I dont think anything official has been said about this but I seldomly play Halo multiplayer withought a couch buddy. Will War games be like previous Halos and let me and 3 buddies play online? Halo has been the only game I know of that lets me do this and it is a very fun feature. So does anyone have insight to the answer?
I remember reading a while back that war games would only allow one guest, and Campaign & Spartan Ops is four players.
It’s more than likely. I doubt 343 would take away one of the features of the series that allows people to play with their friends.
If all you say is true, I am very happy and very unhappy at the same time. 4 player split screen in matchmaking is one of the best ideas ever in console shooters. This is unique and gives so much fun. Very sad, if it is gone :((
Campaign and Spartan ops 4-plauyer split screen sound amazing though!!
I know having guests is a technical problem with draw distance and all, so when games gets more detailed they have to use tricks like derezzing far away stuff but if theres two or more players then the trick stops to work because the game has to render two different fields of view.
I just am at college and if me and my roomates cant all play then we would have to switch off or play past Halos. With modern sized tvs I dont even mind sharing the screen. I really hope we can have 3 guests for at least some gametypes
as long as the guests dont get a vote in the map/game mode selection or get seperate votes because it messes up voting in numorous ways
2 player local only for war games, how it should be.
I think its only allowing one guess. Having more then that promotes boosting and makes it to easy.
That being said I always liked a full team of quest. Made for such a fun game.
Perfection!
I hope that they have 4 local players allowed in most game types. It’s so fun.
> as long as the guests dont get a vote in the map/game mode selection or get seperate votes because it messes up voting in numorous ways
Why shouldn’t they get a choice? They’re playing the game as well, just like any other person.
It’s probably gunna stick to the same formula that was used for 3 and Reach. 2 man split screen and four player system link/xbox live. The only reason it’s not more for local is because of the issues it would create for the engine because of the size and scale of the campaign levels.
> > as long as the guests dont get a vote in the map/game mode selection or get seperate votes because it messes up voting in numorous ways
>
> Why shouldn’t they get a choice? They’re playing the game as well, just like any other person.
I said that they could get indervidual votes instead
the reason why is because the map the player wants ussaully gets picked if he has guests
and if one of them wants to quit then both have to leave (ruined way too many nice games of invasion)
If it’s not 4-player War Games, 343 failed. End of discussion.
On a side note, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to say that they aren’t turning this franchise into Call of Duty.
> If it’s not 4-player War Games, 343 failed. End of discussion.
how so?
2 PL only for matchmaking is a god send, allows for a lot more flexibility in forged maps, fairer voting, more evenly matched games and better graphics because sacrifices for 4PL don’t need to be made.
From a technical standpoint it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that the game will support 4 player split screen online or even locally.
As you probably already know, Halo is one of the only remaining console games to offer split screen let alone 4 ways. All the games that come out these days are pushing the hardware to its limits and thats only for one player on full screen. I can’t imagine Halo 4 supporting more than 2 players given that it is not only on 2 disks but with so much content already packed into a single disk not to mention the major improvement to the graphics.
Very, very, very few games support split screen these days and with the ever more ambitious scope of games there is no room for that feature. Granted some games are built around 2 local players but nothing more. Reach tried to squeeze in 4 local players but it ended up looking terrible. I can’t imagine 343 subjecting us to that again.
Sometimes you just have to realize when a feature is no longer practical and must remove it. How do you think the 99% of people who play the game full screen feel when a 4 local player party is in the game? More often than not it is a terrible experience for the other players and not only that but supporting 4 local players means that there will be a severe lack of quality in forge maps.
Also what’s so wrong with taking turns with 2 controllers? Its more cost effective and you get larger screens? The players in the game won’t mind a party of 2 local players as much as they would have the 4. Everybody wins.
> > If it’s not 4-player War Games, 343 failed. End of discussion.
>
> how so?
>
> 2 PL only for matchmaking is a god send, allows for a lot more flexibility in forged maps, fairer voting, more evenly matched games and better graphics because sacrifices for 4PL don’t need to be made.
LAN parties are ruined. Sleep-overs with both younger and older audiences are limited. Entertainment values drop.
On forged maps: The game shouldn’t need to make these sacrifices. 343 shouldn’t be adding those pointless details that Reach had, and instead keep designs simplistic in nature. Halo 3 has the best multiplayer so far because of this - replayability.
Fairer voting: What’s the problem? Why is voting “unfair”? If I have three friends over, and we all want to play Guardian, then Guardian should earn four votes. One option is that 343 finds a way to give each controller their own vote. If this isn’t an option, I don’t see why voting is “unfair” as it is. If 343 took away guest voting, we could end up with 2 votes total in a 4v4 game. Then people will start whining that it’s unfair because their guests wanted to play a certain map but couldn’t because they weren’t granted the votes.
