Remove all 4vs4 playlists

Games Halo Infinite
1

With infinite on the horizon, Halo will see some level of renewed interest. Recently with 4 and 5 the multiplayer experience became too chopped and segregated, something that imo was a contributor to a population dropoff in the early lifespan of the games. We have seen an inkling of what could come next however and that is with MCC.

Much of the content could fall to the wayside or never get played due to low pop playlists. This could be alleviated by giving players further ability to tailor their experience without overly sacrificing search times.

Playlists would be categorised by player count, totalling 4 only. Each playlist separated by its max player count, allowing any number of players per lobby up to the maximum.
Teams - either 4 or 5
Big team - whatever the pop cap of btb, 8 probs
Doubles - 2
Lone wolf - 1
Each playlist would have all options on by default, and players can turn off certain options to specify their search, also each playlist will have a ranked mode which may omit certain options from search pool.

Teams would have slayer, objective, swat, snipers, action sack, grifball and the like, as options

BTB would have slayer and objective

Doubles would have 2vs2 and multi-team

Lone wolf would have infection, ffa and 1vs1

Undecided but possibly the idea that players can omit maps too or choose to turn off forge maps also (at the cost of wait times) or that the hardcore/tournament playlist is either separate or just a mode unlocked once a certain skill level is reached.

The other is that larger parties can search social modes of smaller lobby playlists like 6 players searching infection, the system greying out unavailable modes like 1vs1.

I think its a way to enable more control to the player and to give niche modes more traffic by having the default search cover a wider variety of play. It cleans up the playlists also, a clean, simple and informative UI would be vital.

Tell me what you think of this idea or how it could be iterated or any flaws/drawbacks.

2

I would honestly hate if this were to be implemented, a giant scramble of gamemodes based on number of players would lose your ability to know what your getting into. I know I for one like to have times where I want to just play slayer and not have to worry about objectives or flags or whatnot.

Instead, I think a much better solution to the issue would be some sort of mixtape matchmaking, like form Titanfall 2. Basically as the system goes, before beginning the search, each plaer has the ability to pick and choose what gamemodes and playlists to search for. For instance, lets say you wanted to play king of the hill, but wouldn’t mind getting into a game of slayer if the search for koth took too long, in this scenario, you could check the slayer and koth playlists and the game would search in both playlists at the same time.

3

> 2533274836395701;1:
> With infinite on the horizon, Halo will see some level of renewed interest. Recently with 4 and 5 the multiplayer experience became too chopped and segregated, something that imo was a contributor to a population dropoff in the early lifespan of the games. We have seen an inkling of what could come next however and that is with MCC.
>
> Much of the content could fall to the wayside or never get played due to low pop playlists. This could be alleviated by giving players further ability to tailor their experience without overly sacrificing search times.
>
> Playlists would be categorised by player count, totalling 4 only. Each playlist separated by its max player count, allowing any number of players per lobby up to the maximum.
> Teams - either 4 or 5
> Big team - whatever the pop cap of btb, 8 probs
> Doubles - 2
> Lone wolf - 1
> Each playlist would have all options on by default, and players can turn off certain options to specify their search, also each playlist will have a ranked mode which may omit certain options from search pool.
>
> Teams would have slayer, objective, swat, snipers, action sack, grifball and the like, as options
>
> BTB would have slayer and objective
>
> Doubles would have 2vs2 and multi-team
>
> Lone wolf would have infection, ffa and 1vs1
>
> Undecided but possibly the idea that players can omit maps too or choose to turn off forge maps also (at the cost of wait times) or that the hardcore/tournament playlist is either separate or just a mode unlocked once a certain skill level is reached.
>
> The other is that larger parties can search social modes of smaller lobby playlists like 6 players searching infection, the system greying out unavailable modes like 1vs1.
>
> I think its a way to enable more control to the player and to give niche modes more traffic by having the default search cover a wider variety of play. It cleans up the playlists also, a clean, simple and informative UI would be vital.
>
> Tell me what you think of this idea or how it could be iterated or any flaws/drawbacks.

I’m only interested in slayer, 4v4 or higher, or btb. I have zero interest in objectives and don’t queue for them at all. As long as I can queue for slayer I’m happy. I cannot comment on how the MCC works as I never updated the game and have not played it in a very long time.

4

When I saw this I kinda assumed it would be a bit silly, but this actually kinda reminds me of how 3’s gamemodes were spread out. Not a bad idea, I guess.

5

> 2533274925727172;2:
> I would honestly hate if this were to be implemented, a giant scramble of gamemodes based on number of players would lose your ability to know what your getting into. I know I for one like to have times where I want to just play slayer and not have to worry about objectives or flags or whatnot.
>
> Instead, I think a much better solution to the issue would be some sort of mixtape matchmaking, like form Titanfall 2. Basically as the system goes, before beginning the search, each plaer has the ability to pick and choose what gamemodes and playlists to search for. For instance, lets say you wanted to play king of the hill, but wouldn’t mind getting into a game of slayer if the search for koth took too long, in this scenario, you could check the slayer and koth playlists and the game would search in both playlists at the same time.

