Halo: Combat Evolved Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Halo: CE Online for Xbox
  • Subject: Halo: CE Online for Xbox
Subject: Halo: CE Online for Xbox

I think Bungie should do it. If they made it, I'd be much more excited for it, than for Halo 3. Plus it's not like it would be hard or time consuming to make.

C'Mon... when are we going to see Halo: CE Online (Xbox)?

[Edited on 5/13/2006]

  • 05.13.2006 3:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

due to yours and MILLIONS of other peoples complaints, im on bungies side now. you know how long it takes to reconfigure halo1 xbox to make it xbl enabled? you need to turn halo1 into millions of pieces of unwritten data, then recompile them ALL (yes ALL millions, im sorry, BILLIONS of pieces) into xbl mode. then you gotta put the pices back together, i mean seriously, have you ever done a thousand piece jigsaw puzzle. well bungie has to do the "puzzle" a billion times. and then they have to release the damn thing! but wait?! whos going to buy it?!?!?! no one, cuz now everyone has halo2 live, halo1pc online, and now halo3. see, you think its EASY to make halo1 into online mode, but ITS NOT. go pay for some lessons or two about technology and itll make what i said much easier to understand. if you really want halo1 online action, go buy a decent PC, then buy halo1PC!!! omg, you really need a spanking or two, because this is the 6th time im posting this kind of thread, yes 6TH!!!

  • 05.13.2006 4:23 PM PDT

Posted by: gnome13
dude, you pulled a jesus!

Why pay another $50 for Halo 1 online when there is XLink Kai and XBC that go online for free? Granted those are a little laggy, but still, it's free and you get what you pay for...

  • 05.13.2006 4:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Budweiser Man 1
Why pay another $50 for Halo 1 online when there is XLink Kai and XBC that go online for free? Granted those are a little laggy, but still, it's free and you get what you pay for...


nicely said there, budwieser man! what he said, just get XBC or XLK, and POOF, youre now online. but seriously, these kinds of threads and complaints have got to stop. i dont want my 7th post of explaining to another tech n(ewcomer) about why halo1xbox cant go on live, to be an even more pissed off one.

or hell, just buy halo1PC as i have said before. its online enabled, no need to pay, and it will stop you and millions of others from complaining to bungie.

[Edited on 5/13/2006]

  • 05.13.2006 4:44 PM PDT

Why do people in ship mutinies always ask for "better treatment"? I'd ask for a pinball machine, because with all that rocking back and forth, you'd get a lot of free games.

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words - "mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.

XBOX CONNECT.

  • 05.13.2006 4:47 PM PDT

due to yours and MILLIONS of other peoples complaints, im on bungies side now. you know how long it takes to reconfigure halo1 xbox to make it xbl enabled? you need to turn halo1 into millions of pieces of unwritten data, then recompile them ALL (yes ALL millions, im sorry, BILLIONS of pieces) into xbl mode. then you gotta put the pices back together, i mean seriously, have you ever done a thousand piece jigsaw puzzle. well bungie has to do the "puzzle" a billion times. and then they have to release the damn thing! but wait?! whos going to buy it?!?!?! no one, cuz now everyone has halo2 live, halo1pc online, and now halo3. see, you think its EASY to make halo1 into online mode, but ITS NOT. go pay for some lessons or two about technology and itll make what i said much easier to understand. if you really want halo1 online action, go buy a decent PC, then buy halo1PC!!! omg, you really need a spanking or two, because this is the 6th time im posting this kind of thread, yes 6TH!!!

It's a good thing you know everything...

Guess what smart guy, I MAKE GAMES FOR A LIVING. I'm pretty sure I know how the system works. Then again, your little "puzzle" theory ALMOST made sense. Wait... no it didn't?

If a game is already coded for a system or console or whatever, it's not hard to add code into it to allow for online gaming. Really, it's probably about a couple hundred lines of code to properly code that game for online play. With refinement and the best of attention, they could easily have Halo: CE online for Xbox in less than 6 months.

It's not really that time consuming to take a game that's already made and allows it to communicate to other boxes over a simple system. They already have a LAN connection system, it's not that much of a difference to code it to XBL. The only reason it took them a while to make Halo: CE for PC is because they needed to recode the game for another platform. Even that didn't take long because they already had it all tested and controlled well, which in itself eliminates months, if not years, of trial and error testing.

