Since the release of Halo 4, people have noticed features, similar to those found in Call of Duty, popping up in the game. Love them or hate them they’re here to stay so why don’t we take advantage of them? If 343 could improve JIP and implement DLC the same way call of duty did in World at War, our DLC issues would be a thing of the past.
For those of you who have no idea what I’m talking about, let me explain. When maps were released for WaW, they were all added to the map rotations. They’d show up with the same frequency as non-DLC maps regardless if players have them or not. If the DLC map passes the vote, the people without the map will be kicked to the lobby while the people with it will play as usual. JIP allows this system to work because the kicked players can be replaced.
If they added this to Halo 4, then we won’t have to worry about DLC required playlists or not being able to play the maps you purchase.
Pros
People can play the maps they purchased with DLC restrictions on everyone else
Better access for people with individual maps packs (No “All DLC required” problems for people with 1 or 2 packs).
Cons
*dependent on JIP
Might break up parties
*Potentially long waits for people without DLC
There are a few details that I’ve left out because I can’t think of any easy way to explain them. Because of this you might have some questions or concerns about my idea. If so, leave a comment and I’ll try my best to answer any questions.
Maybe it’s just that I’m drunk, reading this on a phone but I don’t think that’s how it works…being a vet COD player too, I would purposely delete DLC so I could player worse players (something I’d never do in H4 because I’m just so desperate to play my DLC AND because the way it works in halo, the best players are infrequently in the DLC lists).
Are you literally saying that non-DLC owning players will get in lobbies where they can vote on a DLC map vs a vanilla one and then if the DLC is picked, they’ll get booted? Because that’s not how it’s worked…ever
> Are you literally saying that non-DLC owning players will get in lobbies where they can vote on a DLC map vs a vanilla one and then if the DLC is picked, they’ll get booted? Because that’s not how it’s worked…ever
It worked like that in W@W. Can’t say I liked it though. Yeah, it was nice to play on DLC maps, but punishing majority of players that didn’t want to pay the extra money never seemed like the right thing to do IMO.
I’m not saying it wouldn’t have its own flaws (or that I think it should be implemented), but I think simply matching DLC players with DLC players, and non-DLC players with non-DLC players would work better than what OP is suggesting - population needs to be higher for that to work nicely though especially if you only had 1 of 3 map packs. In Blacks Ops (1), you could go into options and turn off DLC if you wished to play with the general population.
OPs suggestion would work well in terms of the fact it might convince more players to buy the DLC if they were repeatedly watching DLC maps get voted for. But more likely since the majority of players do not have DLC, DLC owners would just get frustrated watching the options come up, only to repeatedly see the non-DLC maps winning on votes.
> Halo’s matchmaking system, as it’s been since 3 (even 2 I believe), attempts to group those with the DLC together.
>
> If all the players have the same/required DLC, the voting options will reflect this and offer everyone the choice to play said DLC.
>
> If just 1 person in the party/room doesn’t have the DLC, then the voting options reflect this and don’t offer the chance to play on said DLC.
only 2 playlist that most players play have all 11 dlc maps.
that are big team battle slayer and Infinity Slayer.
1 problem is big team battle slayer has 2 dlc maps and Infinity Slayer has the other 9 dlc maps.
that means you need 16 players with the crimsom dlc map pack for big team battle slayer in 1 match and 8 players for Infinity Slayer for the other dlc maps.
then is Infinity Slayer play list the best chose to have chance to play on a dlc map pack.
also that has a problem if you not 4 vs 4 play list and you are more a 8 vs 8 play list type.
then you have a problem.
its the same that 343 has post on the bulletin from this week that the dlc maps are unbelance in matchmaking. and they wane chance that for the dlc users next monday.
next monday you need 1 dlc map pack to play Infinity Slayer its a good news for the dlc users and bad news for the players that not wane buy any dlc maps.
I have owned every DLC map pack since they became available. I play them so rarely outside of DLC-only playlists that I consider them a waste of my money up to this point.
Maybe the news in yesterday’s bulletin will help change this. But, I have another proposal for 343 and the future of Halo…
DLC maps are free for all players. It ensures the entire games population gets the best experience possible. It doesn’t fragment the population. It keeps people coming back for more (and then some more). The future model of microtransactions means there will be plenty of other ways to earn our money that do not affect population or playability (using just the halo 4 model: armor, armor skins, skins, stances are ways this can work).
Here’s hoping the DLC-required playlist works out well. Majestic was the right choice for it, too.
> I have owned every DLC map pack since they became available. I play them so rarely outside of DLC-only playlists that I consider them a waste of my money up to this point.
>
> Maybe the news in yesterday’s bulletin will help change this. But, I have another proposal for 343 and the future of Halo…
>
> DLC maps are free for all players. It ensures the entire games population gets the best experience possible. It doesn’t fragment the population. It keeps people coming back for more (and then some more). The future model of microtransactions means there will be plenty of other ways to earn our money that do not affect population or playability (using just the halo 4 model: armor, armor skins, skins, stances are ways this can work).
>
> Here’s hoping the DLC-required playlist works out well. Majestic was the right choice for it, too.
they is 1 problem.
343 cant make the dlc packs free for all players.
you know why they cant do that its more that Microsoft has make what rule’s with 343.
and free dlc packs is 1 from it.
> DLC maps are free for all players. It ensures the entire games population gets the best experience possible. It doesn’t fragment the population. It keeps people coming back for more (and then some more). The future model of microtransactions means there will be plenty of other ways to earn our money that do not affect population or playability (using just the halo 4 model: armor, armor skins, skins, stances are ways this can work).
