Custom Games and "Rent-A-Server"

Since very few of you read the entire post, this is for Custom Games only! It is not ranked. It does not affect your skill. It’s not designed to replace matchmaking. It’s purely for Custom Games. Player-run servers would use dedicated servers as well. They would simply be rented out to the community (just as in Battlefield 4)! A search mechanic (that’s highly desired within the community) would also be present. Private matches will still be available for gamers that want to play with their friends (and recent players) without being forced to purchase a server. There will, however, be obvious benefits to owning your own. The problem of abusive admins is addressed in this very post. If you have any other argument, feel free to share it with me.

Battlefield 3 is a very different game than Halo. Once again, read my ENTIRE post. While I don’t loathe BF, don’t point to BF3 because of its poor implementation. Player-run dedicated servers are the norm in PC games, and there’s a reason for its popularity. Am I allowed to point at the number of successes? It works perfectly for Halo, because it has Custom Games and Forge. Battlefield does not. BF made the mistake of allowing ranked player-run servers. If you want to go into further detail, continue reading.

To further discourage “admin abuse”, a rating system should be implemented. When you leave a game (whether you are kicked, banned, or leave yourself), Halo would force you to rate the server out of 5 stars. The average rating would show up on the server browser. That way, players will be able to easily identify matches with fair admins and fun maps.

I want Halo to provide its traditional matchmaking experience, yet at the same time, include a server browser and allow for player-run servers. In my opinion, I see these servers as one of the keys to longevity and a healthy playerbase. If you want proof, go to any computer game that allows for such customization.

The classic playlists will still be present in matchmaking. However, some of the more “fun-oriented” gametypes could be completely ridden of. The community would host these game modes now! The rest of the system would work exactly the same as it does now.

Player-run servers, on the other hand, would not be “ranked”. Instead, they would be hosted purely for non- and semi-competitive gameplay. The host of the server would be able to choose what map and what game mode the server will play on (that includes custom Forge maps and gametypes). Everything else will work similarly to Battlefield 3 (on the console). We know it’s possible, and it works very well.

The combination of Forge, Custom Games, and player-run dedicated servers would be a revolutionary moment in console history. For the first time, players will be able to connect and play the custom maps they want to play–on the custom game modes of their choosing. It’s one of those features Halo needs to adopt. This franchise is known for innovation, but it hasn’t brought anything new to the table since Forge and Theater back in 2007.

I imagine that purchasing a server would be similar to purchasing a server on Battlefield 3. You pay money and in turn, you “host” a server for a period of time. Perhaps 343 will allow the community to rent out servers permanently.

It’s great when you’re able to join your favorite minigames server and have all your “virtual friends” playing at the same time–every single day. It’s a unique experience that’s only found on the PC but can be brought to consoles.

Drawbacks

Abusive Admins:

First of all, that issue is not caused by player-run servers but originates from the game itself. I love Battlefield 3 (or used to love it), but the game is horribly imbalanced. DICE did a poor job with its post-game updates and weapon tweaking. Players should (at least, in theory) congregate to the most “fair” servers, and this truly worked–to some extent!

Forgive me if my information is outdated (I haven’t played in months), but there’s an obvious reason for all the “no M26 Dart” servers. That weapon is terribly overpowered and completely unfair when compared to the other guns. This is not only apparent on Battlefield 3, but on any PC game that allows for players to run their own servers.

Either way, this could be avoided if you went to the browser and looked at the server’s title! You can favorite servers that don’t have restrictions. Or, DICE could have been smart and made it only for unranked matches. Or how about making a balanced game in the first place!

Another problem is how it was implemented. The “quick match” feature shouldn’t have sent you to player-run servers. Period. Oh, and the whole “banning players who use certain weapons” is fixed when Halo allows for pre-set loadouts. Tada! Besides, the majority of servers would play on custom Forge maps that only allow for certain weapons. The host wouldn’t need to enforce “weapon ban” rules. Unlike Battlefield, Halo has in-depth customization.

I used Battlefield 3 as an example, because it’s the only game of its kind. Ideally, however, Halo would be different. If you read my post, matchmaking will still be available for all of the classic playlists. As a Battlefield 3 player, you should know it doesn’t include Custom Games or Forge. It wasn’t able to reap all the benefits of player-run servers.

