Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Who is playtesting Halo3 for balance?
  • Subject: Who is playtesting Halo3 for balance?
Subject: Who is playtesting Halo3 for balance?
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: TheBigShow
Posted by: Wiltron

Nice patronizing post from an MLG jerk. You're so right. Halo2 plays itself. I just kick the controller now and then and rack up the kills..


Obviously he was exaggerating. You automatically assume hes an "MLG jerk." Tell me, what does it take to be considered "MLG?" Do you have to play with their settings? Visit the site? Go to a tournament? Or is it just because he doesnt like the dumbed down gameplay in Halo 2 so you lash out at what you think is the source, when in fact its not? Do you realize that Bungie and MLG are friends? Ever look at Bungie front page? They have links to MLG all the time and guess what? MLG uses Halo 2 as its flagship game!!! OMG, they arent mortal enemies set against each other.

You seem to think that if someone desires more balance in the game that they are automatically an "MLG jerk." Simply because half a year ago some kids came on here getting all pissy calling themselves "MLG" this and "MLG" that does not mean they represent the majority of MLG players.

Instead of making blind, ignorant generalizations, explain your point of view to the best of your abilities; it will make people respect your opinion a little bit more.

Actually im not over exaggerating about do it yourself or the big hitboxes nor am I being a Jerk or a MLG Jerk. If you dont believe me you can test it yourself and see the big differences between H1 and H2. There is also vids also showing these differences. And actually because the game is dumbed down you probably could kick around the controler and get a kill or two :) Never tried it but probably would work playing with your feet.

  • 06.15.2006 2:48 PM PDT

Death by figure skater.

Well, you've probably got to have bigger hitboxes and more auto aim when building a game for Live. At least, I'd think you would.

However, that does not mean you can't have balanced weaponry and spawns. These things should exist with Halo3. It should be priority #1 in my opinion, because the single player era of gaming is dead or dying. It's all about Live MP now.

I'm an MLG supporter and at the same time, I love playing Action Sack. I'm an example of the best of both worlds. ;) I like to have fun, but I also like to compete. Which is why I firmly believe everyone from every preference will love Halo3 if it solves the balance puzzle.

  • 06.15.2006 3:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

A Guide to Networking, Matchmaking, and Host in Halo (HBO mirror)

Bungie Friends and Family invitee, and sender of "random emails" about networking.

If Bungie can get a good client trust model in, there's no need for bigger hitboxes.

Basically if Bungie can get the host to accept the Client's view (assuming no lag/network errors/manipulation), things would be fine.

  • 06.15.2006 3:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: OksanaBayul
Well, you've probably got to have bigger hitboxes and more auto aim when building a game for Live. At least, I'd think you would.

However, that does not mean you can't have balanced weaponry and spawns. These things should exist with Halo3. It should be priority #1 in my opinion, because the single player era of gaming is dead or dying. It's all about Live MP now.

I'm an MLG supporter and at the same time, I love playing Action Sack. I'm an example of the best of both worlds. ;) I like to have fun, but I also like to compete. Which is why I firmly believe everyone from every preference will love Halo3 if it solves the balance puzzle.

You dont need big hitboxes and the same strong autoaim that H2 has now. In H1 you had small hitboxes and low autoaim and it still works fine online through XBConnect. It actually works perfectly except for having to lead your target. Small hitboxes that only register when you shoot only the model and not next to him and very low autoaim actually work for online and it has been proven through H1 on XBConnect.

  • 06.15.2006 3:29 PM PDT

Posted by: Wiltron
*KNOCK, KNOCK* Hellooo, BiggieShow!

Dude, it's in his signature. I'm sure there are plenty of MLG fans that are great guys. He's apparently not one of them. His patronizing tone is obvious and I refuse to spend more than a couple seconds replying to such a post.

...I'm not sure what the point of your "Bungie <3's MLG" rant was about.


The point of my Bungie/MLG "rant" is to point out that they are not at odd with each other. You seem to think that anything anti-Bungie = MLG and if someone disagrees with balancing issues they are an "MLG jerk." Trust me, MLG is not your enemy, at this point, they are your best friend, you just dont know it.

  • 06.15.2006 3:32 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

We dont need 1 host dedicated or not. I rather everybody be host and see everybody in real time than have to send my info to Redmond WA or to somebody who knows where then to my target. Like I said Id rather cut the middle man and play in real time and see things in real time.
Posted by: One One Seven
If Bungie can get a good client trust model in, there's no need for bigger hitboxes.

