> Halo 4 got about 1/20th the total playtime I gave Halo Reach… and to be honest that is more than Halo 4 deserved. The problem for 343 is Halo Reach. Once a higher standard of matchmaking and networking is achieved you don’t go backwards. If you do the end result can ONLY be disappointment and ultimately a radically shortened lifespan for the online multiplayer portion of the game. I can’t fathom the kind of masochistic self abusing mentality of a person who’d actually attempt to push through the glitchy, horrid networking of off host games in Halo 4.
>
> Its simple. 343 need to research and find out what Bungie did with their net code for Reach and either duplicate it or improve upon it. Delivering a poor mans version is NOT an option. In Reach I can be playing on French, Canadian, Mexican or Italian host and still get kills (and plenty of them). Of course on any international host there is some lag but at least in Halo Reach hit detection / hit registration still works. Halo 4 only needs a slightly sub par host and hit detection goes to crap. I don’t even search good connection in Reach and I have fun games. Whereas the ONLY fun games of Halo 4 have either been on my own host or a host from the same city as me. Halo 4’s delicate net code can’t handle small amounts of latency - but on international host it is a complete write off.
>
> Meanwhile 343 bunkered down after Halo 4 released and pretended that the game was awesome and everything was just fine. I mean they only had themselves to blame after bypassing a international beta… so lets just pretend there isn’t an international community. 343 had 3 times the staff working on Halo 4 that Bungie had working on Halo Reach and look at what they managed to do to the games multiplayer networking. No reliable good connection options - the auto good connection is woefully loose even after two tightenings of the search by 343. Problem is if the game ran net code like Halo Reach I’d be playing Halo 4 right now - to this day - as still do with Reach. I don’t need host when the game actually works… when HIT DETECTION WORKS ON OR OFF HOST!
>
> You would think 343 could only improve from such a woeful start but why don’t I have any confidence in them? Because they were the same arrogant bunch who decided they didn’t have time or need a international multiplayer beta before releasing Halo 4. Thats why I don’t trust them. A definite lack of respect or consideration for the international community appears to be the mindset of 343.
Please dont necro post, I know its halloween but still and besides they dont need it as a search option when the game does it automatically like in halo 4 but the 360 has a really out of date transfer limit.
> Please dont necro post, I know its halloween but still and besides they dont need it as a search option when the game does it automatically like in halo 4 but the 360 has a really out of date transfer limit.
What are you on about? This thread is a month old. Not dead. Unless by your “troll standards” it is deemed dead.
As for the abysmal auto good connection search (which I raised in my post) it is a poor mans version of the manual good connection search found in Reach. I’d be happy with no good connection search if Halo 4’s net code and hit registration were even a fraction as robust as that in Halo Reach.
Your flawed theory about the 360 being the ultimate cause of the problem is exposed when comparing Reach with Halo 4. 343 were just sloppy and rushed. They didn’t even bother with a international multiplayer beta. That is their mistake. The recent over taking of Halo 4 by Halo Reach on live activity is symptomatic of a game suffering a premature online death due to a litany of online glitches and weak as piss net code.
> > Please dont necro post, I know its halloween but still and besides they dont need it as a search option when the game does it automatically like in halo 4 but the 360 has a really out of date transfer limit.
>
> What are you on about? This thread is a month old. Not dead. Unless by your “troll standards” it is deemed dead.
>
> As for the abysmal auto good connection search (which I raised in my post) it is a poor mans version of the manual good connection search found in Reach. I’d be happy with no good connection search if Halo 4’s net code and hit registration were even a fraction as robust as that in Halo Reach.
>
> Your flawed theory about the 360 being the ultimate cause of the problem is exposed when comparing Reach with Halo 4. 343 were just sloppy and rushed. They didn’t even bother with a international multiplayer beta. That is their mistake. The recent over taking of Halo 4 by Halo Reach on live activity is symptomatic of a game suffering a premature online death due to a litany of online glitches and weak as piss net code.
>
> I think I hear your bridge calling you.