Really the suggestion is just the inverse of that though, you would select teams/4vs4 then uncheck what you dont want to play.

To explain further if you were to search 4s there would be a sub-menu with slayer, objective, grifball, swat etc. You would then deselect what you dont want to play. Say you only want to play snipes you would deselect the other options, say you dont want to play forge maps or only 1 map you would deselect the rest. It would up search time from the base search but it would be far quicker than splitting up all playlists because theres now a sizable fraction of the playerbase who will have most options ticked, MCC has a less fleshed out version of this and i’d argue its a saving grace rather than a scramble.

6

I heavily dislike submenu spam, which is the reason I dislike Halo MCC Matchmaking beyond getting curbstomped for the act of being on the opposite team of the good team and stuck with 4+ AFKers.

So uh… Not a fan of this idea, but I can totally see why people would.

7

The problems had nothing to do with to many playlists. You had crap stories that alienated the lore fans in both but mostly 5. You had clunky (4) or new mechanics alienating more players. The biggest killer of 5 was realising less than half a game at launch in order to justify micros. By the time the game was in a complete state most had left.

8

> 2533274836395701;1:
> With infinite on the horizon, Halo will see some level of renewed interest. Recently with 4 and 5 the multiplayer experience became too chopped and segregated, something that imo was a contributor to a population dropoff in the early lifespan of the games. We have seen an inkling of what could come next however and that is with MCC.
>
> Much of the content could fall to the wayside or never get played due to low pop playlists. This could be alleviated by giving players further ability to tailor their experience without overly sacrificing search times.
>
> Playlists would be categorised by player count, totalling 4 only. Each playlist separated by its max player count, allowing any number of players per lobby up to the maximum.
> Teams - either 4 or 5
> Big team - whatever the pop cap of btb, 8 probs
> Doubles - 2
> Lone wolf - 1
> Each playlist would have all options on by default, and players can turn off certain options to specify their search, also each playlist will have a ranked mode which may omit certain options from search pool.
>
> Teams would have slayer, objective, swat, snipers, action sack, grifball and the like, as options
>
> BTB would have slayer and objective
>
> Doubles would have 2vs2 and multi-team
>
> Lone wolf would have infection, ffa and 1vs1
>
> Undecided but possibly the idea that players can omit maps too or choose to turn off forge maps also (at the cost of wait times) or that the hardcore/tournament playlist is either separate or just a mode unlocked once a certain skill level is reached.
>
> The other is that larger parties can search social modes of smaller lobby playlists like 6 players searching infection, the system greying out unavailable modes like 1vs1.
>
> I think its a way to enable more control to the player and to give niche modes more traffic by having the default search cover a wider variety of play. It cleans up the playlists also, a clean, simple and informative UI would be vital.
>
> Tell me what you think of this idea or how it could be iterated or any flaws/drawbacks.

Nah I don’t like that at all. Like at all. If the concern is splitting up the population then just have fewer playlists and rotate them out. Part of the problem in my opinion too is splitting social and ranked. Instead, just do something somewhat like Reach. Just have these playlists.
-Team Slayer
-Team Objective
-Arena Competetive Mix
-Action Sack
-Big Team Battle
-Solo
-Doubles

Rotate games and modes in and out within the playlists, and let the players vote between 3-4 options with at least one being a default in each set in case of tie/nonvoters. Occasionally introduce specialty limited time playlists. Perfect system.

