The number 1 thing i wish for is that 343i keeps the standard of quality Halo: Reach set as far as smooth and mostly lag free online =)
I am very impressed with how polished my experience with reach has been since its release and I want Halo 4 to have the same quality.
For me the most important factor in online play is that the things that I do, should have their effect. For example if I shoot someone in the head with the sniper, they shoudl die =) If I run someone over, they should die.
I have faith in you 343 and I know you will do the franchise proud with this new trilogy ! !
I’m constantly lagging and TrueSkill refuses to match me with anyone my skill level. Teams area always stacked, black screens are every two minutes, and shots register less than H3’s projectile BR. Ghosts, Revenants, and Wraiths go supersonic and die and one can never boot griefers and always get booted for accidents. A Ghost can hit someone full-boost-speed and they won’t die, yet when walk into a stationary tank I get splattered. People in AL recharge their shields and are shooting at me before my Xbox recognizes that they have left AL. The Psyche profile is useless and never matches with anyone you asked for. I never play the maps I payed for. My teamates quit, leaving me alone against a well-coordinated group. Gameplay is monotonous and boring, at best, frustrating and laggy at worst.
And it’s not my connection either. Every other game never lags a bit.
343 better get their crap together for H4, because I can’t take another garbage game. At least in Halo 3, when it lagged, I was having such a good time it didn’t matter.
> Really? Because my online experience has sucked.
>
> I’m constantly lagging and TrueSkill refuses to match me with anyone my skill level. Teams area always stacked, black screens are every two minutes, and shots register less than H3’s projectile BR. Ghosts, Revenants, and Wraiths go supersonic and die, one can never boot griefers and always get booted for accidents. The Psyche profile is useless and never matches with anyone you asked for. I never play the maps I payed for. My teamates quit, leaving me alone against a well-coordinated group. Gameplay is monotonous and boring, at best, frustrating and laggy at worst.
>
> And it’s not my connection either. Every other game never lags a bit.
>
> 343 better get their crap together for H4, because I can’t take another garbage game. At least in Halo 3, when it lagged, I was having such a good time it didn’t matter.
Sorry to hear about all that but i have never experienced that bad of events lol. Its probably your connection as far as the latency problems. Cause halo 3 was by far the worst out of all the halo games for online issues. Just cause your conection is fine in other games doesnt mean its halo’s fault.
Me and everyone of my friends that play halo dont have the issues your having.
343 doenst have any “Crap” to get together. You dont see the halo reach forums exploding with topics complaining about lag do you? That proves its a vast minority issue. And reach was hardly a garbage game. over 400k people play this game daily and over 600k play it on the saturday & sunday. Those numbers prove halo reach isnt garbage.
If you like halo 3 so much just PLAY that instead of trying to bash a game that hudreds of thousands still actively play.
I wasn’t trying explicitly to bash Reach. And I do play a good of H3, but it’s gotten worse since it was moved to the Reach servers.
And I think it is Halo’s fault. Battlefield 3 didn’t lag once for me in the Beta, and it was a beta! Think of how much more information was being shared–building damage, extra players–and not a single glitch (lag related). Yet my Reach connection sucks.
And most of what I brought up isn’t necessarily connection related–so far as I can tell, Ghosts warping are random, splatter issues are random, psyche profile just doesn’t work, the dlc never comes up anyway–I’m sick of it. I love Halo with a burning passion of a thousand suns (or maybe 7 halo rings), but if it isn’t fun it isn’t fun.
Also, perhaps I was too harsh in blaming 343. Bungie made the game, and even so they were trying their best to put out an awesome game. But in doing that they destroyed it; just look at the color pallete and lighting system–far inferiour to H3. And I am excited for Halo 4.
> I wasn’t trying explicitly to bash Reach. And I do play a good of H3, but it’s gotten worse since it was moved to the Reach servers.
>
> And I think it is Halo’s fault. Battlefield 3 didn’t lag once for me in the Beta, and it was a beta! Think of how much more information was being shared–building damage, extra players–and not a single glitch (lag related). Yet my Reach connection sucks.