The joy of this system is that you’re able to favorite and play on servers that provide the best experience for you. This doesn’t work perfectly in Battlefield 3 because of the setbacks mentioned above. Think of it this way: The more people banned from a server, the less people that play on that server.

On PC games, it’s important to be a “good” admin and have unique maps, or users won’t play on your server (which generates less revenue, but that’s a whole nother story). This doesn’t affect Battlefield 3, because quick-match ruins the entire concept! Not to mention that admins are limited to their customization, picking only the map and game mode (both of which are available to all hosts). There’s simply not enough to differentiate one server from another. It also made the mistake of allowing player’s to run their own ranked matches.

Players don’t enjoy certain weapons, so they play on servers that “ban” certain weapons. In Battlefield 3, the only way to enforce that certain rule is to kick/ban players. In Halo, there are custom gametypes!

I hate using BF3 as an example, but it’s the only one that console players are able to relate to. PC users should understand my reasoning much more clearly.

Conclusion:

343 needs to adopt a “Rent-a-Server” system to get an edge over its competitors without sacrificing Halo’s core gameplay. Feel free to share your own ideas on the topic.

NOOOOOO!!!

This ruined BF3 for me since it made admins whiney at times and stopped certain weapons like ‘no AEK, no noobtube, no shotguns etc’

A better idea is a custom game search mechanic like the community wanted since custom games is where you play your own minigames

> NOOOOOO!!!
>
> This ruined BF3 for me since it made admins whiney at times and stopped certain weapons like ‘no AEK, no noobtube, no shotguns etc’

EDIT: I encourage everyone that’s responded to re-read the original post. I added important information that will hopefully change your viewpoint on the topic.

> > NOOOOOO!!!
> >
> > This ruined BF3 for me since it made admins whiney at times and stopped certain weapons like ‘no AEK, no noobtube, no shotguns etc’
>
> I absolutely knew someone would say this!
>
> I’ll try my best to persuade you :stuck_out_tongue:
>
> First of all, that issue is not of player-run servers but of the game itself. I loved Battlefield 3 (or used to love it), but the game was horribly imbalanced. In theory, players would congregate to the most “fair” servers. Forgive me if my information is outdated, but there was a reason there’s a ton of “no M26 Dart” servers. That weapon is arguably abused. This is not only apparent on Battlefield 3, but on any PC game that allows players to run their own servers. Either way, this could be avoided if you went to the browser and looked at the server’s title! Or, you could favorite servers that didn’t have restrictions.
>
> Another problem is how it was implemented. The “quick match” feature shouldn’t have sent you to player-run servers. Period.
>
> I used Battlefield 3 as an example, because it’s the only game of its kind. Ideally, however, Halo would be different. If you read my post, matchmaking will still be available for all of the classic playlists. As a Battlefield 3 player, you should know it doesn’t include Custom Games or Forge. It wasn’t able to reap all the benefits of player-run servers.
>
> In theory, you would favorite and play on servers that work best for you. This doesn’t work perfectly in Battlefield 3 because of the setbacks mentioned above.
>
> I hate using Battlefield 3 as an example, but it’s the only one that console players are able to relate to. PC users will hopefully understand my reasoning better.

All the servers nearly got rented so I had no choice but to go into them half the time
Also it seems pointless since if people want matches with their own settings they go into customs which only really needs a search mechanic implemented with the custom games being labeled as custom, 1v1 etc.

This would be great.

It does work well in BF3, but if you still had the option for Match Making for Ranked Playlist and all the Rent servers were social. This would be amazing.

I would like to see this.

> This would be great.
>
> It does work well in BF3, but if you still had the option for Match Making for Ranked Playlist and all the Rent servers were social. This would be amazing.
>
> I would like to see this.

Works well???