Basically if Bungie can get the host to accept the Client's view (assuming no lag/network errors/manipulation), things would be fine.

  • 06.15.2006 3:51 PM PDT

DO NOT send me invites for clans or groups. You will be blocked.
Success is measured in blood; yours or your enemy's.
my siggy
me bringing the pwnage on the better game
Posted by: dalmedya
Bungie doesn't see gamers any more. They see walking credit cards.

Posted by: atomic weggie
Posted by: Wiltron
We are their cash cow.


Who are you calling a cow?

HAHAH!

  • 06.15.2006 4:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Halo 2's maps are, for the most part, very balanced. The symmetrical maps are balanced from their nature, and the asymmetrical maps are designed for a different type of game.

In CTF/Assault the defenders are usually a bit closer to the big weapons since they have to stop people getting in the base. It wouldn't be a struggle if the opposing force started with two sniper rifles, a shotgun, and a rocket launcher.

The only flaw I see in Halo 2 from a matchmaking/LIVE standpoint is the ability to have a searchable custom game option. The party system is fine, but I do miss being able to just jump into a game with random people and go. Perhaps a custom option, where it sticks you in random open parties, would suffice in Halo 3.

  • 06.15.2006 4:28 PM PDT

Twelve Large ²

An army of sheep led by a lion would defeat an army of lions led by a sheep.

Posted by: operativeace
We dont need 1 host dedicated or not. I rather everybody be host and see everybody in real time than have to send my info to Redmond WA or to somebody who knows where then to my target. Like I said Id rather cut the middle man and play in real time and see things in real time.
Posted by: One One Seven
If Bungie can get a good client trust model in, there's no need for bigger hitboxes.

Basically if Bungie can get the host to accept the Client's view (assuming no lag/network errors/manipulation), things would be fine.


You'll never be able to see players in real time. You even have "what's your latency" written in your sig. I wouldn't mind dedicated servers if we could get 'em setup across the country, and not just in Washington. Then again, I suck anyways, so I don't have to worry about that host advantage stuff. Go me!!

  • 06.15.2006 6:09 PM PDT

Twelve Large ²

An army of sheep led by a lion would defeat an army of lions led by a sheep.

Posted by: OksanaBayul
Well, you've probably got to have bigger hitboxes and more auto aim when building a game for Live. At least, I'd think you would.


You don't have to have bigger hitboxes. But it's nice for those players who don't want to play all day everyday on 7 different tunnel programs running on every os known to man. Some players just want to pick up a game and have fun sooner, rather than later.

Posted by: OksanaBayul
However, that does not mean you can't have balanced weaponry and spawns. These things should exist with Halo3. It should be priority #1 in my opinion, because the single player era of gaming is dead or dying. It's all about Live MP now.


Halo didn't exactly have balanced weapons and spawn points either. I can remember many fans complaining about the pistol and the spawn points. Or the sniper/tank and spawn points on Blood Gulch.

Halo was a great game, but I don't think bungie could get away with putting out the same game just to please a few hardcore old school fans. Things have to improve, because expectations are high, and I think Halo 2 holds it's own, considering how it's the #1 played game and all. It wasn't perfect, and I'm sure the complaints are welcomed, because if everyone thinks the game is perfect, or this or that idea is the best ever, then you know something's wrong.

In the end, I feel confident that the team will work hard to iron out some of these issues. I don't see why you have to worry about it so much. Yes, you care.. But in the end, you just have to trust bungie to do what they feel is best. Or else send in your resume and make the game yourself!


p.s. I do miss Halo and the old physics. I can remember this first round in an old school tourney where we had to play koth on Blood Gulch. And I hopped in a Ghost and jumped a warthog to land on top of the base and owned the hill. Or I used the Ghost to push me up to hills so I wouldn't have to take the long route. Good times! If it wasn't for the bad spawns in Rat Race, I would have packed my pistol with me on my way to the finals. Oh, well..

  • 06.15.2006 6:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: VVV
Posted by: atomic weggie
Posted by: Wiltron
We are their cash cow.


Who are you calling a cow?

The casual gamer is Halo's biggest demographic, not the people who pour over spawn points and map balance ratios.

No map is ever perfect, and that's the way I like it. Because I play for fun. If someone get's to the sniper or rocket before me cause they spawned closer, who cares?