I’d prefer to see a search option to explicitly search for players with DLC over this, as I fear this would give players who purchased the DLC the impression that they have needlessly spent their money. After all, why purchase something when it’s just going to be free several months later? However, I feel that in the current situation of low population, this might be a better choice. The search option would further limit the available population for DLC players to search for; thereby limiting the available host choices, potentially leading to higher latency between players, and more laggy matches. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I would much rather have a playable game on an on-disc map than an unplayable one on a DLC map.
> > Are you literally saying that non-DLC owning players will get in lobbies where they can vote on a DLC map vs a vanilla one and then if the DLC is picked, they’ll get booted? Because that’s not how it’s worked…ever
>
> It worked like that in W@W. Can’t say I liked it though. Yeah, it was nice to play on DLC maps, but punishing majority of players that didn’t want to pay the extra money never seemed like the right thing to do IMO.
I completely agree with the idea that people shouldn’t be punished for not buying DLC. I just think that my solution would be a lesser evil compared having DLC required playlists or not allowing DLC owners to see their maps at all.
> I’m not saying it wouldn’t have its own flaws (or that I think it should be implemented), but I think simply matching DLC players with DLC players, and non-DLC players with non-DLC players would work better than what OP is suggesting
I also like your idea better, the only problem is that it doesn’t currently work. The system you mentioned is exactly what’s supposed to be happening in Halo 4 right now but most of us have seen little success. If they could improve it to the point where it actually worked well, it would absolutely be the better option.
> Are you literally saying that non-DLC owning players will get in lobbies where they can vote on a DLC map vs a vanilla one and then if the DLC is picked, they’ll get booted? Because that’s not how it’s worked…ever
I’m not sure about World At War but I definitely remember being kicked from at least a dozen games of Black Ops 1 because of this feature and I have to say, it’s extremely frustrating!!! I’d much rather have DLC restrictions any day of the week, at least in Halo 3 when I didn’t own any DLC I was able to have a consistent experience. Newer CoD games (and possibly MW2? I never played it) seem to have a feature that allows players to restrict their search to DLC maps only. This would have been a great feature if 343 hadn’t been so insistent on doing everything automatically.
Halo has never had a DLC problem until 343 took the reins. Bungie supported their map packs past the first few weeks and actually made many playlists DLC required or gave the DLC packs their own playlists and kept them for months at a time, plus they weren’t rare occurrences in non-DLC required playlists and they would show up frequently because people with the maps tended to be matched with each other. You never had to worry about not playing the new maps that you paid extra for.
343 is the one with the DLC problem. They give their map packs a playlist for a week or two then they remove it. Why would you remove the ability for players who paid extra for more content not able to access their maps in matchmaking? It’s essentially a 10 day access to the maps, then they remove the playlist and they leave it to chance that you’ll ever play the maps again in online matchmaking. They did this in Halo: Reach when they took over by taking Squad DLC out, and they’ve been doing the exact same thing with all the map packs in Halo 4. Not to mention that the weighting for them in normal playlists are extremely, extremely rare. They’ve said many, many times that their matchmaking system is optimized for people to be matched with other DLC owners, but I, along with many other of my friends and random people in matchmaking that I’ve discussed this with, find this to be a blatant lie. I have not played on a non-Champions DLC map since around the time Castle was launched. I’m hard pressed for DLC maps to even show up in the voting rotation, let alone for people to actually pick the map. Yes, even if the DLC map shows up people STILL vote for old maps like Haven, Ragnarok, and so forth. It’s really sad.
Also, they always throw out the low population excuse out too for consolidating or removing DLC playlists. That wasn’t a problem for Bungie, so why are you blaming the maps now?
Just give us a couple of DLC required playlists. I am glad they are making Team Slayer DLC required, but that’s only for one map pack, Majestic (they should include Champions Bundle too, Pitfall and Vertigo are great 4v4 maps). But Crimson and Castle are larger maps made for Big Team, so they should make that playlist DLC required too. I think it’s safe to say that Ragnarok, Exile, Vortex, Longbow, Meltdown, and Settler are getting old now. Make the playlist Crimson and Castle required, and boom, 6 more great maps to choose from.
> Just give us a couple of DLC required playlists. I am glad they are making Team Slayer DLC required, but that’s only for one map pack, Majestic (they should include Champions Bundle too, Pitfall and Vertigo are great 4v4 maps). But Crimson and Castle are larger maps made for Big Team, so they should make that playlist DLC required too. I think it’s safe to say that Ragnarok, Exile, Vortex, Longbow, Meltdown, and Settler are getting old now. Make the playlist Crimson and Castle required, and boom, 6 more great maps to choose from.
what 343 is doing now with the Infinity Slayer playlist that you most own the a super big move in the good way for the dlc users and you know why.
if you make 1 dlc map pack required then you have more and more chance to play on the castle and the campions bundle too.
they not need to required more dlc on 1 playlist.
for the Crimson dlc map pack has 2 playlist where you need a 8 vs 8 playlist for.
but still the dlc users can play now on 9 from the 11 dlc maps that have come out.
its sadly that 343 had not found a way for the Wreckage and Shatter map to let then also been play much in matchmaking.
> Halo’s matchmaking system, as it’s been since 3 (even 2 I believe), attempts to group those with the DLC together.
>
> If all the players have the same/required DLC, the voting options will reflect this and offer everyone the choice to play said DLC.
>
> If just 1 person in the party/room doesn’t have the DLC, then the voting options reflect this and don’t offer the chance to play on said DLC.
So why does one person get to ruin the experience for everyone else? With JIP, booting that one person and replacing them with someone who does have the DLC should be relatively easy.