A month is still pretty old anyway
They dont need to have it as an option when the game does it automatically since no one wants a bad connection game. A beta wasnt used because they thought that most people would just use it like a demo which is partly true but by that stage the wouldnt of been able to edit the netcode.
The 360 WAS and STILL IS the problem. Halo 4 has that much going on, on the screen that its got too much data to transfer that the 360 with its limited transfer thus making it have bad connection with the game trying to catch up. It isnt the netcoding. The reason reach had better connection was mainly because it had lower graphical quality thus making it use up less data and this didnt overload the transfer limit.
Also I was making a friendly pun with the halloween statement.
> They dont need to have it as an option when the game does it automatically since no one wants a bad connection game. A beta wasnt used because they thought that most people would just use it like a demo which is partly true but by that stage the wouldnt of been able to edit the netcode.
>
> The 360 WAS and STILL IS the problem. Halo 4 has that much going on, on the screen that its got too much data to transfer that the 360 with its limited transfer thus making it have bad connection with the game trying to catch up. It isnt the netcoding. The reason reach had better connection was mainly because it had lower graphical quality thus making it use up less data and this didnt overload the transfer limit.
>
> Also I was making a friendly pun with the halloween statement.[/color]
You can repeat yourself as often as you like. The lack of logic remains evident.
The auto good connection search is broken. The only way to ensure it operates as a true regional filter is to slavishly monitor the pre-game lobby to check the country of the person who pulled host and then rapidly leave said lobby if it is (as if often the case) a person in a country many thousands of miles from Australia.
As for “your” theory about the beta (which to my knowledge 343 has never said anything like what you just claimed - i.e. they think betas are demos) “IF” they thought that it would prove that they are incompetent. International multiplayer betas are used by developers to gather statistics and networking data to make improvements / fix glitches in the game PRIOR to releasing it to the public. Only imbecile developers would or could view a beta as a trumped up demo.
As for your highly inaccurate statement about the 360 being to blame - again - there are a plethora of titles currently being played on XBL which are more complex than Halo 4’s scrubby multiplayer and they work great with good hit detection and less latency. Perhaps their developers know what they are doing?
I could care less about your Halloween statement. Its the ridiculous statements about the 360, auto matchmaking and the missing beta which I won’t let pass. If you’re going to attempt to close someone down it helps if you can do it from a position of truth instead of opinion.
> > They dont need to have it as an option when the game does it automatically since no one wants a bad connection game. A beta wasnt used because they thought that most people would just use it like a demo which is partly true but by that stage the wouldnt of been able to edit the netcode.
> >
> > The 360 WAS and STILL IS the problem. Halo 4 has that much going on, on the screen that its got too much data to transfer that the 360 with its limited transfer thus making it have bad connection with the game trying to catch up. It isnt the netcoding. The reason reach had better connection was mainly because it had lower graphical quality thus making it use up less data and this didnt overload the transfer limit.
> >
> > Also I was making a friendly pun with the halloween statement.[/color]
>
> You can repeat yourself as often as you like. The lack of logic remains evident.
>
> The auto good connection search is broken. The only way to ensure it operates as a true regional filter is to slavishly monitor the pre-game lobby to check the country of the person who pulled host and then rapidly leave said lobby if it is (as if often the case) a person in a country many thousands of miles from Australia.
>
> As for “your” theory about the beta (which to my knowledge 343 has never said anything like what you just claimed - i.e. they think betas are demos) “IF” they thought that it would prove that they are incompetent. International multiplayer betas are used by developers to gather statistics and networking data to make improvements / fix glitches in the game PRIOR to releasing it to the public. Only imbecile developers would or could view a beta as a trumped up demo.
>
> As for your highly inaccurate statement about the 360 being to blame - again - there are a plethora of titles currently being played on XBL which are more complex than Halo 4’s scrubby multiplayer and they work great with good hit detection and less latency. Perhaps their developers know what they are doing?
>
> I could care less about your Halloween statement. Its the ridiculous statements about the 360, auto matchmaking and the missing beta which I won’t let pass. If you’re going to attempt to close someone down it helps if you can do it from a position of truth instead of opinion.