Granted the "casual" gamer is what Bungie may be targeting with Halo 3. It's certainly not unjust to say that the demograpic of the casual gamer was their main (if not only) aim with Halo 2. However I think you're simplifying the whole argument for a more balanced and "Pro" approach.

What has been evident to me in the past 18 months of playing Halo 1,2 and visiting these forums (among others) is that some people still don't get it. What can be offered by investing more time and resources into a more "balanced" game play is something only a few seem to understand.

These benefits are for much more then say as organisation like MLG. What can be gained by a more balanced approach to game play is a longer lasting appeal to a stale and otherwise boring game.

Consider the problem of Halo 2 upon a wide group of players. No matter what their skill level. What has been evident in the past 12 months has been the growing legion of fans that have become bored with a game that lost it's appeal. The beauty of Halo 1 was that it was true to it's title. It evolved. Becoming a game that all players could find a way to play and enjoy no matter what their skill level.

The reasons for this were much greater then "balance" alone but even so the key to much of it's success was simply that at the HIGHER level of play the game came down to skill and simply not chance.

Consider also that from the very onset Halo 1 grew in popularity while Halo 2 from first release only fell. All be it not drastically (due to lack of competition IMO). It's easy for those that have an intimate knowledge and understanding of both games to understand why.

First day sales were staggering for Halo 2. Something like 2.6 millon units. Within 2 months it had sold about 6 millon. In hindsight I think Bungie should be very disappointed that it added only a another million or so copies in the proceeding 18 months. When it's name was traded away all that was left was a sub par FPS.


Yep, that's it in a nutshell. I hope Bungie is reading.

  • 06.15.2006 6:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Twelve Large
Posted by: operativeace
We dont need 1 host dedicated or not. I rather everybody be host and see everybody in real time than have to send my info to Redmond WA or to somebody who knows where then to my target. Like I said Id rather cut the middle man and play in real time and see things in real time.
Posted by: One One Seven
If Bungie can get a good client trust model in, there's no need for bigger hitboxes.

Basically if Bungie can get the host to accept the Client's view (assuming no lag/network errors/manipulation), things would be fine.


You'll never be able to see players in real time. You even have "what's your latency" written in your sig. I wouldn't mind dedicated servers if we could get 'em setup across the country, and not just in Washington. Then again, I suck anyways, so I don't have to worry about that host advantage stuff. Go me!!

Actually it is possable to skip the middle man and see everybody in real time by having all the xboxs act as host to each other. The info would be sent directly to the other players xbox and also sent to the xbox live server or a dedicated server at the same time. Its not impossible.

  • 06.15.2006 6:54 PM PDT

Twelve Large ²

An army of sheep led by a lion would defeat an army of lions led by a sheep.

Posted by: operativeace
Actually it is possable to skip the middle man and see everybody in real time by having all the xboxs act as host to each other. The info would be sent directly to the other players xbox and also sent to the xbox live server or a dedicated server at the same time. Its not impossible.


Yeah, that's exactly how racers work on Xbox Live. It's called peer to peer. Yet there's still a host - Someone has to host the results or a live scoreboard - in Halo it would be the one that shows up when you press the back button. Even in these racing games - such as Moto GP, you aren't seeing the other players in "real time," which is why you still have to have predictions in place. Latency and lag will always play a factor, regardless.

Shooters aren't usually hosted in this way, though. And I wouldn't expect it to change anytime soon. There is a ton of more stuff that goes on in a shooter. How do you handle the weapon spawns? Weapon locations? Vehicle locations? Someone has to keep track of that stuff. And latency can become a big problem if you don't get it right..

  • 06.15.2006 7:08 PM PDT

Posted by: PREDAT0R
It would be very wise for Bungie to hire at least a few professional Halo/Halo2 gamers with no bias towards the average gamer population to help with balance.




Screw that. "Pro" gamers are the least qualified to know what game the majority of people will like the best.

  • 06.15.2006 7:13 PM PDT

Twelve Large ²

An army of sheep led by a lion would defeat an army of lions led by a sheep.

Posted by: Woodsie
Posted by: PREDAT0R
It would be very wise for Bungie to hire at least a few professional Halo/Halo2 gamers with no bias towards the average gamer population to help with balance.




Screw that. "Pro" gamers are the least qualified to know what game the majority of people will like the best.



I was thinkin' they should hire more "noobs," just for kicks.

  • 06.15.2006 7:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Troll PWNER
Posted by: VVV
Posted by: atomic weggie
Posted by: Wiltron
We are their cash cow.