9

> 2533274857642512;8:
> > 2533274836395701;1:
> > With infinite on the horizon, Halo will see some level of renewed interest. Recently with 4 and 5 the multiplayer experience became too chopped and segregated, something that imo was a contributor to a population dropoff in the early lifespan of the games. We have seen an inkling of what could come next however and that is with MCC.
> >
> > Much of the content could fall to the wayside or never get played due to low pop playlists. This could be alleviated by giving players further ability to tailor their experience without overly sacrificing search times.
> >
> > Playlists would be categorised by player count, totalling 4 only. Each playlist separated by its max player count, allowing any number of players per lobby up to the maximum.
> > Teams - either 4 or 5
> > Big team - whatever the pop cap of btb, 8 probs
> > Doubles - 2
> > Lone wolf - 1
> > Each playlist would have all options on by default, and players can turn off certain options to specify their search, also each playlist will have a ranked mode which may omit certain options from search pool.
> >
> > Teams would have slayer, objective, swat, snipers, action sack, grifball and the like, as options
> >
> > BTB would have slayer and objective
> >
> > Doubles would have 2vs2 and multi-team
> >
> > Lone wolf would have infection, ffa and 1vs1
> >
> > Undecided but possibly the idea that players can omit maps too or choose to turn off forge maps also (at the cost of wait times) or that the hardcore/tournament playlist is either separate or just a mode unlocked once a certain skill level is reached.
> >
> > The other is that larger parties can search social modes of smaller lobby playlists like 6 players searching infection, the system greying out unavailable modes like 1vs1.
> >
> > I think its a way to enable more control to the player and to give niche modes more traffic by having the default search cover a wider variety of play. It cleans up the playlists also, a clean, simple and informative UI would be vital.
> >
> > Tell me what you think of this idea or how it could be iterated or any flaws/drawbacks.
>
> Nah I don’t like that at all. Like at all. If the concern is splitting up the population then just have fewer playlists and rotate them out. Part of the problem in my opinion too is splitting social and ranked. Instead, just do something somewhat like Reach. Just have these playlists.
> -Team Slayer
> -Team Objective
> -Arena Competetive Mix
> -Action Sack
> -Big Team Battle
> -Solo
> -Doubles
>
> Rotate games and modes in and out within the playlists, and let the players vote between 3-4 options with at least one being a default in each set in case of tie/nonvoters. Occasionally introduce specialty limited time playlists. Perfect system.

I wouldn’t mind that but many players enjoy certain modes and nothing is more irksome than having a mainline playlist (say snipers) be a rotational playlist. The other is once the pop is low (6 months to a year) everything except for 2-4 playlists either have long search times, uneven games or a lot of player dropoff midgame. I think the current approach worsens that problem, if not that approach i think there needs to be brainstorming ahead.

10

Sounds to me like you should brainstorm these ideas working for 343 lmao. With the magnitude that Halo is for fans across the globe i doubt player count will be that much of a issue for the first few years post launch. Only time will tell.

11

> 2533274836395701;9:
> > 2533274857642512;8:
> > > 2533274836395701;1:
> > > With infinite on the horizon, Halo will see some level of renewed interest. Recently with 4 and 5 the multiplayer experience became too chopped and segregated, something that imo was a contributor to a population dropoff in the early lifespan of the games. We have seen an inkling of what could come next however and that is with MCC.
> > >
> > > Much of the content could fall to the wayside or never get played due to low pop playlists. This could be alleviated by giving players further ability to tailor their experience without overly sacrificing search times.
> > >
> > > Playlists would be categorised by player count, totalling 4 only. Each playlist separated by its max player count, allowing any number of players per lobby up to the maximum.
> > > Teams - either 4 or 5
> > > Big team - whatever the pop cap of btb, 8 probs
> > > Doubles - 2
> > > Lone wolf - 1
> > > Each playlist would have all options on by default, and players can turn off certain options to specify their search, also each playlist will have a ranked mode which may omit certain options from search pool.
> > >
> > > Teams would have slayer, objective, swat, snipers, action sack, grifball and the like, as options
> > >
> > > BTB would have slayer and objective
> > >
> > > Doubles would have 2vs2 and multi-team
> > >
> > > Lone wolf would have infection, ffa and 1vs1
> > >
> > > Undecided but possibly the idea that players can omit maps too or choose to turn off forge maps also (at the cost of wait times) or that the hardcore/tournament playlist is either separate or just a mode unlocked once a certain skill level is reached.
> > >
> > > The other is that larger parties can search social modes of smaller lobby playlists like 6 players searching infection, the system greying out unavailable modes like 1vs1.
> > >
> > > I think its a way to enable more control to the player and to give niche modes more traffic by having the default search cover a wider variety of play. It cleans up the playlists also, a clean, simple and informative UI would be vital.
> > >
> > > Tell me what you think of this idea or how it could be iterated or any flaws/drawbacks.
> >
> > Nah I don’t like that at all. Like at all. If the concern is splitting up the population then just have fewer playlists and rotate them out. Part of the problem in my opinion too is splitting social and ranked. Instead, just do something somewhat like Reach. Just have these playlists.
> > -Team Slayer
> > -Team Objective
> > -Arena Competetive Mix
> > -Action Sack
> > -Big Team Battle
> > -Solo
> > -Doubles
> >
> > Rotate games and modes in and out within the playlists, and let the players vote between 3-4 options with at least one being a default in each set in case of tie/nonvoters. Occasionally introduce specialty limited time playlists. Perfect system.
>
> I wouldn’t mind that but many players enjoy certain modes and nothing is more irksome than having a mainline playlist (say snipers) be a rotational playlist. The other is once the pop is low (6 months to a year) everything except for 2-4 playlists either have long search times, uneven games or a lot of player dropoff midgame. I think the current approach worsens that problem, if not that approach i think there needs to be brainstorming ahead.

Well I happen to love oddball but I don’t really think a 24/7 oddball playlists is fair to people that like king of the hill/snipers/infection and so on and so forth. You know what I mean?