Every match I find even in the server browser is clan servers, no weapons aloud servers, Admin wins every match servers

Hell no am I letting halo turn out like that

> > This would be great.
> >
> > It does work well in BF3, but if you still had the option for Match Making for Ranked Playlist and all the Rent servers were social. This would be amazing.
> >
> > I would like to see this.
>
> Works well???
>
> Every match I find even in the server browser is clan servers, no weapons aloud servers, Admin wins every match servers
>
> Hell no am I letting halo turn out like that

You’re clearly over-exaggerating. In fact, I just went in BF3 and checked it out. It seems that servers banning weapons are less common than they were at “Rent-a-Server” launch. If you actually read my post, most of your worries would be alleviated.

> All the servers nearly got rented so I had no choice but to go into them half the time
> Also it seems pointless since if people want matches with their own settings they go into customs which only really needs a search mechanic implemented with the custom games being labeled as custom, 1v1 etc.

It’s not pointless, I promise you. I’ve had so many great times with friends I met on Counter-Strike. I’ve spent countless hours wasting away my time playing some pointless “fun” map. I love Halo’s Custom Games. But coming from the PC, it’s a step down. There are so many benefits from a player-run server system, it’s silly for 343 to not implement it.

EDIT: I updated my first response to you. It’s in your best interests to reread it :slight_smile:

Bleh, I hate the admins on BF3. Kill them, you get kicked.

Its a good idea but you’re always going to have those jerks. If there’s a fair way to allow them, I’m all for player rented servers.

But that should be for customs obviously and it should list all the crucial details like score limit, map, gametype, etc.

The MM ones should just have dedicated servers. No custom search criteria outside of the usual language, skill, blah blah blah and definitely have the option to uncheck JIP if it stays.

So essentially I can just enjoy lag free Halo. Yay.

> I don’t know the specifics of how Halo 5 matchmaking will work (nor does anyone in the community), but this is how I personally want it to:
>
> I want Halo to provide its traditional matchmaking experience, yet at the same time, include a server browser and allow for player-run servers. In my opinion, I see these servers as one of the keys to longevity and a healthy playerbase. If you want proof, go to any <mark>computer game</mark> that allows for such customization.
>
> The classic playlists will still be present in matchmaking. However, some of the more “fun-oriented” gametypes could be completely ridden of. The community would host these game modes now! The rest of the system would work exactly the same as it does now.
>
> <mark>Player-run servers</mark>, on the other hand, would not be “ranked”. Instead, they would be hosted purely for non- and semi-competitive gameplay. The host of the server would be able to choose what map and what game mode the server will play on (that includes custom Forge maps and gametypes). Everything else will work similarly to Battlefield 3 (on the console). We know it’s possible, <mark>and it works very well.</mark>
>
> The combination of Forge, <mark>Custom Games</mark>, and player-run dedicated servers would be a revolutionary moment in console history. For the first time, players will be able to connect and play the custom maps they want to play–on the custom game modes of their choosing. It’s one of those features Halo needs to adopt. This franchise is known for innovation, but it hasn’t brought anything new to the table since Forge and Theater back in 2007.
>
> I imagine that purchasing a server would be similar to purchasing a server on Battlefield 3. You pay money and in turn, you “host” a server for a period of time. Perhaps 343 will allow the community to rent out servers permanently.
>
> It’s great when you’re able to join your favorite minigames server and have all your “virtual friends” playing at the same time–every single day. It’s a unique experience that’s only found on the PC but can be brought to consoles.
>
> 343 needs to adopt a “Rent-a-Server” system to get an edge over its competitors without sacrificing Halo’s core gameplay. Feel free to share your own ideas on the topic.

Hmmm… No. There are too many Admin jerks in BF3. This could work for custom games though.

NO!!!

They already ruined BF3!!!