But Im telling the truth they said that they wont do a beta because people would act like it was a demo this is true and you cant deny it. Im nit saying its a good decision. They said this and they choose to a closed beta which gets all the same data but on a smaller scale, yes it was a bad decision but its true, they DID DO IT. Most games dont have betas so calling people bad developers for not using a beta when it requires lots of resources and money that they dont always have to use to get the stuff they need and want out of a beta.
You should have an option to search for people in your region but you dont need a good connection search when the game AUTOMATICALLY has this turned on. Its stupid. Region search and good connection search are different things
The 360 has a very limited transfer limit this is yoinking true. This means that if there is too much data to transfer it will lag. Laggy games are more frequent on BTB which helps to prove my pint because it true for the last time. If halo 4 had a lower graphical level then there would be less lag again. Why do you think Battlefield has low graphics? Because it doesnt cause lag hence why the graphics are not as good as on PC. How complex the game is is not really relevant its how much data is being used. Halo 4 has decent graphics but due to all the stuff going on the screen it causes lag. It isnt always the games fault. I dont run into that many laggy games in halo 4 anyway unless its in BTB or where there is loads of explosions happening.
This is all true and Im repeating it because you havnt a clue what I mean which goes against your point.
Halo 4 players were the guinea pigs for Microsoft’s half baked Windows Azure/Orleans platforms. Maybe by the time the Xbone is launched Microsoft/343i will have sorted out the bugs but I won’t be buying one to find out.
The issues Halo 4 experiences in part are because 343i chose to move certain tasks performed by the host in prior Halo games to the cloud to free up local resources, unfortunately in doing so they introduced another point of potential failure/degradation.
> Can’t justify $599 for the X**** + $50 for XBLG + whatever they charge for the next Halo just to continue the series. Many good exclusive games would have to come out for me to consider purchasing the X****.
]Minor corrections:
Xbox One: $499.96
Xbox LIVE Gold 12 Months: $59.99 (actually a pretty good deal, because buying from month to month for $10 equals to $120/year)
Halo 5/One: (estimated) $59.99
Also consider that the better consoles get, the longer they last, Xbox-Xbox 360 = 4 years, Xbox 360-Xbox One = 8 years. So, the life expectancy of the Xbox One (in my opinion) is well over 14 years.
THIS POST WAS BASED ON THE FRICKIN’ US. PLEASE NO RUDE RESPONSES.
I understand there will be server farms in various contries.
Consider this folks - 4 players from UK, 4 players from US all with different bandwitdths & connection speeds . Which server farm to use - EU, US or neutral (Australia, lol)? Prioritse players with good connection?
So, searching options for local players/good connection is relevant. Also maybe for players with headsets, similar skill or random depending on pop/wait times etc.
> Ok, um, the Xbox One will have more than 300,000 servers, so good connections in Halo 5 shouldn’t be a problem.
Yes 300,000 servers for Xbox One graphics based cloud support - how many are DEDICATED Halo 5 servers and where will they be located? Come back here and post when you find out actual numbers. A server based system is fine as long as you have dedicated servers in every city of every country you’re releasing a game. They won’t though. The games with dedicated servers usually charge subscription fees for the resulting costs from operating dedicated servers.
> > Can’t justify $599 for the Xbone + $50 for XBLG + whatever they charge for the next Halo just to continue the series. Many good exclusive games would have to come out for me to consider purchasing the Xbone.
> >
> > If there aren’t dedicated Australian servers there’s no chance I’ll purchase the next Halo as I’m not interested in the Halo campaigns at all and I’ve played enough laggy Halo games.
>
> Minor corrections:
>
> Xbox One: $499.96
>
> Xbox LIVE Gold 12 Months: $59.99 (actually a pretty good deal, because buying from month to month for $10 equals to $120/year)
>
> Halo 5/One: (estimated) $59.99
Dunno where you’re from mate but Nicholas was right about the price. In “Australia” the XB1 is $599 so you can retract your correction. We get XBLG for $50 by ordering it from overseas - here in Aus its $79 if you go through the Xbox marketplace subscriptions… so you’re wrong there too. And lastly considering all your other prices don’t seem to be based on Aussie $ I’m going to guess Halo 5 is going to cost us more than $60 too. You probably shouldn’t assume you’re right on currency matters in a forum frequented by an international audience… unless you bothered to check the country of origin of the person you’re attempting to correct.
