Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Would you prefer a "Join Active Session" Matchmaking System?
  • Subject: Would you prefer a "Join Active Session" Matchmaking System?
Subject: Would you prefer a "Join Active Session" Matchmaking System?


Posted by: NinjaLord77
Halo has penalties for quitting games so if they did the Join Session system and someone enters a game they are losing and they quit out they will get penalized for it. It sounds like a good idea since you won't have to wait long for a game but I don't think it will work.


Also, did you read the original post before commenting? I get the itching suspicion you did not. Come on people, know what your actually voting on and where the starting point for the conversation is before replying.

  • 11.11.2011 4:07 AM PDT

Yes for social playlists, this would be nice.
For ranked playlists, however, that wouldn't work.

  • 11.11.2011 4:10 AM PDT


Posted by: Flyin Hero
Yes for social playlists, this would be nice.
For ranked playlists, however, that wouldn't work.


My sentiments exactly. Then it becomes how best to control the "Join Active Session in Progress" system in Social Playlists as to attempt to avoid the most amount of annoyance.

  • 11.11.2011 8:50 AM PDT

PSR = (((K+A)/D)*Win%)*120
The average player's PSR = 100


BigTeamBattle.net

No, but I'd like if people would stop quitting everytime one little thing doesn't go their way.

  • 11.11.2011 8:52 AM PDT


Posted by: Bito922
No, but I'd like if people would stop quitting everytime one little thing doesn't go their way.


You won't be able to change that. That problem of quitters will only likely increase going forward as people have many quality FPS options available to them to play and the minute they encounter a struggle they will want to quit the game. They may perhaps give the game several more attempts, but if the struggles continue they will only continue to quit until they decide to out right switch the game. This is also more prevalent in Halo:Reach due to the temporary ban, which encourages them to switch to another game.

[Edited on 11.11.2011 9:01 AM PST]

  • 11.11.2011 8:59 AM PDT

Lol

Hate joining games that are already over, even if my team is winning. What's the point of playing the game if you can't play a full match?

  • 11.11.2011 8:59 AM PDT


Posted by: Killer4785
Hate joining games that are already over, even if my team is winning. What's the point of playing the game if you can't play a full match?


What's the difference between joining a game and participating for a tad bit, if at all, for the game to end and then be present, in the lobby, for the beginning of the next game verses searching and searching and searching for that lobby to become available? I'd rather be put into a game right away verses waiting in a lengthy matchmaking search any day.

[Edited on 11.11.2011 9:04 AM PST]

  • 11.11.2011 9:04 AM PDT

Lol

I would rather wait longer having a balanced game than have a quick 10 second wait, playing against a non-balanced game. Your contradicting yourself, you say people will quit if they get frustrated. If the Match-Making system doesn't produce balance and fair games, wouldn't that make them quit more until they find an easy game? The problem is that people like yourself are too selfish to understand that its not just your happiness matters. Balance is more important than just finding a quick match and get dominated in. People need to learn that the world including video games doesn't revolve around you.

  • 11.11.2011 9:09 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.


Posted by: eLantern

Posted by: Killer4785
Hate joining games that are already over, even if my team is winning. What's the point of playing the game if you can't play a full match?


What's the difference between joining a game and participating for a tad bit, if at all, for the game to end and then be present, in the lobby, for the beginning of the next game verses searching and searching and searching for that lobby to become available? I'd rather be put into a game right away verses waiting in a lengthy matchmaking search any day.


The wait times are not long, at all.

Also, the drop-in/out system does not work with Halo's playstyle and flow of games. People quitting breaks this flow, but so does adding new randoms in the middle of a game to make up for it. Halo games are supposed to go from start to finish with the same people on the teams that were there when the match started.

  • 11.11.2011 10:26 AM PDT


Posted by: Killer4785
I would rather wait longer having a balanced game than have a quick 10 second wait, playing against a non-balanced game. Your contradicting yourself, you say people will quit if they get frustrated. If the Match-Making system doesn't produce balance and fair games, wouldn't that make them quit more until they find an easy game? The problem is that people like yourself are too selfish to understand that its not just your happiness matters. Balance is more important than just finding a quick match and get dominated in. People need to learn that the world including video games doesn't revolve around you.


Wow, buddy... wow. Actually, if you bothered to play any other FPS games other than Halo maybe you'd know that Halo's system doesn't produce the most fair or balanced games out there. In fact there isn't such a system in existence. The only thing that can be done is to ensure that there is as much balance and fairness as possible through providing a system that's flexible. That is not accomplished by locking players into a match where if someone is to quit by whatever method... start screen quitting or dashboarding or simply turning off their xbox, the end result is a complete loss of match balance with no hope of getting it back. At least with a "Join Active Session in Progress" there is a good chance the game can still remain relatively balanced.