>
> And most of what I brought up isn’t necessarily connection related–so far as I can tell, Ghosts warping are random, splatter issues are random, psyche profile just doesn’t work, the dlc never comes up anyway–I’m sick of it. I love Halo with a burning passion of a thousand suns (or maybe 7 halo rings), but if it isn’t fun it isn’t fun.
>
>
> Also, perhaps I was too harsh in blaming 343. Bungie made the game, and even so they were trying their best to put out an awesome game. But in doing that they destroyed it; just look at the color pallete and lighting system–far inferiour to H3. And I am excited for Halo 4.
Battlefields netcode + your internet is NOT THE SAME as Reach’s netcode + your internet.
Atually learn how online gaming works instead of just thinking that all games react the same way to all internet types -.- You cant compare BF to COD to GOW to Halo etc etc to gauge the quality of one or the other.
Again IM sorry things like that happen to someone so devoted to halo but I cant force someone to enjoy the game like me and my friends do xD
> I wasn’t trying explicitly to bash Reach. And I do play a good of H3, but it’s gotten worse since it was moved to the Reach servers.
>
> And I think it is Halo’s fault. Battlefield 3 didn’t lag once for me in the Beta, and it was a beta! Think of how much more information was being shared–building damage, extra players–and not a single glitch (lag related). Yet my Reach connection sucks.
>
> And most of what I brought up isn’t necessarily connection related–so far as I can tell, Ghosts warping are random, splatter issues are random, psyche profile just doesn’t work, the dlc never comes up anyway–I’m sick of it. I love Halo with a burning passion of a thousand suns (or maybe 7 halo rings), but if it isn’t fun it isn’t fun.
>
>
> Also, perhaps I was too harsh in blaming 343. Bungie made the game, and even so they were trying their best to put out an awesome game. But in doing that they destroyed it; just look at the color pallete and lighting system–far inferiour to H3. And I am excited for Halo 4.
Reach has a far more robust and consistent networking model than Halo 3 ever had. Halo 3 pretty much requires a latency below 50 to work well, below 100 to even work properly. reach on the other hand has a very consistent networking that gives a good experience below 100, and a decent experience below 200. If you want a better online experience in Reach, you should do everything to make your own connection better. Because most of the time things like lag depend on your own connection.
But I completely agree with everything that relates to TrueSkill, DLC, and psych profile, none of them is very strict and should be made much more strict in Halo 4, even if that did lengthen search times.
And last of all, a word about the lightning system. The Halo 3 lightning system is inferior to the one we have in Reach, the Reach lightning system is just under utilized and goes unnoticed most of the time because the lightning effects aren’t visible enough, but more subtle. The subtle approach was intentional because it fit the mood they were trying to get at with Reach. But the lightning engine of Reach is many times better than the one in Halo 3, and I completely agree with you in regards to color palette, it was rather boring.
> > I wasn’t trying explicitly to bash Reach. And I do play a good of H3, but it’s gotten worse since it was moved to the Reach servers.
> >
> > And I think it is Halo’s fault. Battlefield 3 didn’t lag once for me in the Beta, and it was a beta! Think of how much more information was being shared–building damage, extra players–and not a single glitch (lag related). Yet my Reach connection sucks.
> >
> > And most of what I brought up isn’t necessarily connection related–so far as I can tell, Ghosts warping are random, splatter issues are random, psyche profile just doesn’t work, the dlc never comes up anyway–I’m sick of it. I love Halo with a burning passion of a thousand suns (or maybe 7 halo rings), but if it isn’t fun it isn’t fun.
> >
> >
> > Also, perhaps I was too harsh in blaming 343. Bungie made the game, and even so they were trying their best to put out an awesome game. But in doing that they destroyed it; just look at the color pallete and lighting system–far inferiour to H3. And I am excited for Halo 4.
>
> Reach has a far more robust and consistent networking model than Halo 3 ever had. Halo 3 pretty much requires a latency below 50 to work well, below 100 to even work properly. reach on the other hand has a very consistent networking that gives a good experience below 100, and a decent experience below 200. If you want a better online experience in Reach, you should do everything to make your own connection better. Because most of the time things like lag depend on your own connection.