> But Im telling the truth they said that they wont do a beta because people would act like it was a demo this is true and you cant deny it. Im nit saying its a good decision. They said this and they choose to a closed beta which gets all the same data but on a smaller scale, yes it was a bad decision but its true, they DID DO IT. Most games dont have betas so calling people bad developers for not using a beta when it requires lots of resources and money that they dont always have to use to get the stuff they need and want out of a beta.
>
> You should have an option to search for people in your region but you dont need a good connection search when the game AUTOMATICALLY has this turned on. Its stupid. Region search and good connection search are different things
>
> The 360 has a very limited transfer limit this is yoinking true. This means that if there is too much data to transfer it will lag. Laggy games are more frequent on BTB which helps to prove my pint because it true for the last time. If halo 4 had a lower graphical level then there would be less lag again. Why do you think Battlefield has low graphics? Because it doesnt cause lag hence why the graphics are not as good as on PC. How complex the game is is not really relevant its how much data is being used. Halo 4 has decent graphics but due to all the stuff going on the screen it causes lag. It isnt always the games fault. I dont run into that many laggy games in halo 4 anyway unless its in BTB or where there is loads of explosions happening.
>
> This is all true and Im repeating it because you havnt a clue what I mean which goes against your point.
Yes keep repeating yourself. I posted earlier that the auto connection search is broken. If you live in a country where it works good for you. But for the majority of Australian players it is royally screwed. Feel free to keep hammering on about something you “don’t experience”. God knows I love to rave on about all the things that “don’t happen to me or effect me”. lol.
As for your bizarre claim about the beta… as I said if any developer claimed a mass international beta was a trumped up demo they are imbeciles. I’m not saying 343 said that… as I don’t believe thats what they said… unless you’re going to provide a link to one of the 343 staff saying something that obtuse? In a AAA “multiplayer” game “good developers” will frequently run international betas to ensure the network is going to work well without glitches or poor performance. Running a closed beta on a AAA international multiplayer title is stupid. As you say it was a mistake and a huge one. If Halo 4 performed as well as Reach the daily population would be in the 50,000’s instead of the current 3 - 5,000.
I gotta pull you up on a previous statement of yours too… you said “Halo Reach had a better network because it has less graphical requirements”. By your logic Halo 3 (also a Xbox 360 game) should have had even better performance than Reach for hit detection and general lag free game play. False! Halo 3 always required you to “lead” the shot off host (like Halo 4) because the hit detection was severely affected by host quality / location. You’re talking out of your backside on this and the proof is 3 games in one generation with increasing graphics… yet the first and last are the worst performing in networking. Its a simple failure of not having a international beta in combination with new developer who didn’t keep up the quality of Bungies networking achievements on Reach.
Lastly - if the developer designs a game which “looks nice” but runs like crap on the 360 who is at fault? The hardware which has been around all this time with no surprises… or the sloppy developer who made the game, as you say, too graphics intensive for the hardware it needs to run on? Again you’re just proving my point. 343 screwed up.
> Ok, um, the Xbox One will have more than 300,000 servers, so good connections in Halo 5 shouldn’t be a problem.
Even if there’s 300k servers each game still needs to have a huge online population in order to match players on correct servers. No Australian player enjoys playing on a US server etc.
Now add all restrictions some games have when trying to matching players such as DLC, Skill, Party vs Party etc, all of this by the end of the day requires a huge online population in order to work smoothly even for Dedicated Servers.
> > But Im telling the truth they said that they wont do a beta because people would act like it was a demo this is true and you cant deny it. Im nit saying its a good decision. They said this and they choose to a closed beta which gets all the same data but on a smaller scale, yes it was a bad decision but its true, they DID DO IT. Most games dont have betas so calling people bad developers for not using a beta when it requires lots of resources and money that they dont always have to use to get the stuff they need and want out of a beta.