In regards to me contradicting myself... I have done no such thing. All along I have been looking at a method of ensuring all players will be provided some method for enjoyment. The real problem here is your stubbornness to accept anything other than Halo's traditional matchmaking system, which in my experience has been proving it's self to the masses of online FPS gamers to be less than ideal. This is not to suggest that these other FPS games have a perfect system themselves but seem to have a system that produces less irritation on the whole. The quitting problem isn't really a huge problem in several of the other games I play, nor have I heard many complaint about it unless I'm on here or other Halo sites.

Now, granted Halo is a different type of FPS and it's gameplay may not work as well with an identical "Join Active Session in Progress" system such as the one used in the most popular FPS (Call of Duty), but that doesn't mean that the idea behind it shouldn't be considered in some aspect for improvement to the matchmaking system for Halo. If you had bothered to read the original post instead of opening your trap immediately and being so smug in regards to my character and those who are of similar opinion to myself, then perhaps you would have seen exactly where I stood on the matter. If you would prefer to not play games with the "Join Active Session in Progress" then per my preference, which is outlined in the original post, you would prefer to play Ranked games where Halo's matchmaking system would still be similar to Halo's traditional system.

[Edited on 11.11.2011 10:47 AM PST]

  • 11.11.2011 10:32 AM PDT


Posted by: B Rye

Posted by: eLantern

Posted by: Killer4785
Hate joining games that are already over, even if my team is winning. What's the point of playing the game if you can't play a full match?


What's the difference between joining a game and participating for a tad bit, if at all, for the game to end and then be present, in the lobby, for the beginning of the next game verses searching and searching and searching for that lobby to become available? I'd rather be put into a game right away verses waiting in a lengthy matchmaking search any day.


The wait times are not long, at all.

Also, the drop-in/out system does not work with Halo's playstyle and flow of games. People quitting breaks this flow, but so does adding new randoms in the middle of a game to make up for it. Halo games are supposed to go from start to finish with the same people on the teams that were there when the match started.


I have had other experiences in searching and I know I'm not the only one. In regards to the "Join Active Session in Progress" matchmaking system you cannot know whether it would or wouldn't work as it has never been tried. Also, is there a Halo rule book I am unaware of that states specifically that Halo games are suppose to go from start to finish with the same people? Besides, it's kind of hard for that to be the truth once someone decides to quit, don't you think?

[Edited on 11.11.2011 11:20 AM PST]

  • 11.11.2011 10:35 AM PDT


Posted by: eLantern

Also, did you read the original post before commenting? I get the itching suspicion you did not. Come on people, know what your actually voting on and where the starting point for the conversation is before replying.


I know what you meant. It could happen you just have to wait and see.

  • 11.11.2011 10:38 AM PDT

Lol

Starcraft 2 has such a system. It forces you in a 50/50 win percentage. This means every match is balanced, equal, and *gasp* quick to find. Only wait a maximum of 1 minute. A drop in/drop out system creates more problems than it solves. If your a casual gamer then you probably won't care if you have balance since you don't value winning above and beyond. But if your competitive then the game becomes broken if people can just pop in and out at any time. It's like asking sports fans how should they approve sports and not the pros or coaches. How can you expect a balanced game if you ask everyday people's opinion when they don't dedicate that much time into the game itself. A drop in and out system is fine for social gametypes. But I'm tired of people that make threads like this who don't say, "This is entirely for social gametypes." Because your going to give the developers the wrong idea that everything should be social.



[Edited on 11.11.2011 12:04 PM PST]

  • 11.11.2011 11:58 AM PDT

Lol

Hell, even sometimes when you include social only, they will just put it all drop in and out because there too lazy to make two separate servers that work differently. The more people make threads like this the more likely it will happen and the competitive gamers will have no modern FPS to play because casuals keep whining about the current system.

  • 11.11.2011 12:03 PM PDT

Lol

All they have to do is make a system where you strictly win and lose 50/50. All matches will be competitive and balanced. Good people play against good people, bad people will play against bad people. The only reason why they wouldn't make a system like this for a shooter is because everyone's stats would be close to the same. K/D 1.0 etc. People couldn't boost stats or have bragging rights.

  • 11.11.2011 12:09 PM PDT

Flash Kicks beat Armor Lock.

TheLab.


Posted by: Killer4785
Hell, even sometimes when you include social only, they will just put it all drop in and out because there too lazy to make two separate servers that work differently. The more people make threads like this the more likely it will happen and the competitive gamers will have no modern FPS to play because casuals keep whining about the current system.