>
> But I completely agree with everything that relates to TrueSkill, DLC, and psych profile, none of them is very strict and should be made much more strict in Halo 4, even if that did lengthen search times.
>
> And last of all, a word about the lightning system. The Halo 3 lightning system is inferior to the one we have in Reach, the Reach lightning system is just under utilized and goes unnoticed most of the time because the lightning effects aren’t visible enough, but more subtle. The subtle approach was intentional because it fit the mood they were trying to get at with Reach. But the lightning engine of Reach is many times better than the one in Halo 3, and I completely agree with you in regards to color palette, it was rather boring.
Thank you very much for that detailed response =) Do you think Halo 4 will have as consistent if not more consistent networking system for its multiplayer? I do have full faith in 343 but i bought gears of war 3 at its release… and was greatly dissapointed over the few months that i played it. I see all this talk on the forums about wanting servers for halo 4… and it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth =\
It is alot better than 2 but my god! its still so inconsistent and annoying. I Always loved halo Reach for its ability to bring such good gameplay to the table =)
> Thank you very much for that detailed response =) Do you think Halo 4 will have as consistent if not more consistent networking system for its multiplayer? I do have full faith in 343 but i bought gears of war 3 at its release… and was greatly dissapointed over the few months that i played it.
>
> It is alot better than 2 but my god! its still so inconsistent and annoying. I Always loved halo Reach for its ability to bring such good gameplay to the table =)
Definitely, if we look at the leap in low level networking quality (gameplay networking) between Halo 3 and Reach, the improvement was gigantic. Even though 343i doesn’t have such experience with p2p networking like Bungie did, I still trust them making some improvements to the netcode of Reach to make it more consistent. The biggest improvement the network needs is with the host selection, to have a robust host selection, all players should be pinged before the match to decide who is the most suitable, at the moment host selection is only based on estimation. Pinging players before the game would only take a short moment and would quarantee much better gameplay quality. The game could also, if possible, have a built in connection test system that from time to time performs a test for player’s connection and “takes notes” of the connection quality to further improve host selection.
> > Thank you very much for that detailed response =) Do you think Halo 4 will have as consistent if not more consistent networking system for its multiplayer? I do have full faith in 343 but i bought gears of war 3 at its release… and was greatly dissapointed over the few months that i played it.
> >
> > It is alot better than 2 but my god! its still so inconsistent and annoying. I Always loved halo Reach for its ability to bring such good gameplay to the table =)
>
> Definitely, if we look at the leap in low level networking quality (gameplay networking) between Halo 3 and Reach, the improvement was gigantic. Even though 343i doesn’t have such experience with p2p networking like Bungie did, I still trust them making some improvements to the netcode of Reach to make it more consistent. The biggest improvement the network needs is with the host selection, to have a robust host selection, all players should be pinged before the match to decide who is the most suitable, at the moment host selection is only based on estimation. Pinging players before the game would only take a short moment and would quarantee much better gameplay quality. The game could also, if possible, have a built in connection test system that from time to time performs a test for player’s connection and “takes notes” of the connection quality to further improve host selection.
Sounds great =) But isnt alot of 343 ex bungie employee’s?
> > If Halo 4 has any kind of frame rate lag like Reach does, I will kill myself.
>
> lagy framerate? what is wrong with peoples connections these days haha xD i only had framerate lag at SOME points in campaign. Never in multiplayer.
Yeah I don’t really notice framerate issues, just people teleporting/not registering shots and such.
And no, I don’t claim to know anything about coding, but it seems logical to say that BF should experience more lag issues because of the extra information being sent. The fact that it doesn’t would therefore imply that it has a better networking code.
And you’re 100% correct with the lighting (not lightning lol) system. And like I said before, I realize and respect why Bungie chose to make Reach’s visuals how they are, I just don’t agree with them. I personally would rather have H3’s lighting then Reach’s.