Where was I complaining? I was suggesting Bungie to do it. What's the good in it for us? Having a great game with superior online coding and a good way to stop cheating, as well as getting great connections out of them instead of XBC. What's the good in it to Bungie? Making a lot of money for VERY little work. I wasn't ever complaining, I was making a suggestion. If it's such a pain in the ass to type on your keyboard, why are you doing it?

Learn what you're talking about before you think you can ramble to somebody that already knows how to do it. The fact is, you know nothing about coding a game or what it takes to make or alter one. You're arguing with somebody IN THE INDUSTRY. Watch who you criticize before you just run your mouth.

Nice try.

Why pay another $50 for Halo 1 online when there is XLink Kai and XBC that go online for free? Granted those are a little laggy, but still, it's free and you get what you pay for...

Tried it. The problem isn't lag so much as it is CONSTANT cheating, and the lack of competetive spirit, that is so great in Halo 2. Bungie could make a lot of money with very little effort on this project. XBC is simply not going to cut it for a lot of people that want competetive games, good connections, and a LOT less cheating. Even Halo: CE for PC has a good online system, but the cheating still makes it really unappealing.



[Edited on 5/14/2006]

  • 05.14.2006 6:55 AM PDT

Don't follow in my footsteps; I walk into walls
my 360s blog

If this does happen most likely it will be a live arcade release lived up for 360 by a MGS team.

  • 05.14.2006 10:38 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Yeah most likely Bungie won't do it. If they've given up on on Halo 2 live what makes you think they're going to keep on working on a better but much older game? They might release it in the XBL arcade for the 360 but I still dobut that even. Your best bet is just keep on playing XBC even though like you said how they mod or buy Halo:PC, and make some of your own maps and mods like everyone else does on Halo:PC.

  • 05.14.2006 11:49 AM PDT

As an industry insider, you would be aware that taking the time and effort to revisit a 4 year old title that was released for a last-gen console in order to add a single feature (XBL) that is also last-gen would be a move that would have all sorts of risks.

Since you make games for a living, then how about you propose the following to Bungie.


Your company will pay for the rights to re-code Halo for the Xbox.

Your company devotes the man-hours to decompiling the existing game.

Your company re-writes the game to have altered netcode.

Your company re-writes the game to allow downloadable content.

Your company re-writes the game to include a matchmaking system.

Your company recompiles and tests the game and the changes.

Your company decides what factors of online play have to be altered to compensate for the change from a 100 MBit LAN to the Internet.

Your company allows Bungie to have final say as to the playability of the final product and that it stayed true to the original. It is after all, their IP.

Then the new product is packaged, marketed and released. *cha-ching!* And how long? Just a few months? That's one hell of a short production cycle, I would imagine at least a year to a year and a half.

Then it hits shelves. What price? $50?

So a gamer is given the choice of spending $50 on an Xbox title (which aren't really flying off of the shelves even now) that is the same game that came out (that is by then) 5-6 years previously and it's merely added the ability to play on the legacy XBL system.

And guess what else is on the shelves at the same time?


Halo 3 for the 2 year old 360.

Halo 2 for the 5 year old Xbox and 4 year old XBL for $15-20

Halo 1 for the 5 year old Xbox for $10-20 and free tunneling software

Halo 1 re-released for the 5 year old Xbox (with XBL-classic support) for $50?

Countless other titles that are attempting to get the attention and dollars from the gamers out there.

I don't see that as a valid or viable business plan. I don't see your company, Bungie or Microsoft Gaming making anything off of this but red ink. Now, before you get defensive on me, I am not attacking you, nor am I questioning (or necessarily impressed) by your statement of being in the industry. So please don't feel that I am attacking you or your idea. I merely see problems with it.

I do however believe that Bungie is making a wise decision to let that game stand as-is and not place the reputation of themselves or their titles at risk by undertaking such a dangerous move.



Recon 54- so what you're saying is the age-old staple of the gaming industry: The gaming company (Bungie, in this case) wouldn't be willing to take the risk.

