HALO 4's netcode quality will be based on....

Games Other Halo
1

How well BTB run online and if there is noticeable lag in a good majority of matches in BTB then we all know 343 studios should have pushed for dedicated servers. HALO is my favorite FPS franchise so i really do hope HALO 4 ends up playing as well as it should online. I really feel HALO 4 deserves to have dedicated servers but if the netcode is truly solid then well know with how BTB turns out.

If BTB turns out great online then dedicated servers probably wont be needed. BTB to me will be the true test of how well this game plays online and if it NEEDS dedicated servers.

2

Thanks for your post. Kinda rambling there. But awesome opinion dude.

3

> Thanks for your post. Kinda rambling there. But awesome opinion dude.

How is an opinion if any online game mode is going to have noticeable lag its going to be BTB dude. This game for the most part takes more than one shot to kill someone so dedicated servers would be more helpful to this game then say COD where people die like there made of paper mache.

Why do people have to defend games like there the ones making them lol. Im buying the LE and i like most people are going to be playing this game online so i just want the best possible online experience. Since we all know there arent going to be dedicated servers then i really do hope the netcode is solid.

4

I wasn’t defending anything, you were rather vague in the OP, and while agree dedicated servers controlled and managed by Microsoft would be nice, they have said in plain words that there are no plans to host Halo 4 on dedicated servers.

5

I would think Spartan Ops would be a better test.

BTB never lagged for me in Reach. Not much anyway. However, Firefight ALWAYS did. And seeing as how Spartan Ops is more akin to Firefight in MANY ways, I would think that would be a better benchmark.

BTB would still be a decent benchmark, though. According to 343 (for what that’s worth, since they have to talk up their own game), multiplayer has been much more improved and less host-favourable. Especially for games like Grifball, which are SEVERELY host-favourable, as is SWAT. Almost to the point where, in Reach, if you’re not host and you’re playing Grifball or SWAT, you’re severely hamstrung and it makes it almost impossible to enjoy. They said in a video interview (in Bravo’s “competitive” video interview) that the host-dependency for those playlist has been severely minimized; almost completely eliminated.

Take that for what you will, because they haven’t really tested it with packed servers with the entire community playing at the same time, and on various connection types in various different areas, but hopefully they’re at least improved it by 50%. If so, I’d be more than happy.

6

> > Thanks for your post. Kinda rambling there. But awesome opinion dude.
>
> How is an opinion if any online game mode is going to have noticeable lag its going to be BTB dude. This game for the most part takes more than one shot to kill someone so dedicated servers would be more helpful to this game then say COD where people die like there made of paper mache.
>
> Why do people have to defend games like there the ones making them lol. Im buying the LE and i like most people are going to be playing this game online so i just want the best possible online experience. Since we all know there arent going to be dedicated servers then i really do hope the netcode is solid.

Dedicated servers aren’t the holy grail you like to think they are. First of all, they’re expensive. If they’re more expensive, you’re going to be charged more for the game to make up for the cost, or you’re going to be charged monthly to play the game; something to supplement the cost of running dedicated servers for the game, I’m sure. If 343/Microsoft just decided to “eat” the cost, I’d be very surprised.

Secondly, anyone who lived any measurable distance from 343 in Washington, would be severely hamstrung by latency. So while it may be awesome for people who live in the North-West, those on the East-coast, or worse yet, in Europe/Asia, would have an absolutely terrible experience and would be handicapped when playing people in the US.

Thirdly, if the game population dies down, they’d have to shut down the servers. They’re not going to keep the servers up when the population starts to dwindle. So unlike Halo 3, which you can still play to this day 5 years after it’s released, you’ll only be able to play Halo 4 until around Halo 5’s release, because then the population will drop off and the servers will be shut down due to cost effectiveness.

Lastly, dedicated servers would not be playable if they’re completely full. Given that Halo 4 seems to be HUGELY popular, and the very real possibility that the online player numbers may jump back up to the heights of Halo 2 and/or Halo 3, that could be a major, major problem. Whereas with P2P, the larger the population, the better.

I’m sure 343i took all this into consideration when and if they considered dedicated servers. As long as there is decent matchmaking, the netcode is top-notch, and the engine is programmed well, that’s more than enough to keep me happy. For now. With internet getting faster and faster, and more and more people upgrading to much faster connections, P2P will eventually be more than acceptable to play on more often. We just have to bide our time and enjoy Halo in the meantime.