On the Waypoint website when you click “Games” towards the top of the webpage and then click on Halo 4, the details say that the online will support up to 16 players.
I know it’s still over a year away from release, but does that mean that there is not any chance of larger-scale multiplayer battles?
to be honest i like 16 maybe go so far as to 24 but anything bigger then 24 its just a hot mess.
I agree dude, since Halo 2 to Halo: Reach we’ve gotten up to 16 players, let Halo 4 have like 22 players, thatd be sick
I imagined huge war-like 16 vs 16 battles, featuring scarabs, pelicans, phantoms, elephants, etc. for Halo 4’s big team battle playlist. 
I hope it isn’t too late to change it.
More than 16 players would be awesome, but with more players comes more problems. Look at BTB in Reach for example, its a normal 8 vs. 8, but I honestly don’t remember the last Big Team game I played where someone didn’t quit or leave the game. Also, more players = more connections = potentially more problems. One host player for 20+ people could cause some technical problems.
I discussed with my friend the other day about potentially having epic 50 on 50 battles in future Halos. But then I realzed how it wouldn’t live up to it’s hype due to people quitting, the maps would have to be huge, and weapons/vechicle fighting would be ridiculous. I say at least give support to up to 20 people in Halo 4.
I think they should do 24 players online.
> More than 16 players would be awesome, but with more players comes more problems. Look at BTB in Reach for example, its a normal 8 vs. 8, but I honestly don’t remember the last Big Team game I played where someone didn’t quit or leave the game. Also, more players = more connections = potentially more problems. One host player for 20+ people could cause some technical problems.
>
> I discussed with my friend the other day about potentially having epic 50 on 50 battles in future Halos. But then I realzed how it wouldn’t live up to it’s hype due to people quitting, the maps would have to be huge, and weapons/vechicle fighting would be ridiculous. I say at least give support to up to 20 people in Halo 4.
This could be solved if Halo 4 had dedicated servers, and if Halo had CoD’s replacement system where if someone quit, a new person could take their place, but in someone could pick a setting like in their psych profile that they only want to find games that haven’t actually started yet.
BTB plays just fine and fun with 16 people and I see no reason to change it. I’m not saying 24 players would be a bad idea, but it would mean maps would have to become larger, accommodate more vehicles and weapons, and deal with the possibility of major lag. I can see it being general chaos.
> > More than 16 players would be awesome, but with more players comes more problems. Look at BTB in Reach for example, its a normal 8 vs. 8, but I honestly don’t remember the last Big Team game I played where someone didn’t quit or leave the game. Also, more players = more connections = potentially more problems. One host player for 20+ people could cause some technical problems.
> >
> > I discussed with my friend the other day about potentially having epic 50 on 50 battles in future Halos. But then I realzed how it wouldn’t live up to it’s hype due to people quitting, the maps would have to be huge, and weapons/vechicle fighting would be ridiculous. I say at least give support to up to 20 people in Halo 4.
>
> This could be solved if Halo 4 had dedicated servers, and if Halo had CoD’s replacement system where if someone quit, a new person could take their place, but in someone could pick a setting like in their psych profile that they only want to find games that haven’t actually started yet.
Getting dedicated servers would be great, but I think it’s up to Microsoft, not 343i, for that to happen. However, the replacement system like what CoD, Team Fortress, or countless other games have could work. I don’t necessarily see the problems with it, however a playing coming in mid-game is already limited to the amount of kills/objectives they can get. Plus, if the host were to leave, and Halo isn’t on dedicated servers, we’d still all black screen which would suck. I think they should bring back a penalty for quitting, like in Halo 3.
> > > More than 16 players would be awesome, but with more players comes more problems. Look at BTB in Reach for example, its a normal 8 vs. 8, but I honestly don’t remember the last Big Team game I played where someone didn’t quit or leave the game. Also, more players = more connections = potentially more problems. One host player for 20+ people could cause some technical problems.
> > >
> > > I discussed with my friend the other day about potentially having epic 50 on 50 battles in future Halos. But then I realzed how it wouldn’t live up to it’s hype due to people quitting, the maps would have to be huge, and weapons/vechicle fighting would be ridiculous. I say at least give support to up to 20 people in Halo 4.
> >
> > This could be solved if Halo 4 had dedicated servers, and if Halo had CoD’s replacement system where if someone quit, a new person could take their place, but in someone could pick a setting like in their psych profile that they only want to find games that haven’t actually started yet.