I understand your point of view, and it is justified enough. As you said, yes, they probably would not take the risk. I think if presented with enough of a reason, and having reasonable evidence that they could make a big profit off it, they would do it. Any company would do anything reasonable if they knew they could make money.

However, like you've stated, they probably wouldn't, even if they knew what kind of money and support they would get from the community, simply because: they don't want to take the risk.

Unfortunately, that's the problem with a lot of gaming companies today. While, yes, a lot of their decisions are justified in denying new ideas for games just because of the risk involved, I don't think the industry listens to enough ideas to understand where the market COULD move, instead of where it's inevitably going to wind up. That's where people like me step in and try to think in a different direction. Who knows... you could see me in a couple years leading one of the most revolutionary gaming groups in the history of the world... or I could wind up working at McDonald's for the rest of my life. There's no harm in thinking, right?

My main point is that there's no way to really tell whether or not they're going to lose money, right off the bat. How do I know that? Well, first off, you are eliminating several months if not a year or two of work and funding by not having to re-design anything within the game. The characters, maps, physics engine... everything is there already, and tested to an acceptable level. That right there saves bundles of money and plenty of time (and risk), compared to any new game hitting the market. There is also marketing eliminated from the equation because Halo:CE is already one of the most revolutionary games of it's kind, and there are millions of avid fans out there salivating at the thought of being able to play with anybody they wanted. Afterall, several Halo fans still prefer Halo:CE over Halo 2.

After that, all you'd need to worry about is coding the online portion of it quickly and efficiently, and marketing the game properly.

For one, Bungie and Halo:CE already have a strong enough reputation in the gaming industry, and to gamers around the world, to be able to market this game minimally and still be able to sell copies without much effort.

The one thing that I believe Halo has separated from is competition with other titles. When Halo:CE came out, many gamers literally bought an XBOX just to play Halo:CE. How many console sellers have we seen in our time? Very few. With the reputation behind the company AND the game, there's no question the product would sell itself. Worrying about competition with other titles is obsolete, as it never had competition in the first place. Console sellers don't compete with anybody other than itself, and the limits it can set and break continually.

However, your proposal to sell the game for $50 is the flaw in your argument. Of course, for a game that is already made, released, and a tad outdated, you wouldn't turn around and sell it for $50 again. You could sell it for $25-$30 and maximize your sales to profit efficiency... of course you'd have to actually test for the correct number, but I'd be willing to venture that something around $25 would sell more copies AND maximize profits in this case, in comparison to $50.

As a gamer, would you pay $50 to buy the same game, but with online capabilities added? Probably not. Do you think a majority of people would be willing to pay less than $30 for this title (and in consideration of Halo's several million fans, most of whom are already great targets for the release)? I believe so.

I think, if Bungie were willing to take the chance, and they could find an optimal price to sell the game, they could easily make a profit just from the people that are already fans of their products, JUST BECAUSE of their reputation. It's a rare thing to see profit being made just from loyal fans... very few companies can claim to that, ESPECIALLY in the gaming industry. Take a look at Halo 3. You KNOW there will be several million copies of it pre-ordered (paid for before the game even hits the market), and Bungie could throw it together haphazardly and still easily make money. Their reputation sells games, which is why I believe Halo: CE Online for Xbox would do well.

Of course, this is all just my opinion, and really, business is run on opinions of others. Bungie could hear a proposal like this and say I'm insane. Whereas if I proposed the same thing to a scrappy group of designers, they would jump at the opportunity, assuming we had the rights and everything.

Outsourcing is a possibility, and I know on both ends, Bungie would be willing to let somebody else do it (if they figured they could make money), and there would be another company out there to take the small task of just adding another feature to a game that is already created, tested, and sold VERY well. I'm not saying I want to take the responsibility, as I am also working on things and can't afford to spend time on anything other than what I am trying to accomplish, nor do I have much money to risk right now.

Oh well. Opinions don't have to agree, and I didn't think they would seriously consider the proposal anyway, just because they are already working on something else, and the biggest reason for denial in the gaming industry: They don't want to take the risk. I was simply posting this to see what kind of support the fans would have of the idea. Afterall, once you get a ball rolling and some support behind it, there's not much of a limit to what you can achieve. Bungie should know this. The same game we're discussing proved that concept.