Who are you calling a cow?

The casual gamer is Halo's biggest demographic, not the people who pour over spawn points and map balance ratios.

No map is ever perfect, and that's the way I like it. Because I play for fun. If someone get's to the sniper or rocket before me cause they spawned closer, who cares?


Granted the "casual" gamer is what Bungie may be targeting with Halo 3. It's certainly not unjust to say that the demograpic of the casual gamer was their main (if not only) aim with Halo 2. However I think you're simplifying the whole argument for a more balanced and "Pro" approach.

What has been evident to me in the past 18 months of playing Halo 1,2 and visiting these forums (among others) is that some people still don't get it. What can be offered by investing more time and resources into a more "balanced" game play is something only a few seem to understand.

These benefits are for much more then say as organisation like MLG. What can be gained by a more balanced approach to game play is a longer lasting appeal to a stale and otherwise boring game.

Consider the problem of Halo 2 upon a wide group of players. No matter what their skill level. What has been evident in the past 12 months has been the growing legion of fans that have become bored with a game that lost it's appeal. The beauty of Halo 1 was that it was true to it's title. It evolved. Becoming a game that all players could find a way to play and enjoy no matter what their skill level.

The reasons for this were much greater then "balance" alone but even so the key to much of it's success was simply that at the HIGHER level of play the game came down to skill and simply not chance.

Consider also that from the very onset Halo 1 grew in popularity while Halo 2 from first release only fell. All be it not drastically (due to lack of competition IMO). It's easy for those that have an intimate knowledge and understanding of both games to understand why.

First day sales were staggering for Halo 2. Something like 2.6 millon units. Within 2 months it had sold about 6 millon. In hindsight I think Bungie should be very disappointed that it added only a another million or so copies in the proceeding 18 months. When it's name was traded away all that was left was a sub par FPS.


Yep, that's it in a nutshell. I hope Bungie is reading.
I agree 100%, but when you look at the big picture--it gets nobody anywhere.

Remember the patch thread in the old zanzy forum? That thing was colossal. Know why Bungie didn't balance Halo 2 after reading the patch ideas? Answer--there was no need to.

There was no need to balance a game that already pleased so many people. Hypothetically, let's say Halo 2 starts losing its popularity about 5 months after its release. THEN Bungie would probably have released numerous balancing patches to keep gameplay fresh. But hell, there is no need in the real situation. Halo 2 was very popular. It didn't need any support beams.

There are a lot more casual gamers than "hardcore" gamers out there. Which is probably why Halo 2 had such a razor-sharp popularity spike in such a short amount of time. It appealed to casual gamers more than Halo 1 did.

That's not to say that every Halo 2 fan is a "newbie" or anything. I'm just saying that, in the scheme of things, Halo 2 had a different fanbase than Halo 1. I hate to say it, but Halo 2's fanbase is significantly larger than halo 1's.

That having been said, can anyone really blame Bungie for aiming Halo 2 a little more to the casual side? No. Why? Because, whether or not it was an intentional decision, it was a damn good business move. Bungie did get a lot of money from Halo 2 and its famous merchandise. Who knows, this money collection could go towards Halo 3 having amazing quality.

So....although I do agree with VVV, I also think that making Halo 2 lean more to casual gamers was actually a decent idea.

  • 06.15.2006 7:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

But this time Bungie has to aim for the hardcore fans cause of the true skill system. Thats why Halo 3 needs the biggest skill gap ever. Thats why I said Halo needs to be a do it yourself game instead of a do it for you game in which it already is.

  • 06.15.2006 7:43 PM PDT

PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME GROUP INVITATIONS

The Halo REACH Script (post thoughts in thread)

Writing Lead of Whisper Studios. Check out Heron!

Look... I'm on bungiepedia!

We need Halo 3 to be balanced..Halo 2 was balanced, but not so well as Halo was. Halo 3 should be somewhere in between the two, with decreased auto aim...

keep weapons off of a respawn system (it was okay for Halo, but I'm sick of it now that I go back to it..and I hate Ascension and Ivory tower for this.)

MLG is just too balanced..so balanced that it literally becomes memorization of what's going to happen next, rather than use real skill to overcome difficulties..they just use aim, rather than the whole package.

  • 06.15.2006 7:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Twelve Large
Posted by: operativeace
Actually it is possable to skip the middle man and see everybody in real time by having all the xboxs act as host to each other. The info would be sent directly to the other players xbox and also sent to the xbox live server or a dedicated server at the same time. Its not impossible.