>
> Getting dedicated servers would be great, but I think it’s up to Microsoft, not 343i, for that to happen. However, the replacement system like what CoD, Team Fortress, or countless other games have could work. I don’t necessarily see the problems with it, however a playing coming in mid-game is already limited to the amount of kills/objectives they can get. Plus, if the host were to leave, and Halo isn’t on dedicated servers, we’d still all black screen which would suck. I think they should bring back a penalty for quitting, like in Halo 3.
They do have the quit ban for Reach, but I think you’re right, we do need harsher punishments for quitters, especially repetitive quitters.
> > > > More than 16 players would be awesome, but with more players comes more problems. Look at BTB in Reach for example, its a normal 8 vs. 8, but I honestly don’t remember the last Big Team game I played where someone didn’t quit or leave the game. Also, more players = more connections = potentially more problems. One host player for 20+ people could cause some technical problems.
> > > >
> > > > I discussed with my friend the other day about potentially having epic 50 on 50 battles in future Halos. But then I realzed how it wouldn’t live up to it’s hype due to people quitting, the maps would have to be huge, and weapons/vechicle fighting would be ridiculous. I say at least give support to up to 20 people in Halo 4.
> > >
> > > This could be solved if Halo 4 had dedicated servers, and if Halo had CoD’s replacement system where if someone quit, a new person could take their place, but in someone could pick a setting like in their psych profile that they only want to find games that haven’t actually started yet.
> >
> > Getting dedicated servers would be great, but I think it’s up to Microsoft, not 343i, for that to happen. However, the replacement system like what CoD, Team Fortress, or countless other games have could work. I don’t necessarily see the problems with it, however a playing coming in mid-game is already limited to the amount of kills/objectives they can get. Plus, if the host were to leave, and Halo isn’t on dedicated servers, we’d still all black screen which would suck. I think they should bring back a penalty for quitting, like in Halo 3.
>
> They do have the quit ban for Reach, but I think you’re right, we do need harsher punishments for quitters, especially repetitive quitters.
In Halo 3, they took away one experience point every time you quit. Reach gives a matchmaking ban of varying times… Is there some sort of hybrid? I mean, its not always gaurunteed you’ll get the MM ban when you quit in Reach, so its almost like there isn’t a punishment the majority of the time. What if they took away credits? Or made you write a letter of apology to every member of your team you quit out on?
> > > > > More than 16 players would be awesome, but with more players comes more problems. Look at BTB in Reach for example, its a normal 8 vs. 8, but I honestly don’t remember the last Big Team game I played where someone didn’t quit or leave the game. Also, more players = more connections = potentially more problems. One host player for 20+ people could cause some technical problems.
> > > > >
> > > > > I discussed with my friend the other day about potentially having epic 50 on 50 battles in future Halos. But then I realzed how it wouldn’t live up to it’s hype due to people quitting, the maps would have to be huge, and weapons/vechicle fighting would be ridiculous. I say at least give support to up to 20 people in Halo 4.
> > > >
> > > > This could be solved if Halo 4 had dedicated servers, and if Halo had CoD’s replacement system where if someone quit, a new person could take their place, but in someone could pick a setting like in their psych profile that they only want to find games that haven’t actually started yet.
> > >
> > > Getting dedicated servers would be great, but I think it’s up to Microsoft, not 343i, for that to happen. However, the replacement system like what CoD, Team Fortress, or countless other games have could work. I don’t necessarily see the problems with it, however a playing coming in mid-game is already limited to the amount of kills/objectives they can get. Plus, if the host were to leave, and Halo isn’t on dedicated servers, we’d still all black screen which would suck. I think they should bring back a penalty for quitting, like in Halo 3.
> >
> > They do have the quit ban for Reach, but I think you’re right, we do need harsher punishments for quitters, especially repetitive quitters.
>
> In Halo 3, they took away one experience point every time you quit. Reach gives a matchmaking ban of varying times… Is there some sort of hybrid? I mean, its not always gaurunteed you’ll get the MM ban when you quit in Reach, so its almost like there isn’t a punishment the majority of the time. What if they took away credits? Or made you write a letter of apology to every member of your team you quit out on?
I think your last suggestion would be very effective. So what? You won’t be allowed back into matchmaking until you send your letters to 343, they approve ad then forward your apologies to the people you quit on?
That would be so hilariously awesome. Someone needs to bring this to bs angel’s attention.
> That would be so hilariously awesome. Someone needs to bring this to bs angel’s attention.
She probably wouldn’t care if the microsoft heads themselves spoke against it, she would find a way to make it happen.
No game on the Xbox 360 will have MP with over 24 people, the console is not designed to handle more than that, so if it says Online 2-16 people, that is probably as high as it will go.