Thanks for the reply.

As a fan, I would like to see it done. As a businessman, I doubt Bungie would be willing to invest time or money to make it happen.

  • 05.14.2006 1:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I'd love to see this done

  • 05.14.2006 2:50 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Unlucky-17 Great post.

Recon#54 and some Game developers (not say any names) are just not capable of thinking outside of the Box.

Spend,Spend,Spend, thats the only way to make a game is Recon #54's slogan.

I have a cheaper way to make the game more online friendly.

All you have to do is add More Stats to the Carnage report at the end of the online or lan game.Then have all those Stats Save to the profile you picked then save it to a memory card."Hello Mc Fly"

So Recon#54 since you know it all how long will that take? Aww!! i think with two programers @ 40 hours per week two months.

Now what did we learn today? Thats right reacon #54 "How to beat a dead horse." did i ever tell you that I'm the ill-lusAlive

  • 05.14.2006 10:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: unlucky17
As an industry insider, you would be aware that taking the time and effort to revisit a 4 year old title that was released for a last-gen console in order to add a single feature (XBL) that is also last-gen would be a move that would have all sorts of risks.

Since you make games for a living, then how about you propose the following to Bungie.


Your company will pay for the rights to re-code Halo for the Xbox.

Your company devotes the man-hours to decompiling the existing game.

Your company re-writes the game to have altered netcode.

Your company re-writes the game to allow downloadable content.

Your company re-writes the game to include a matchmaking system.

Your company recompiles and tests the game and the changes.

Your company decides what factors of online play have to be altered to compensate for the change from a 100 MBit LAN to the Internet.

Your company allows Bungie to have final say as to the playability of the final product and that it stayed true to the original. It is after all, their IP.

Then the new product is packaged, marketed and released. *cha-ching!* And how long? Just a few months? That's one hell of a short production cycle, I would imagine at least a year to a year and a half.

Then it hits shelves. What price? $50?

So a gamer is given the choice of spending $50 on an Xbox title (which aren't really flying off of the shelves even now) that is the same game that came out (that is by then) 5-6 years previously and it's merely added the ability to play on the legacy XBL system.

And guess what else is on the shelves at the same time?


Halo 3 for the 2 year old 360.

Halo 2 for the 5 year old Xbox and 4 year old XBL for $15-20

Halo 1 for the 5 year old Xbox for $10-20 and free tunneling software

Halo 1 re-released for the 5 year old Xbox (with XBL-classic support) for $50?

Countless other titles that are attempting to get the attention and dollars from the gamers out there.

I don't see that as a valid or viable business plan. I don't see your company, Bungie or Microsoft Gaming making anything off of this but red ink. Now, before you get defensive on me, I am not attacking you, nor am I questioning (or necessarily impressed) by your statement of being in the industry. So please don't feel that I am attacking you or your idea. I merely see problems with it.

I do however believe that Bungie is making a wise decision to let that game stand as-is and not place the reputation of themselves or their titles at risk by undertaking such a dangerous move.



Recon 54- so what you're saying is the age-old staple of the gaming industry: The gaming company (Bungie, in this case) wouldn't be willing to take the risk.

I understand your point of view, and it is justified enough. As you said, yes, they probably would not take the risk. I think if presented with enough of a reason, and having reasonable evidence that they could make a big profit off it, they would do it. Any company would do anything reasonable if they knew they could make money.

However, like you've stated, they probably wouldn't, even if they knew what kind of money and support they would get from the community, simply because: they don't want to take the risk.

Unfortunately, that's the problem with a lot of gaming companies today. While, yes, a lot of their decisions are justified in denying new ideas for games just because of the risk involved, I don't think the industry listens to enough ideas to understand where the market COULD move, instead of where it's inevitably going to wind up. That's where people like me step in and try to think in a different direction. Who knows... you could see me in a couple years leading one of the most revolutionary gaming groups in the history of the world... or I could wind up working at McDonald's for the rest of my life. There's no harm in thinking, right?

