This has been a dream of mine ever since I’ve played Halo 1 with my friends with full system links.
This feature has never been delivered, I really hope that 343 can provide us with this experience in a matchmaking game type. Does anyone agree with this or want to expand upon this?
Personally I wouldn’t mind if there was 64 player, BUT Halo’s maps aren’t built for it, nor is the amount of weapons and vehicles in the game.
And then there’s the players, most players like small 4vs4 maps/gametypes, not large scale maps and gametypes, so even tho you can make large maps smaller, post Halo players just don’t have an imagination, so they that if the map is large, it means the large map = large play area is the only way the map will have good gameplay.
So increasing the player count to 64 players would bother a lot of people.
> Personally I wouldn’t mind if there was 64 player, BUT Halo’s maps aren’t built for it, nor is the amount of weapons and vehicles in the game.
>
> And then there’s the players, most players like small 4vs4 maps/gametypes, not large scale maps and gametypes, so even tho you can make large maps smaller, post Halo players just don’t have an imagination, so they that if the map is large, it means the large map = large play area is the only way the map will have good gameplay.
>
> So increasing the player count to 64 players would bother a lot of people.
Not to mention the insane amount of coding and sorcery needed to bring the game’s engine from supporting 16 players max to 64, even 32 could be called a bit of a stretch.
> > Personally I wouldn’t mind if there was 64 player, BUT Halo’s maps aren’t built for it, nor is the amount of weapons and vehicles in the game.
> >
> > And then there’s the players, most players like small 4vs4 maps/gametypes, not large scale maps and gametypes, so even tho you can make large maps smaller, post Halo players just don’t have an imagination, so they that if the map is large, it means the large map = large play area is the only way the map will have good gameplay.
> >
> > So increasing the player count to 64 players would bother a lot of people.
>
> Not to mention the insane amount of coding and sorcery needed to bring the game’s engine from supporting 16 players max to 64, even 32 could be called a bit of a stretch.
Which is why every time a thread like this pops up, or my friends discuss this topic, I say: We shouldn’t jump from 16 players to 32 or 64 in one game, if the player count does go up, it shouldn’t leap, it should take baby steps, for #1 coding and networking based issues, #2 player base issues, and #3 Map/weapon/vehicle design and balance.
If they can slowly increase the player count doesn’t cause lag, and isn’t a coding nightmare, then go for it. If the player base is okay with an increased player count, go for it. If the maps/weapons/vehicles are balanced and well designed, go for it.
If any of the above does cause unwanted issues, then scrap it, and call it good.
> <mark>Personally I wouldn’t mind if there was 64 player, BUT Halo’s maps aren’t built for it, nor is the amount of weapons and vehicles in the game.</mark>
>
> And then there’s the players, most players like small 4vs4 maps/gametypes, not large scale maps and gametypes, so even tho you can make large maps smaller, post Halo players just don’t have an imagination, so they that if the map is large, it means the large map = large play area is the only way the map will have good gameplay.
>
> So increasing the player count to 64 players would bother a lot of people.
Things could be tweaked further for it.
> If they can slowly increase the player count doesn’t cause lag, and isn’t a coding nightmare, then go for it. If the player base is okay with an increased player count, go for it. If the maps/weapons/vehicles are balanced and well designed, go for it.
>
> If any of the above does cause unwanted issues, then scrap it, and call it good.
I wouldn’t go as far to say scrap it and wait for the final game in the trilogy to try it out.
As long as they can get 32 players in a lobby to work, the rest can be done later in the game’s life-cycle. Large maps are already needed for Forge and Custom Games, having them in the game allows for maps specifically tailored for 32 player matches to be made later on without requiring DLC to play.
Weapons and vehicles can both be thrown into Customs/Forge without being optimally balanced. No, that’s not sloppy in the least. Here’s why, with spare models for weapons and options to tweak a weapon’s functionality weapons that wouldn’t perform in default gameplay can be made at any time; more or less the same with vehicles. All in the meantime, players in the community can mess around with these options and new weapons that work in default, or the future, gametypes can be made. Theoretically the community could do the vehicle/weapon creation/balancing while maps are being made, and with Community maps the initial playlist could have many maps to choose from right off the bat.
> Personally I wouldn’t mind if there was 64 player, BUT Halo’s maps aren’t built for it, nor is the amount of weapons and vehicles in the game.
>
> And then there’s the players, most players like small 4vs4 maps/gametypes, not large scale maps and gametypes, so even tho you can make large maps smaller, post Halo players just don’t have an imagination, so they that if the map is large, it means the large map = large play area is the only way the map will have good gameplay.
>
> So increasing the player count to 64 players would bother a lot of people.
We could take small, arena-sized maps and expand outwards from them.
I hope not, maps would have to be way to big and i dont want 343i putting extra time into creating maps just for a specific mode. Honestly Halo never was or should be a huge “battlefield” game. I think at most 18-24 players max.
Now that they’re gonna have dedicated servers I think it’ll be entirely possible to achieve with minimum lag. It all comes down to the maps after that.
> Honestly Halo never was or should be a huge “battlefield” game.
This is just BS. Halo started out as an RTS, and guess what, RTS games are large/huge “Battlefield” games in a way, the only difference is player’s aren’t controlling only one character, they’re controlling an army. Plus Halo Wars is an RTS. Also there’s the fact that there has been a few Halo Custom Edition Maps that could support 64 players, along with weapons and vehicles, BUT the game didn’t support that many players, and the netcode had issues supporting 2 to 16 players on an open online network.