> >
> > You should have an option to search for people in your region but you dont need a good connection search when the game AUTOMATICALLY has this turned on. Its stupid. Region search and good connection search are different things
> >
> > The 360 has a very limited transfer limit this is yoinking true. This means that if there is too much data to transfer it will lag. Laggy games are more frequent on BTB which helps to prove my pint because it true for the last time. If halo 4 had a lower graphical level then there would be less lag again. Why do you think Battlefield has low graphics? Because it doesnt cause lag hence why the graphics are not as good as on PC. How complex the game is is not really relevant its how much data is being used. Halo 4 has decent graphics but due to all the stuff going on the screen it causes lag. It isnt always the games fault. I dont run into that many laggy games in halo 4 anyway unless its in BTB or where there is loads of explosions happening.
> >
> > This is all true and Im repeating it because you havnt a clue what I mean which goes against your point.
>
> Yes keep repeating yourself. I posted earlier that the auto connection search is broken. If you live in a country where it works good for you. But for the majority of Australian players it is royally screwed. Feel free to keep hammering on about something you “don’t experience”. God knows I love to rave on about all the things that “don’t happen to me or effect me”. lol.
>
> As for your bizarre claim about the beta… as I said if any developer claimed a mass international beta was a trumped up demo they are imbeciles. I’m not saying 343 said that… as I don’t believe thats what they said… unless you’re going to provide a link to one of the 343 staff saying something that obtuse? In a AAA “multiplayer” game “good developers” will frequently run international betas to ensure the network is going to work well without glitches or poor performance. Running a closed beta on a AAA international multiplayer title is stupid. As you say it was a mistake and a huge one. If Halo 4 performed as well as Reach the daily population would be in the 50,000’s instead of the current 3 - 5,000.
>
> I gotta pull you up on a previous statement of yours too… you said “Halo Reach had a better network because it has less graphical requirements”. By your logic Halo 3 (also a Xbox 360 game) should have had even better performance than Reach for hit detection and general lag free game play. False! Halo 3 always required you to “lead” the shot off host (like Halo 4) because the hit detection was severely affected by host quality / location. You’re talking out of your backside on this and the proof is 3 games in one generation with increasing graphics… yet the first and last are the worst performing in networking. Its a simple failure of not having a international beta in combination with new developer who didn’t keep up the quality of Bungies networking achievements on Reach.
>
> Lastly - if the developer designs a game which “looks nice” but runs like crap on the 360 who is at fault? The hardware which has been around all this time with no surprises… or the sloppy developer who made the game, as you say, too graphics intensive for the hardware it needs to run on? Again you’re just proving my point. 343 screwed up.
Im repeating my self because you dont get the point and seriously stop insulting me.
They can have servers and have the good connection search automatic. It saves time and it will always try to find a good connection locally, this happens automatically, the reason you end up facing people around the world so often is because the connection is good which for me it nearly always is and for moat of my friends in both the UK and the US its good. Adding it as a search option wouldnt do anything really since if it cant find a good connection game locally it expands the search filter. And with dedicated servers games with people from other regions would be good quality.
Halo 3 didnt have much lag either but it had more than reach, this is because the net-code wasnt as good back then as it was with reach and halo 4. This is why it lags occasionally, but it barely lags at all unless its in CO-OP which has been laggy in every halo game.
They said it here and here that it would be a waste of resources, this is because people wpuld treat it like a demo. End of.
Halo 4 doesnt have all that much lag but still more frequent than other games, this is because of the graphics. They chose to have better graphics to make campaign seem richer and more fun to play, to generally improve graphics like people would expect from a sequel, the game doesnt have a significant frame rate drop, (halo 5 will run at 60FPS so thats that covered) and doesnt suffer from all that much lag anyway. They are not bad developers, they merely didnt handle the 360s limits as well as they should off, they still produced a good game and with the XB1 they can have good connection and good graphics especially with the game using the cloud and dedicated servers.
> > Can’t justify $599 for the Xbone + $50 for XBLG + whatever they charge for the next Halo just to continue the series. Many good exclusive games would have to come out for me to consider purchasing the Xbone.