My main point is that there's no way to really tell whether or not they're going to lose money, right off the bat. How do I know that? Well, first off, you are eliminating several months if not a year or two of work and funding by not having to re-design anything within the game. The characters, maps, physics engine... everything is there already, and tested to an acceptable level. That right there saves bundles of money and plenty of time (and risk), compared to any new game hitting the market. There is also marketing eliminated from the equation because Halo:CE is already one of the most revolutionary games of it's kind, and there are millions of avid fans out there salivating at the thought of being able to play with anybody they wanted. Afterall, several Halo fans still prefer Halo:CE over Halo 2.

After that, all you'd need to worry about is coding the online portion of it quickly and efficiently, and marketing the game properly.

For one, Bungie and Halo:CE already have a strong enough reputation in the gaming industry, and to gamers around the world, to be able to market this game minimally and still be able to sell copies without much effort.

The one thing that I believe Halo has separated from is competition with other titles. When Halo:CE came out, many gamers literally bought an XBOX just to play Halo:CE. How many console sellers have we seen in our time? Very few. With the reputation behind the company AND the game, there's no question the product would sell itself. Worrying about competition with other titles is obsolete, as it never had competition in the first place. Console sellers don't compete with anybody other than itself, and the limits it can set and break continually.

However, your proposal to sell the game for $50 is the flaw in your argument. Of course, for a game that is already made, released, and a tad outdated, you wouldn't turn around and sell it for $50 again. You could sell it for $25-$30 and maximize your sales to profit efficiency... of course you'd have to actually test for the correct number, but I'd be willing to venture that something around $25 would sell more copies AND maximize profits in this case, in comparison to $50.

As a gamer, would you pay $50 to buy the same game, but with online capabilities added? Probably not. Do you think a majority of people would be willing to pay less than $30 for this title (and in consideration of Halo's several million fans, most of whom are already great targets for the release)? I believe so.

I think, if Bungie were willing to take the chance, and they could find an optimal price to sell the game, they could easily make a profit just from the people that are already fans of their products, JUST BECAUSE of their reputation. It's a rare thing to see profit being made just from loyal fans... very few companies can claim to that, ESPECIALLY in the gaming industry. Take a look at Halo 3. You KNOW there will be several million copies of it pre-ordered (paid for before the game even hits the market), and Bungie could throw it together haphazardly and still easily make money. Their reputation sells games, which is why I believe Halo: CE Online for Xbox would do well.

Of course, this is all just my opinion, and really, business is run on opinions of others. Bungie could hear a proposal like this and say I'm insane. Whereas if I proposed the same thing to a scrappy group of designers, they would jump at the opportunity, assuming we had the rights and everything.

Outsourcing is a possibility, and I know on both ends, Bungie would be willing to let somebody else do it (if they figured they could make money), and there would be another company out there to take the small task of just adding another feature to a game that is already created, tested, and sold VERY well. I'm not saying I want to take the responsibility, as I am also working on things and can't afford to spend time on anything other than what I am trying to accomplish, nor do I have much money to risk right now.

Oh well. Opinions don't have to agree, and I didn't think they would seriously consider the proposal anyway, just because they are already working on something else, and the biggest reason for denial in the gaming industry: They don't want to take the risk. I was simply posting this to see what kind of support the fans would have of the idea. Afterall, once you get a ball rolling and some support behind it, there's not much of a limit to what you can achieve. Bungie should know this. The same game we're discussing proved that concept.

Thanks for the reply.

As a fan, I would like to see it done. As a businessman, I doubt Bungie would be willing to invest time or money to make it happen.



Just face it man - you got pwned by your crap idea. no-one is going to bother to remake or buy a live enabled halo 1. its dead. just get over it and wait for halo 3.

  • 05.15.2006 7:42 AM PDT

Posted by: Recon Number 54
*enormous quotes snipped*
Posted by: russybabes
Just face it man - you got pwned by your crap idea. no-one is going to bother to remake or buy a live enabled halo 1. its dead. just get over it and wait for halo 3.

No one is attempting to "pwn" here. We're talking and discussing, not playing a text-based slayer match. The only losers in a discussion are those who refuse to listen.

There really is no such thing as a "crap idea", especially if the person with the idea is willing to talk about it and be reasonable. The original poster seems to be open to discussion as long as the discussion is valid and polite.