Matched games: What do guests have to do with skill? Yes, you can go ahead and characterize most guests as lesser-skilled players (which is definitely not 100% accurate), but guests aren’t the only people you’re inhibiting with the 2-player per xbox rule. Now you’re taking away playing time from other Gold accounts. I rarely play with guests anymore, since the new Dashboard features enable quick account recovery for my friends, who mostly have Gold accounts at this time.
Better graphics: If graphics are the problem, then why can we play 4-player custom games? For the sake of argument, I’m assuming that this feature will not diminish, considering custom games practically made this game. Reach had both 4-player Matchmaking and Custom Games, and it was no mystery that the graphics suffered tremendously with as many as two players per TV. The issues mainly arose from Forged environments, but others were impacted too. If graphics were the reason, then 343 might as well limit Custom Games to 2 players per TV as well.
I’m not really in the mood to argue, hence any poor sentence structures or whatever. I just hope that you understand that 4 players per TV is not just a tradition among Halo games, but it provides the opportunity for heightened entertainment experiences.
> From a technical standpoint it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that the game will support 4 player split screen online or even locally.
>
> As you probably already know, Halo is one of the only remaining console games to offer split screen let alone 4 ways. All the games that come out these days are pushing the hardware to its limits and thats only for one player on full screen. I can’t imagine Halo 4 supporting more than 2 players given that it is not only on 2 disks but with so much content already packed into a single disk not to mention the major improvement to the graphics.
>
> Very, very, very few games support split screen these days and with the ever more ambitious scope of games there is no room for that feature. Granted some games are built around 2 local players but nothing more. Reach tried to squeeze in 4 local players but it ended up looking terrible. I can’t imagine 343 subjecting us to that again.
>
> Sometimes you just have to realize when a feature is no longer practical and must remove it. How do you think the 99% of people who play the game full screen feel when a 4 local player party is in the game? More often than not it is a terrible experience for the other players and not only that but supporting 4 local players means that there will be a severe lack of quality in forge maps.
>
> Also what’s so wrong with taking turns with 2 controllers? Its more cost effective and you get larger screens? The players in the game won’t mind a party of 2 local players as much as they would have the 4. Everybody wins.
-
I’ve never had issues when facing an opponent who is using 4 guests or people on the same xbox. I only experience screen issues when I’m using more than 2 people.
-
Cost effective? I already have the freaking controllers. I already have a few mics. If anything, the 2-player system is more cost effective, as you would have to buy 2 TVs, xboxs, games, etc. just to play with 4 people. Over summer, my friend brought his TV over to my house so we could play CoD and Halo 3 custom games. It was annoying, not only to have to set it up, but also the fact that we weren’t right next to each other, laughing and trash talking.
-
Having 4 players will not affect the quality of Forge maps. The quality of those maps rests on the shoulders of the map creators. If you’re talking about graphics, then I guess we’ll have to wait and see. Halo 3 seemed to work perfectly fine, using simple graphics rather than complex designs on each and every wall, rock, tree, etc.
-
Practical? I can’t tell you how often I use Halo with more than 2 people. I know for a fact that many others do it too, based simply off the number of guests I see in lobbies.
> > > If it’s not 4-player War Games, 343 failed. End of discussion.
> >
> > how so?
> >
> > 2 PL only for matchmaking is a god send, allows for a lot more flexibility in forged maps, fairer voting, more evenly matched games and better graphics because sacrifices for 4PL don’t need to be made.
>
> LAN parties are ruined. Sleep-overs with both younger and older audiences are limited. Entertainment values drop.
>
> On forged maps: The game shouldn’t need to make these sacrifices. 343 shouldn’t be adding those pointless details that Reach had, and instead keep designs simplistic in nature. Halo 3 has the best multiplayer so far because of this - replayability.
>
> Fairer voting: What’s the problem? Why is voting “unfair”? If I have three friends over, and we all want to play Guardian, then Guardian should earn four votes. One option is that 343 finds a way to give each controller their own vote. If this isn’t an option, I don’t see why voting is “unfair” as it is. If 343 took away guest voting, we could end up with 2 votes total in a 4v4 game. Then people will start whining that it’s unfair because their guests wanted to play a certain map but couldn’t because they weren’t granted the votes.
>
> Matched games: What do guests have to do with skill? Yes, you can go ahead and characterize most guests as lesser-skilled players (which is definitely not 100% accurate), but guests aren’t the only people you’re inhibiting with the 2-player per xbox rule. Now you’re taking away playing time from other Gold accounts. I rarely play with guests anymore, since the new Dashboard features enable quick account recovery for my friends, who mostly have Gold accounts at this time.