> >
> > If there aren’t dedicated Australian servers there’s no chance I’ll purchase the next Halo as I’m not interested in the Halo campaigns at all and I’ve played enough laggy Halo games.
>
> Minor corrections:
>
> Xbox One: $499.96
>
> Xbox LIVE Gold 12 Months: $59.99 (actually a pretty good deal, because buying from month to month for $10 equals to $120/year)
>
> Halo 5/One: (estimated) $59.99
>
> Also consider that the better consoles get, the longer they last, Xbox-Xbox 360 = 4 years, Xbox 360-Xbox One = 8 years. So, the life expectancy of the Xbox One (in my opinion) is well over 14 years.
I’m Australian so $599AUD for an Xbox One.
I’m assuming I will be able to purchase 12 months Xbox Live Gold subscriptions for $50AUD.
Next Halo $79+AUD.
The Xbox One will struggle to remain relevant for 8 years let alone 14 years. The Xbox360 relative to its time had stronger hardware than the Xbox One and look how badly the Xbox360 has aged.
> They said it here and here that it would be a waste of resources, this is because people wpuld treat it like a demo. End of.
>
> Halo 4 doesnt have all that much lag but still more frequent than other games, this is because of the graphics. They chose to have better graphics to make campaign seem richer and more fun to play, to generally improve graphics like people would expect from a sequel, the game doesnt have a significant frame rate drop, (halo 5 will run at 60FPS so thats that covered) and doesnt suffer from all that much lag anyway. They are not bad developers, they merely didnt handle the 360s limits as well as they should off, they still produced a good game and with the XB1 they can have good connection and good graphics especially with the game using the cloud and dedicated servers.
Both of your links just say 343 didn’t run a beta to avoid splitting resources. They didn’t say anything about 343 thinking the Xbox population treat betas like demos. Your assertion about people viewing it as a “demo” remains your tacked on subjective opinion vs any actual evidence that 343 view it as such. Did you know Bungie with a development team of 90 people made Reach fully inclusive of a international multiplayer beta and just like 343 also ran large scale MS internal network testing too? 343 with closer to 300 staff skipped a important step in quality assurance for a AAA international online multiplayer game… effectively reducing Halo 4 to a campaign ONLY.
I haven’t played the horribly inconsistent online multiplayer of Halo 4 for quite a while and even when I did give it a go it was only because I wanted to see if 343 had ever managed to get their crap together and fix the plethora of online issues. They may have tightened search but certainly didn’t FIX it. At no stage did H4’-Yoink!- registration / hit detection ever improve or attain a semblance of Reach’s. The only way to get decent hit registration is to play a locally hosted match or better still “be the host”.
Peer to peer Xbox Live search systems been around and improving on Xbox since the original. If 343 couldn’t figure out consistent P2P search what makes you think they’ll handle online matchmaking via cloud graphics assist / cloud servers any better? They haven’t proven they have the net coding abilities to produce a AAA worthy online multiplayer game experience. I’m not prepared to shell out for a XB1 and another dismal 343 produced Halo as a preorder. I’d wait until enough people (whose opinions I’d actually value) said that 343 had fixed Halo online MP.
I and most of my friends are planning to get Destiny on the 360 instead of the next Halo on XB1. Already read that Bungie were using a improved version of “their” online matchmaking system which they developed for Reach… so I’m sold. Bungie HAVE proven they can develop a workable and consistent matchmaking system (though nothing is perfect) which is a lot more than can be said for 343.
The real problem is you don’t go backwards. After a previous innovation you keep the standard or improve the experience. 343 didn’t do that with their woeful online for Halo 4. 343 did go backwards. People had a superior online Halo product to compare Halo 4 to - Halo Reach. So it became evident to most in the international community that 343 lacked the care and expertise of Bungie when it came to developing for the international online multiplayer network. Ultimately when they look back on the various Halo online MP titles in years to come. Halo Reach and Halo 2 will be remembered as classics. Halo 4 won’t rate a mention because it was a let down. I mean when gamers read that 343 had 3 times the staff working on H4 that Bungie had working on Halo Reach they were entitled to have high expectations for H4. So even if H4 was good (not great) it wasn’t nearly good enough overall for the number of staff 343 threw at it.