The original poster (and others) have made valid posts with reasons and supporting statements. Others have listened, done their best to understand and then replied calmly and civilly (to varying degrees).

I know, it all seems strange and surreal, but that is actually how people conversed and communicated with each other prior to the Internet.


Well said my friend. Professionalism is always appreciated.

  • 05.16.2006 12:38 PM PDT

Let there be CHAOS!

funny how you guys mention XBC and Xlink. yes they are great tunneling programs! too bad no one even plays halo 1 on them.....so why would you tell someone to just get XBC and Xlink and be happy?

i would spend 50 on halo:CE for Live. i'd have it the day it comes out

  • 05.16.2006 10:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Recon Number 54
As an industry insider, you would be aware that taking the time and effort to revisit a 4 year old title that was released for a last-gen console in order to add a single feature (XBL) that is also last-gen would be a move that would have all sorts of risks.

Since you make games for a living, then how about you propose the following to Bungie.

* Your company will pay for the rights to re-code Halo for the Xbox.
* Your company devotes the man-hours to decompiling the existing game.
* Your company re-writes the game to have altered netcode.
* Your company re-writes the game to allow downloadable content.
* Your company re-writes the game to include a matchmaking system.
* Your company recompiles and tests the game and the changes.
* Your company decides what factors of online play have to be altered to compensate for the change from a 100 MBit LAN to the Internet.
* Your company allows Bungie to have final say as to the playability of the final product and that it stayed true to the original. It is after all, their IP.

Then the new product is packaged, marketed and released. *cha-ching!* And how long? Just a few months? That's one hell of a short production cycle, I would imagine at least a year to a year and a half.

Then it hits shelves. What price? $50?

So a gamer is given the choice of spending $50 on an Xbox title (which aren't really flying off of the shelves even now) that is the same game that came out (that is by then) 5-6 years previously and it's merely added the ability to play on the legacy XBL system.

And guess what else is on the shelves at the same time?

* Halo 3 for the 2 year old 360.
* Halo 2 for the 5 year old Xbox and 4 year old XBL for $15-20
* Halo 1 for the 5 year old Xbox for $10-20 and free tunneling software
* Halo 1 re-released for the 5 year old Xbox (with XBL-classic support) for $50?
* Countless other titles that are attempting to get the attention and dollars from the gamers out there.

I don't see that as a valid or viable business plan. I don't see your company, Bungie or Microsoft Gaming making anything off of this but red ink. Now, before you get defensive on me, I am not attacking you, nor am I questioning (or necessarily impressed) by your statement of being in the industry. So please don't feel that I am attacking you or your idea. I merely see problems with it.

I do however believe that Bungie is making a wise decision to let that game stand as-is and not place the reputation of themselves or their titles at risk by undertaking such a dangerous move.


Who said anything about downloadable content? That would be nice, but just getting Halo 1 on XBL would be even nicer.

I myself don't want a "matchmaking" system. I hate the matchmaking system and it's one of the main things that drove me away from Halo 2. I want to be able to play what I want, when I want. SERVER LISTS BABY!!!

I'd pay $200 for Halo 1 on XBL. I was a beta tester for XBL, yet, there were no games I wanted to play online with XBL. I kept my sub for two years waiting for Halo 2, not having one game I found good online. Then found out I couldn't play what I wanted on Halo 2. So, all that time keeping my sub up was a waste of money. I'm not going to re-sub this time. There simply isn't anything I want to play online. Halo CE on XBC would keep me around for years to come.

  • 05.17.2006 4:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Chaosenemy
funny how you guys mention XBC and Xlink. yes they are great tunneling programs! too bad no one even plays halo 1 on them.....so why would you tell someone to just get XBC and Xlink and be happy?

i would spend 50 on halo:CE for Live. i'd have it the day it comes out


??? Me and my friends still play H1 on XBC all the time. They are coming over again this Saturday for a day of H1 on XBC. There aren't as many players as before, but we still have no problems finding others wanting to play.

Now, I can't speak for XLink. The one time I got on it had no players. I then switched to XBC and had several. I uninstalled XLink and never tried it again.

  • 05.17.2006 4:29 PM PDT