> > > If Halo 4 has any kind of frame rate lag like Reach does, I will kill myself.
> >
> > lagy framerate? what is wrong with peoples connections these days haha xD i only had framerate lag at SOME points in campaign. Never in multiplayer.
>
> Yeah I don’t really notice framerate issues, just people teleporting/not registering shots and such.
>
> And no, I don’t claim to know anything about coding, but it seems logical to say that BF should experience more lag issues because of the extra information being sent. The fact that it doesn’t would therefore imply that it has a better networking code.
>
> And you’re 100% correct with the lighting (not lightning lol) system. And like I said before, I realize and respect why Bungie chose to make Reach’s visuals how they are, I just don’t agree with them. I personally would rather have H3’s lighting then Reach’s.
no its not logical. Different games, different engines and different built into xbox live style.
Battlefields frostbite 2.0 engine was DESIGNED around games like battlefield. So in light of that, no there isnt anything extra about it. Just because a game has better graphics and bigger maps doesnt automatically mean its a bigger stress on your connection. Maybe if BF3’s content was running off of halo’s engine you could say something like that, but trust me, BF3’s engine is what makes it run smoothly online there is nothing “extra”
Not all games have the same responses to everyones internet -.-
Also reach was going for a darker tone. Halo 3 and CEA’s vibrant style wouldnt have fit reach’s story. thats why bungie made it that way.
> > > > If Halo 4 has any kind of frame rate lag like Reach does, I will kill myself.
> > >
> > > lagy framerate? what is wrong with peoples connections these days haha xD i only had framerate lag at SOME points in campaign. Never in multiplayer.
> >
> > Yeah I don’t really notice framerate issues, just people teleporting/not registering shots and such.
> >
> > And no, I don’t claim to know anything about coding, but it seems logical to say that BF should experience more lag issues because of the extra information being sent. The fact that it doesn’t would therefore imply that it has a better networking code.
> >
> > And you’re 100% correct with the lighting (not lightning lol) system. And like I said before, I realize and respect why Bungie chose to make Reach’s visuals how they are, I just don’t agree with them. I personally would rather have H3’s lighting then Reach’s.
>
> no its not logical. Different games, different engines and different built into xbox live style.
>
> Battlefields frostbite 2.0 engine was DESIGNED around games like battlefield. So in light of that, no there isnt anything extra about it. Just because a game has better graphics and bigger maps doesnt automatically mean its a bigger stress on your connection. Maybe if BF3’s content was running off of halo’s engine you could say something like that, but trust me, BF3’s engine is what makes it run smoothly online there is nothing “extra”
>
> Not all games have the same responses to everyones internet -.-
>
> Also reach was going for a darker tone. Halo 3 and CEA’s vibrant style wouldnt have fit reach’s story. thats why bungie made it that way.
Well then why wasn’t Reach’s engine made like Battlefield’s? That’s what I’m getting at.
And like I said, I know why Bungie made the colors dark and the Covenant Porteguese–I just don’t agree with it. Halo 3 had dark levels, even with the vibrant colors (Cortana? Halo?) and IWHBYD should have made the Covenant speak English.
I honestly don’t mind the colors in campaign–they fit the mood. But multiplayer? Meh.
Bull -blam!- Halo: CEA was the laggiest thing ever and there were only 2 people MAX. Halo reach isn’t as laggy because Bungie knew what they were doing >.>
> Bull -blam!- Halo: CEA was the laggiest thing ever and there were only 2 people MAX. Halo reach isn’t as laggy because Bungie knew what they were doing >.>
CE was reworked with a ten year old code plus a brand new graphics code that could be freely switched on or off. The original game was never designed for online campaign play, so you could hardly expect the more complicated remake to be any better.
While the online experience is definitely something to focus on, I wouldn’t say that it’s the most important thing. Halo 3 feels horrible online, but I’d much rather play it than Reach, even though I’ve generally had a better online experience while play Reach. IMO, 343 should make sure that the game feels awesome on LAN (balanced gameplay, solid mechanics, competitive,etc), and then work on making it play well online.