Yeah, that's exactly how racers work on Xbox Live. It's called peer to peer. Yet there's still a host - Someone has to host the results or a live scoreboard - in Halo it would be the one that shows up when you press the back button. Even in these racing games - such as Moto GP, you aren't seeing the other players in "real time," which is why you still have to have predictions in place. Latency and lag will always play a factor, regardless.

Shooters aren't usually hosted in this way, though. And I wouldn't expect it to change anytime soon. There is a ton of more stuff that goes on in a shooter. How do you handle the weapon spawns? Weapon locations? Vehicle locations? Someone has to keep track of that stuff. And latency can become a big problem if you don't get it right..

I know thats why I said that there would be a server that everybody is hooked up to. Bungie is pretty smart for online programming at least I hope this time around they are so they will think of something so everybody is even this time around so people wont complaing about being shot through walls and shots not registering.

  • 06.15.2006 7:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I thought I'd add a couple more thoughts to the mix:

1) Now... I'm somewhat playing devil's advocate here (for those of you who flame first and process vocabulary later that means I DONT NECESSARILY BELIEVE THIS...), but...

Has anyone considered that Halo 2 might be TOO balanced? Now, don't flame me, but think about it. If a game is perfectly balanced, then it's going to be just as easy for a noob and a pro to kill one another, right? That is the definition of balance- the playing field is equaled out to get everyone a fair shot, right? So the playing field is leveled so that a noob and a pro stand almost an equal chance. That's why the difference between a good team and a great team might not really show up. Also, that would make sense as to why the team with the power weapons wins.

Does that make sense? If two dudes are equally matched, and are in a fist fight- the dude that suddenly puts on the brass knuckles is going to win. The only way for it to be fair would be to give them BOTH brass knuckles- but where's the fun in that? Half the fun is being the first one to grab them.

Now, I understand why this method would make some angry, and sometimes frustrated me, too. However, what if we're all using the wrong word choice here, and what we really need to say is that Halo 2 is TOO balanced? Catch my drift? Hopefully that makes sense.

2) Balance does not always equal fun. Fun games are sometimes balanced. But sometimes, they are not. Juggernaught= not a balanced gametype. One dude overpowers everybody else. He has the advantage. Fun at times? You bet.

3) Balanced or unbalanced, whatever- does anybody else agree that CTF almost plays perfectly on Halo 2. In Slayer, I get so frustrated with the smg spawn (for some gametypes), but for the most part, I know that killing doesn't matter in CTF, and Rockets or Sniper rifles won't always beat excellent strategy and teamwork. In Halo, one man could take out the whole team and then get the Flag- in Halo 2, I LIKE that that's not possible for CTF games.

I feel like CTF in this game is almost perfect. There, I said it :)

I wish there was a way to alter the values of weapons or spawns or whatever for Slayer to help it out, but keep CTF the way that it is.

4) I don't care about "balance" in competitive, fun LAN games- but for some reason I "care" when I play on LIVE, which is why I stopped playing LIVE- it was just no fun anymore.

Hopefully those will provide some interesting talking points.

  • 06.15.2006 10:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Wiltron
Posted by: VVV
...Granted the "casual" gamer is what Bungie may be targeting with Halo 3. It's certainly not unjust to say that the demograpic of the casual gamer was their main (if not only) aim with Halo 2. However I think you're simplifying the whole argument for a more balanced and "Pro" approach.

What has been evident to me in the past 18 months of playing Halo 1,2 and visiting these forums (among others) is that some people still don't get it. What can be offered by investing more time and resources into a more "balanced" game play is something only a few seem to understand.

These benefits are for much more then say as organisation like MLG. What can be gained by a more balanced approach to game play is a longer lasting appeal to a stale and otherwise boring game.

Consider the problem of Halo 2 upon a wide group of players. No matter what their skill level. What has been evident in the past 12 months has been the growing legion of fans that have become bored with a game that lost it's appeal. The beauty of Halo 1 was that it was true to it's title. It evolved. Becoming a game that all players could find a way to play and enjoy no matter what their skill level.

The reasons for this were much greater then "balance" alone but even so the key to much of it's success was simply that at the HIGHER level of play the game came down to skill and simply not chance.