Have you ever thought, for just one second, that maybe the competitive side needs to maybe re~think their stance on what exactly is and isn't "competitive?"

  • 11.11.2011 12:10 PM PDT


Posted by: Darkside Eric

Posted by: Killer4785
Hell, even sometimes when you include social only, they will just put it all drop in and out because there too lazy to make two separate servers that work differently. The more people make threads like this the more likely it will happen and the competitive gamers will have no modern FPS to play because casuals keep whining about the current system.


Have you ever thought, for just one second, that maybe the competitive side needs to maybe re~think their stance on what exactly is and isn't "competitive?"

No. Drop in/out is retarded.

  • 11.11.2011 12:11 PM PDT

The only way I'd like to see it is if someones quits before the match starts (before first kill of the match is made). After that I wouldn't want to join any game all ready going on.

  • 11.11.2011 12:14 PM PDT

Lol

Competitive = complete balance and equality. Drop in and drop out causes inconsistency which then causes imbalance. Competitive gaming is strict and precise, how long have you actually played online FPS. Have you played any other FPS other than current fads, Halo, CoD, etc. You should be happy you even have a matchmaking system to begin with. Anyone who has played old join server based shooters will attest on how lucky the majority of gamers now are. Stop wanting more, you already took enough.

  • 11.11.2011 12:17 PM PDT

Lol

I do agree that having a team mate leave is bad. But making games random because of it is not the solution. If it is the solution, then competitive e-sports on consoles is dead. Look how much halo has already fallen, look how much people have already returned their MW3 copies? People are tired of being spoon fed the same crap every single year.

  • 11.11.2011 12:20 PM PDT

Flash Kicks beat Armor Lock.

TheLab.


Posted by: Killer4785
Competitive = complete balance and equality. Drop in and drop out causes inconsistency which then causes imbalance. Competitive gaming is strict and precise, how long have you actually played online FPS. Have you played any other FPS other than current fads, Halo, CoD, etc. You should be happy you even have a matchmaking system to begin with. Anyone who has played old join server based shooters will attest on how lucky the majority of gamers now are. Stop wanting more, you already took enough.


Hi, I used to play Starsiege TRIBES competitively.

Please re~think your stance.

Drop In/Out gameplay causes no more inconsistency than current gameplay because in current Halo gameplay a winning team can lose because of something as stupid as a rage quit or as uncontrollable as a power outage. If you and I are playing a match together in a 2v2, we're winning and my power goes out, not only can I not re~join the game once I get back on (unless you're on my friend list) but you, now faced 1v2, could now lose.

However, in the same scenario a secondary player who was searching in the same rank, playlist, etc, can view the game via a server list (dedicated > P2P) and hop in, thus taking up the slack and potentially keeping the game in your favor.

Exactly how does a current BTB game, where one person on the team has 3 guests, decides to quit leaving the game 4v8 make it enjoyable? Especially when there is no "surrender" option?

  • 11.11.2011 12:28 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.


Posted by: eLantern

In regards to the "Join Active Session in Progress" matchmaking system you cannot know whether it would or wouldn't work as it has never been tried. Also, is there a Halo rule book I am unaware of that states specifically that Halo games are suppose to go from start to finish with the same people? Besides, it's kind of hard for that to be the truth once someone decides to quit, don't you think?


Implementing a drop-in/out system will change the core idea of Halo too much, even more-so than Bloom and Armor Abilities. There doesn't have to be a rule book, it's common knowledge. Full games of the same people going from start to finish has been one of the main aspects of Halo since the beginning of online Matchmaking for it.

And as I have said, having people quit ruins the flow of the game, but so does adding a random person in the middle of the match. It doesn't work with Halo.

Don't get me wrong, the current system in Reach is flawed and needs changes to provide a better matchmaking system, but the drop-in/out system is not it.

[Edited on 11.11.2011 12:31 PM PST]

  • 11.11.2011 12:29 PM PDT

Eric, sometimes you make me wonder if you're really Sage undercover, lol.

  • 11.11.2011 12:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Darkside Eric

Hi, I used to play Starsiege TRIBES competitively.

Please re~think your stance.



Oh now you've done it.

  • 11.11.2011 12:30 PM PDT

Lol

I'm willing to lose 2v1 then have someone join me. The reason for this is because when you use a drop in and out system the skill levels of each player can differ. If I was losing before you left and now start winning from a new teammate, that's not right. I deserved to lose. And I expect the same thing vise versa. If I was winning a match earlier and one opponent rage quits and gets a teammate whose better than everyone else in the game and wins that's not fair to the team who was winning before. That's not equality in terms of ethics.

  • 11.11.2011 12:33 PM PDT