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.