>
> Better graphics: If graphics are the problem, then why can we play 4-player custom games? For the sake of argument, I’m assuming that this feature will not diminish, considering custom games practically made this game. Reach had both 4-player Matchmaking and Custom Games, and it was no mystery that the graphics suffered tremendously with as many as two players per TV. The issues mainly arose from Forged environments, but others were impacted too. If graphics were the reason, then 343 might as well limit Custom Games to 2 players per TV as well.
>
> I’m not really in the mood to argue, hence any poor sentence structures or whatever. I just hope that you understand that 4 players per TV is not just a tradition among Halo games, but it provides the opportunity for heightened entertainment experiences.
take it in turns
and what if you all want to pick different maps then what? and as the host you can make the voting go your way regardless of your guests opinions
guest generally do suck and thats partially due to a smaller screen
and you havnt played h4 with all the things avaidable (forge, campaign, custom, theatre) so for all we know 343 have limited it to 2 players on customs
and games like BF3, ME3 dont have co-op and you dont see people complaining about it, they rather take the graphic
split screen also causes stress on the connection resulting on lag
if you want to have big get togethers on halo then why not just do it online (your probably going to say but we dont get the benifits of a sleep over)
and half the time at sleep overs everyone ends up doing random funny stuff anyway
> > From a technical standpoint it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that the game will support 4 player split screen online or even locally.
> >
> > As you probably already know, Halo is one of the only remaining console games to offer split screen let alone 4 ways. All the games that come out these days are pushing the hardware to its limits and thats only for one player on full screen. I can’t imagine Halo 4 supporting more than 2 players given that it is not only on 2 disks but with so much content already packed into a single disk not to mention the major improvement to the graphics.
> >
> > Very, very, very few games support split screen these days and with the ever more ambitious scope of games there is no room for that feature. Granted some games are built around 2 local players but nothing more. Reach tried to squeeze in 4 local players but it ended up looking terrible. I can’t imagine 343 subjecting us to that again.
> >
> > Sometimes you just have to realize when a feature is no longer practical and must remove it. How do you think the 99% of people who play the game full screen feel when a 4 local player party is in the game? More often than not it is a terrible experience for the other players and not only that but supporting 4 local players means that there will be a severe lack of quality in forge maps.
> >
> > Also what’s so wrong with taking turns with 2 controllers? Its more cost effective and you get larger screens? The players in the game won’t mind a party of 2 local players as much as they would have the 4. Everybody wins.
>
> 1) I’ve never had issues when facing an opponent who is using 4 guests or people on the same xbox. I only experience screen issues when I’m using more than 2 people.
>
> 2) Cost effective? I already have the freaking controllers. I already have a few mics. If anything, the 2-player system is more cost effective, as you would have to buy 2 TVs, xboxs, games, etc. just to play with 4 people. Over summer, my friend brought his TV over to my house so we could play CoD and Halo 3 custom games. It was annoying, not only to have to set it up, but also the fact that we weren’t right next to each other, laughing and trash talking.
>
> 3) Having 4 players will not affect the quality of Forge maps. The quality of those maps rests on the shoulders of the map creators. If you’re talking about graphics, then I guess we’ll have to wait and see. Halo 3 seemed to work perfectly fine, using simple graphics rather than complex designs on each and every wall, rock, tree, etc.
>
> 4) Practical? I can’t tell you how often I use Halo with more than 2 people. I know for a fact that many others do it too, based simply off the number of guests I see in lobbies.
you can joke etc. on over live
the whole point of better graphics is more details, complex designs no offence that was a herp derp moment
just because many people do 4 player split screen doesnt mean its pratical they might have to do it to include people, plus it ruins the quality of the game with big groups leaving and having 4 people playing on smaller screens on your team which is more difficult
also you never said it was pratical you simply said you use 4 player split screen
>
I appreciate your feedback, but you’re still missing the point.
You say that I miss out on the benefit of a sleepover. That’s not exactly the point. The point is the community aspect of it - the friendship, the connections we make, and the fun we have together.
I can have lunch with my friends over skype, xbox live, etc., but I’d rather go pick them up and go eat. Why? Because I’m with them. It’s not hard to grasp.
People don’t complain about 2-player games? My brother plays CoD a lot. My friends play CoD a lot. We used to be a Halo family, but Reach ruined that and now it’s CoD for them. I personally don’t care for it. When we all get together, someone says “Hey, let’s play CoD now.” I simply respond, “Wait, isn’t CoD that 2-player game, and there’s three of us?” I have a slight smirk on my face. They know that it’s a BS feature, but since we like to argue about which games are better, they try to cover up their frustrations by saying something like, “We can play custom games.”