All this is regarding “the network” - don’t get me started on 343’s lack of ability to balance / design multiplayer. Thats a book in itself.
> The auto good connection search is broken. The only way to ensure it operates as a true regional filter is to slavishly monitor the pre-game lobby to check the country of the person who pulled host and then rapidly leave said lobby if it is (as if often the case) a person in a country many thousands of miles from Australia.
I agree.
REACH search system was one of the few improvements from Halo 3. But probably the most important. The other being the REACH UI (User Interface).
If Halo 4 Auto Search system found me a game within my own country 70% of the time that would be great. But I be lucky to get 20% with the 50% being USA and 20% Asia and 10% elsewhere.
I am from Australia, and count New Zealand Host as equal. As connection are still really good.
I do enjoy Halo 4, and do like some of the improvements from REACH. They have added other features which I hope never return in future Halo games. However the Search filters are not as good as REACH and for a later game, it should had improved on this even more. making more games more enjoyable.
Hopefully with dedicated servers, I will never ever play a laggy game again and never ever see another famous black/blue screen.
> Im telling the truth they said that they wont do a beta because people would act like it was a demo this is true and you cant deny it. Im not saying its a good decision. They said this and they choose to a closed beta which gets all the same data but on a smaller scale, yes it was a bad decision but its true, they DID DO IT. Most games don’t have betas so calling people bad developers for not using a beta when it requires lots of resources and money that they don’t always have to use to get the stuff they need and want out of a beta.[/color]
The 2 Public Beta Bungie did for Halo 3 and Halo REACH were for three things:
Improving the Net Code
Fixing Bugs/Glitches.
Changes to the Sandbox (Weapon Tuning, etc)
This is the main reason both Betas were released 8 months before game launch. So Bungie had time to make the changes and try fix any discovered bugs.
Bungie even requested we try break their game, so they could fix it. I remember Bungie saying, try get out of our maps, I bet you can’t (within a few days of Beta launch, people were able to exit the map boundaries).
Beta’s are in a way like a Demo, but they are much more useful. It give you a rough idea what the game maybe like, but a lot can happen from the Public Beta to the Final release of the game.
Battlefield for example releases a public beta a month before the game launches. This Beta is just for Server Load Testing. Making sure servers are right for the Release of the game.
Both Halo 3 and Halo REACH Beta’s have had server meltdown on both releases. And were a little annoying.
Beta’s are important, and as a player I like to think by playing the H3 & HR beta’s I helped Bungie make a beta game. I love to assist 343 the same with H5.
> The real problem is you don’t go backwards. After a previous innovation you keep the standard or improve the experience. 343 didn’t do that with their woeful online for Halo 4. 343 did go backwards. People had a superior online Halo product to compare Halo 4 to - Halo Reach. So it became evident to most in the international community that 343 lacked the care and expertise of Bungie when it came to developing for the international online multiplayer network. Ultimately when they look back on the various Halo online MP titles in years to come. Halo Reach and Halo 2 will be remembered as classics. Halo 4 won’t rate a mention because it was a let down. I mean when gamers read that 343 had 3 times the staff working on H4 that Bungie had working on Halo Reach they were entitled to have high expectations for H4. So even if H4 was good (not great) it wasn’t nearly good enough overall for the number of staff 343 threw at it.
This is true, but it took Bungie 4 games to get their Net Code to be where it was for REACH. H2 NetCode was awful and H3 was still much better but I still played many laggy games in H3.
Halo REACH net code has been great. I rarely would play a game with anyone other than people from Australia or New Zealand. And even when you did, you sometimes still a non laggy game. You still get some laggy games. But compared to H2 and H3. HR is a massive massive improvement.
The Halo REACH Net Code was great, and it search featured made it even more great. How H4 didn’t improve on this even more, and why they decided implementing the search features behind the scenes was a better idea. That is for them to answer.
I would say H4 Net Code is much better than H3, but behind HR.
We can only hope 343 have learn from this mistake and with H5 having dedicated servers. Should make their lives easier.