.2009 9:54 AM PDT

also with reach if they went on a larger scale they could include more vehicles like a drive..er flyable pelican that a couple threads want.

  • 10.25.2009 10:27 AM PDT

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.

Only if you like lag fests. I would be cool if it could be made to work but halo 3 lags as it is and that's with far fewer people than the 36 or 64 players you proposing.

  • 10.25.2009 10:33 AM PDT

My Bungiepedia Article | My Halo Reach Service Record | The Mile High Club - For Bad Company 2, Halo, and CoD!

Nyan nyan, nyan nyan, ni hao nyan! Gorgeous, delicious, deculture!

I think that the amount of players should be turned up to 24, but no more than that.

  • 10.25.2009 10:34 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: DK daze
Dude I don't care and my grammer is perfect.I used "Big", as you recall it to mak is specific."to not do...",is incorrect beause "do" is present tense/perfect(or future) when it was a past tense.

I want the max to be 12v12 or 16v16 at most. BTB is pretty much all I play anymore, but even I have to agree that 64 players, assuming it's even possible, is way to many.

  • 10.25.2009 10:36 AM PDT

ok really enough with the lag stuff any game on live can have lag for any amount of reasons but this is a new game that they are making that they can find ways to help prevent lag but obviously not eliminate it the point is enough with the lag comments I realize people hate it but not alot can done about it unless you want the game to be incredibly gimped

  • 10.25.2009 10:45 AM PDT

I'll pass...I rarely play beyond a 6v6 in Halo as it is.

  • 10.25.2009 10:48 AM PDT

Maybe 18 or 20 at the most but anymore than that is overkill.

  • 10.25.2009 10:52 AM PDT

I don't believe it would be overkill there are quite a few games out there that have this many if not more players and its ok and they aren't even half as good as halo is

  • 10.25.2009 11:05 AM PDT

and b4 the whole possible map size argument starts bungie has a way around this as it is just look at sandbox its huge though not entirely connected, but to the point they can always take maps and put up barriers or what not and use them for any size or type of game so you can use the same map just not be able to go everywhere in it if the game type or size does not suit it

  • 10.25.2009 11:30 AM PDT

I think 24 or 32 would be cool but no more than that. Now what we really need is custom game matchmaking. Like you make a match and post it on like a wall and when people See ONe flag on Vallhalla wiith 9 people they join.

  • 10.25.2009 11:39 AM PDT

sigh another dead thread i suppose

  • 10.25.2009 11:39 AM PDT

people who voted no are ghey... more people means bigger maps. Bigger wars Epic battles.

  • 10.25.2009 11:40 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2