Consider also that from the very onset Halo 1 grew in popularity while Halo 2 from first release only fell. All be it not drastically (due to lack of competition IMO). It's easy for those that have an intimate knowledge and understanding of both games to understand why.

First day sales were staggering for Halo 2. Something like 2.6 millon units. Within 2 months it had sold about 6 millon. In hindsight I think Bungie should be very disappointed that it added only a another million or so copies in the proceeding 18 months. When it's name was traded away all that was left was a sub par FPS.


I disagree with almost everything you stated here. And those things that are factual (like # of copies sold on what day) don't matter. What I think is your main point (If it's more balanced, it will stay fresh longer) isn't necessarily true.

For those that see H3 as a test of their gaming prowess, maybe. For the rest of us who enjoy the missionary position (default or MLG settings) but also like to mix it up with Doggiestyle and Reverse Cowgirl (Random weapons, Pink Eye, Poo Poo King) ... not so much.


Why don't sales figures matter? Especially when the amount of copies sold within the first couple of months is such an overwhelming percentage compared to the current total?

Granted the amount of customisation with Halo 2 made many of the aspects of Multiplayer better, however these add ons like Random weapons etc are easy to do and in the end NOT what we're on about here.

Customisation and better balanced game play would see all camps consider Halo 3 a success.

Posted by: TheBigShow
Posted by: VVV

*Snip* (See above)


Greatest post ever? Perhaps.

I have noticed a disturbing trend here. A lot of people seem to think that by balance we mean only using one weapon. That is entirely not true. Balance means finding a point where each weapon is prefered in its element but not overpowering. There is always a chance to kill your enemy if you are skillful enough regardless of your weapon; I found that this is not the case with Halo 2. That doesnt mean only using one weapon, it means using them all, it means MORE variety because each weapon is a viable alternative in any situation (although some are obviously better choices in any given situation) and you wont feel ineffective because of the weapon you are left with.


Thanks for the compliment. I really appreciate the fact that you and I are on the same wave length here.

[Edited on 6/16/2006]

  • 06.16.2006 2:19 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Vitamin Zawaz
I agree 100%, but when you look at the big picture--it gets nobody anywhere.

Remember the patch thread in the old zanzy forum? That thing was colossal. Know why Bungie didn't balance Halo 2 after reading the patch ideas? Answer--there was no need to.

There was no need to balance a game that already pleased so many people. Hypothetically, let's say Halo 2 starts losing its popularity about 5 months after its release. THEN Bungie would probably have released numerous balancing patches to keep gameplay fresh. But hell, there is no need in the real situation. Halo 2 was very popular. It didn't need any support beams.

There are a lot more casual gamers than "hardcore" gamers out there. Which is probably why Halo 2 had such a razor-sharp popularity spike in such a short amount of time. It appealed to casual gamers more than Halo 1 did.

That's not to say that every Halo 2 fan is a "newbie" or anything. I'm just saying that, in the scheme of things, Halo 2 had a different fanbase than Halo 1. I hate to say it, but Halo 2's fanbase is significantly larger than halo 1's.

That having been said, can anyone really blame Bungie for aiming Halo 2 a little more to the casual side? No. Why? Because, whether or not it was an intentional decision, it was a damn good business move. Bungie did get a lot of money from Halo 2 and its famous merchandise. Who knows, this money collection could go towards Halo 3 having amazing quality.

So....although I do agree with VVV, I also think that making Halo 2 lean more to casual gamers was actually a decent idea.


Decent because Marketing and sales is a unique beast. What happens a lot in these environment is that they get to caught up in wanting to sell a game. Then they tend to over simplify it some what. What happened IMO with Halo 2 was the idea to make it easy enough for everybody to play.

This ensures early sales and everybody is drawn to the game. What happens in the end is that the words not only gets out that something is flawed with it's on going success and appeal but also that people get bored and the brand loses some of it's appeal to the wider audiance.

Fair enough the game was targeted at "casual" gamers. However these are a group of people that do not stay loyal to a brand. These are people that move on to the next big thing. Thankfully for Bungie much of their features were quite revolutionary (Customisation, interface ect) and this mixed with the overwhelming appeal of the brand and the drastic lack of competition on XBOX in the FPS genre meant it hardly mattered this time around.

Many people may thin that I'm some sort of player that thinks he's hot stuff and Halo 2 let him down. Consider the fact that although I have these thoughts I suck at Halo 1 badly compared to more skilled players. What I am is someone who enjoys the on going battle to sharpen my skills in Halo 1 (still an on going journey). A game that can be played and greatly enjoyed by all levels of players.