> I don’t know the specifics of how Halo 5 matchmaking will work (nor does anyone in the community), but this is how I personally want it to:
>
> I want Halo to provide its traditional matchmaking experience, yet at the same time, include a server browser and allow for player-run servers. In my opinion, I see these servers as one of the keys to longevity and a healthy playerbase. If you want proof, go to any computer game that allows for such customization.
>
> The classic playlists will still be present in matchmaking. However, some of the more “fun-oriented” gametypes could be completely ridden of. The community would host these game modes now! The rest of the system would work exactly the same as it does now.
>
> Player-run servers, on the other hand, would not be “ranked”. Instead, they would be hosted purely for non- and semi-competitive gameplay. The host of the server would be able to choose what map and what game mode the server will play on (that includes custom Forge maps and gametypes). Everything else will work similarly to Battlefield 3 (on the console). We know it’s possible, and it works very well.
>
> The combination of Forge, Custom Games, and player-run dedicated servers would be a revolutionary moment in console history. For the first time, players will be able to connect and play the custom maps they want to play–on the custom game modes of their choosing. It’s one of those features Halo needs to adopt. This franchise is known for innovation, but it hasn’t brought anything new to the table since Forge and Theater back in 2007.
>
> I imagine that purchasing a server would be similar to purchasing a server on Battlefield 3. You pay money and in turn, you “host” a server for a period of time. Perhaps 343 will allow the community to rent out servers permanently.
>
> It’s great when you’re able to join your favorite minigames server and have all your “virtual friends” playing at the same time–every single day. It’s a unique experience that’s only found on the PC but can be brought to consoles.
>
> 343 needs to adopt a “Rent-a-Server” system to get an edge over its competitors without sacrificing Halo’s core gameplay. Feel free to share your own ideas on the topic.

Hell no this im not going to be forced a pay for a server just to prevent myself from bumping into some -Yoink- who will kick me just because I killed him. Sorry but matchmaking should be handled by 343 not the players. But matchmaking for custom games would be a neat idea as long as I did not have to pay for a server.

I’m not 100% sure how I feel about this idea.

So I’m just going to let 343i and Microsoft
Handle those kinds of things.

So No

Or they could just take what gears one did for it’s multiplayer but instead make that for custom games along side normal multiplayer…

I don’t see a need.
We have custom games. <mark>We will have dedicated servers for all online games on the X1</mark>. Dedicated player run servers would be like having custom games without a lobby host, yet there is a host of some sorts to change the settings.

… Community based playlists like Grifball and Throwdown, sure.
Player controlled “playlists”, na.

> Works well???
>
> Every match I find even in the server browser is clan servers, no weapons aloud servers, Admin wins every match servers
>
> Hell no am I letting halo turn out like that

I’m afraid I have to agree with him here.

Whilst the BF3 rent-a-server on console was a good idea, it lead to the same problems you experience on the PC. Badmins. If people are better than the admin, you were often kicked because of it. If the admin wanted to make space for a friend, you could get kicked, they can kick you for no reason at all if they wanted, even using a weapon they don’t like.

Whilst in theory it is a good idea, a lot of admins ruin it for everyone.

OP basically what your asking for is pretty much an overcomplicated bad way of making custom game lobbies searchable

That is what you do on halo when you want to play by your rules:

P
Play custom games

> > All the servers nearly got rented so I had no choice but to go into them half the time
> > Also it seems pointless since if people want matches with their own settings they go into customs which only really needs a search mechanic implemented with the custom games being labeled as custom, 1v1 etc.
>
> It’s not pointless, I promise you. I’ve had so many great times with friends I met on Counter-Strike. I’ve spent countless hours wasting away my time playing some pointless “fun” map. I love Halo’s Custom Games. But coming from the PC, it’s a step down. There are so many benefits from a player-run server system, it’s silly for 343 to not implement it.
>
> EDIT: I updated my first response to you. It’s in your best interests to reread it :slight_smile:

Im not saying that player altered setting games are bad but what your suggesting is and most of the benefits are heavily outweighed by the horrible downsides

True I met people in GOW but this isnt a good reason for implementing it you can meet friends on normal MM like I did

Player run servers is a horrible idea that is poorly implemented.

BF3 is a perfect example.

You have players owning servers who ban a lot of weapons.
You have players who up the ticket count to ridiculous levels so all you get is 24/7 operation Metro with 300%+ tickets that last almost 40 minutes just so players can get lots of points to level up quicker.
You have players who will ban you if you are too good or beating them.
You have players who stack one team with all of their clan friends so they can steamroll randoms, if you try to switch teams they switch you back.

No thank you. I have been banned from enough servers and spent plenty of time in the server browser to ever want me to do this again. I’ll put up with it for BF4 but for Halo 5 I’m fine with matchmaking.