Also saying “Halo never should be a huge Battlefield game” is false, and mainly opinion, NOT FACT, there never has been a Halo game that supports 64 players and are Battle Fieldish FPS, so we can’t say rather or not Halo could be a good battle fieldish game.
> Now that they’re gonna have dedicated servers I think it’ll be entirely possible to achieve with minimum lag.
Halo PC/Custom Edition had dedicated servers, there was still LAG. Dedicated servers does not automatically mean no lag, the netcoding is another factor that can cause lag.
I don’t think simply upping the player count would automatically be more fun, and I definitely think that it wouldn’t “feel” like Halo, unless there is some special game mode, gameplay features, or map features that take a large player count into account and do something with it.
BTW, I’m not saying that a new Halo game has to stick to any certain aspects to be a Halo game. I just don’t see upping the play count as a good goal to have.
Instead, I would think that should come as a secondary consequence. For example, first, they have an idea of a certain multiplayer game mechanic, and then maybe they realize that it would work better or be more fun with more players.
> Halo PC/Custom Edition had dedicated servers, there was still LAG. Dedicated servers does not automatically mean no lag, the netcoding is another factor that can cause lag.
It is, but there isn’t much more to say at this point beyond that. We simply don’t have ANY information about how 343 is planning to handle dedicated servers and increased player counts. Maybe they’ve found a very workable solution, we don’t know so lets leave the technical end of the discussion for a later time. I think the greater issue for us right now is simply that of design, if 343 doesn’t take special steps to rebalance the sandbox around Giant Team Battle we will have problems. But if they do, what does that mean for the smaller gametypes?
> > Halo PC/Custom Edition had dedicated servers, there was still LAG. Dedicated servers does not automatically mean no lag, the netcoding is another factor that can cause lag.
>
> It is, but there isn’t much more to say at this point beyond that. We simply don’t have ANY information about how 343 is planning to handle dedicated servers and increased player counts. Maybe they’ve found a very workable solution, we don’t know so lets leave the technical end of the discussion for a later time.
Tho you are correct to a point, we should keep in mind some of the technical bits in mind, to keep our ideas/suggestions rooted in some form of reality.
> I think the greater issue for us right now is simply that of design, if 343 doesn’t take special steps to rebalance the sandbox around Giant Team Battle we will have problems. But if they do, what does that mean for the smaller gametypes?
Ah, yes, design as I pointed out in a few posts, current map sizes (other than maybe Forge World in Reach) just do not support the number of people this thread is suggesting. How would they fix this issue to make maps more supportive of larger player counts? Make them larger, which as someone pointed out above, demands more resources both in development, and in hardware. Plus there’s the issue of “What does that mean for the smaller gametypes?” like you stated.
My theory on this has always been the same, it’s easier to shrink than to expand. Take a large map able to support 32 players, you design the map around the 32 players, and 4v4 gametypes, give the map large amounts of space for vehicles, but give players plenty of foot paths, make a small “Base” for smaller gametypes, that when smaller gametypes are selected, you put up a “Safe” zone around that “Base” which if a player leaves, they die. That is what Forge World was designed around.
This would also open up for more forge resources, like buildings, huts, and other structures.
I’ve seen Battle Field use that kind of gametype set up before, it works well for smaller gametypes, with out the need of small maps made for the smaller gametypes.
And we all know that 343i can control how many players per playlist, it wouldn’t be hard for them to set up play lists that uses both big and small maps for small team gametypes, and limit the amount of players.
The pros of doing this is, the scenery around the map will look awesome, and less 2D, forgers can have their forge world sized maps, hopefully with a budget to match.
The cons of doing this is, the amount of gametypes for such sizes, the resources required.
It would be interesting to see halo 5 having 24 play big team battle. Capture the flag and assault alone would some intense combat, wouldnt you agree?
If 64+ person multiplayer can be done smoothly I certainly would like to have a KoTH onslaught.
Even with dedicated servers and all, I’m not sure how feasible a 64+ player game is. Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see a Big Team Battle game be more like a Big Team War, but getting that player count and maintaining the quality of the game may be difficult. Though I feel anything less than a 32 player count would be disappointing for the next gen Halo.
64+ players should never happen in Halo. 16-20 players is enough. The maps would be huge if 64 players were to happen and I and many others would not like that.
EDIT: Sorry, i accidently repeated someones comment.
For one, there’s sandbox balance and variety.
Let’s assume it’s 32v32 on large maps.
-How do we separate this from 8v8, aside from player count?
-How will we still spawn with effective weapons on such large maps?
-How will teams/communication be structured? 32 players speaking at once would be ear shattering.
Has already been tackled with the suggestion of larger, more powerful vehicles that require tons of teamwork to take down.
Hasn’t been discussed much. Spawning with a Battle Rifle would be ineffective, spawning with an AR would be suicide. We’d either have everyone spawn with Rockets and Snipers, or we just have infantry be useless. The latter isn’t so bad so long as there are enough vehicles for everyone.
I assume a Squad system much like Battlefield has. But we would also probably have to adopt their spawn system as well.
Halp 4 can’t even control 16 people well enough. 32 invis people on one team… no thanks