What I don't find appealing about Halo 2 (amoung a large list of other complaints) is the fact that I pretty much am about as good as I will ever be. No I'm not great but I learnt all there is to know about Halo 2 very early on. Therefore the game became quite painful to play from there on. A game that became all to predictable in many respects. This is mainly due to things such as balance. Both with the weapon set, increased AA and map design. Which in my opinion was poor at the very best.

Also, no patch was made for Halo 2 (1.2) because the game is dead and buried as far as Bungie is concerned. Take the fact that the play lists weren't updated the whole time that Ninja on Fire was "on vacation". He is probably only one of a few people tthat really have anything to do with Halo 2 online as a product anymore.


  • 06.16.2006 2:44 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

A Guide to Networking, Matchmaking, and Host in Halo (HBO mirror)

Bungie Friends and Family invitee, and sender of "random emails" about networking.

Good news is that the plan for next time is to give the user more control, and Bungie are also going to try more models of client trust when H3 hits the beta stage. Of course, this is all subject to change, but assuming that the current plan doesn't change, it sounds good;

You'd have some measure of control over latency. If you wanted to play world-wide games, you'd do so knowing that there'd be additional latency, and that performance could be affected.

Assuming that the more complex models for netcode work in a real networking environment, it'd be far more reliable off host, if there's no problems with the network. So if you 4 shot someone with green bars, it doesn't matter about the latency, the shots will still count because the host has deemed the connectivity accurate, and so counted it ... even if the players aren't at the same position on the host's screen*

*Note that this occurs in a special circumstance in Halo 2; client-side sniping. However, sometimes on highly latent connections, the trust displayed isn't always sufficient to get a hit, but sniping generally works better than most other weapons.

In short: Bungie are aware of the frustrations and problems of latency and are working on ways to reduce the problem next time around. I can't give specific quotes because it's from a private email.

  • 06.16.2006 9:23 AM PDT

tldr: Reach requires maintenance

Posted by: Recon Number 54
Sound familiar? It does to me. I am sad to say that some very positive and thoughtful discussions in the old "lag and latency for dummies" thread could have encouraged or lead to the development of the network manipulation cheat commonly referred to as "bridging". The best laid plans of mice and men.


To be fair the OP of that thread was wondering why he would very rarely get host considering his connection was 100meg/10meg (swedish connections rock).

Before that thread I didn't even know what latency was, I just thought:
1. I suck
2. My connection sucks
3. Maybe the other guy's connection sucks

Bridging (all though not common place) was around at the time + information was readily available on modding sites.

The guy who created the ping filter developed it using his own I.T experiences + info from modding sites. His mission, to find more evenly matched games.

However, before releasing any info, he contacted Bungie via email + asked what would be the chances of including something similar to what he had developed into a patch.

Needless to say (for whatever reasons) it wasn't able to be included/used.


Now I am def. not advocating bridging but if everyone in matchmaking who bridges ,filtered as well, then there would be lot more 50-49 games rather than 50-18 blowouts.

Unfortunately I'd expect that most bridgers are "win at all costs" types + would only want to "own" you rather than try to fairly compete with you.


I have seen filtering in use + it was extremely effective.
My mate (before he cancelled his xbox live account) went into a rumble game
with 7 other brits. My mate didn't get host, finished 3rd but said the game was really enjoyable. One of the reasons for this was there was a gap of about 5-6 kills between top + bottom.


Now I never cheat (unless matched with them unknowly) but I could see the attraction of playing a competitive game against others.

Closest thing to playing a competitive game of halo akin to that would probably be over xbox connect + that means I can't play on my 360/21" monitor.

So back to matchmaking, I have developed a new technique where you pray (satan, jesus, whoever) for host. I'll let you know if I get any results.


Back on-topic

Test team should consist of:

1. Bungie internal testers - when the basics need work
2. People who never played halo - for the shallow end of the learning curve
3. Pro players - for glitch testing + steep edge of learning curve
4. Red vs Blue - to add ideas about machinama uses
5. Jump tactics / High intensity Halo guys - jump gliches + others
6. Specifically located testers - people on different connections from different states + countries to help with local + worldwide gameplay.

p.s. Is it true that shishka made Billy Gates step down because he announced halo 3 (several times) ?
(/sarcasm for the oblivious)

  • 06.16.2006 12:18 PM PDT