Playlist? Asking this from a technical perspective, but why do you think we see 24 or so player matches as the top end of what 343 is offering? Battlefield has been doing larger matches than that for a long time and I could see in a Warzone Playlist at least having a 64 player mode. I like the 4v4 and 8v8 stuff. But I would love to see even larger Playlists in the future.
From a technical perspective I guess more players = less vehicles, explosions, plasma effects.
But why 12. As per the MP overview - “This is just the certain beautiful slice of sci-fi chaos”. By making in 12 v 12 on an appropriate sized map they can curate the experience.
If you have more players you have to make the map bigger… you have to keep the players spread out… it’s harder to run with your mates. That doesn’t sound very Halo.
Personally I wouldn’t write a larger mode off just yet. We only saw that was Big Team 2, not Dominion 2.0 or Warzone 2.0 or whatever else. Not to mention what might be added post-launch.
That said, what Battlefield’s doing is kind of irrelevant here, since Halo’s got a different ‘vision’ compared to what Battlefield’s going after.
> 2585548714655118;2:
> From a technical perspective I guess **more players = less vehicles, explosions, plasma effects.**But why 12. As per the MP overview - “This is just the certain beautiful slice of sci-fi chaos”. **By making in 12 v 12 on an appropriate sized map they can curate the experience.**If you have more players you have to make the map bigger… you have to keep the players spread out… it’s harder to run with your mates. That doesn’t sound very Halo.
Yeah these are pretty much the points for why I don’t see a 64 player experience happening any time soon. 32 tops I could see for a specialized mode, but anything higher than that? Not any time soon. A possibility, but highly unlikely.
> 2533274850869596;3:
> Personally I wouldn’t write a larger mode off just yet. We only saw that was Big Team 2, not Dominion 2.0 or Warzone 2.0 or whatever else. Not to mention what might be added post-launch.
>
> That said, what Battlefield’s doing is kind of irrelevant here, since Halo’s got a different ‘vision’ compared to what Battlefield’s going after.
I referenced Battlefield from a technical perspective of a multi-player FPS running reliably with much larger lobby size. I agree that they are so different that outside of a simple networking comparison, they shouldn’t be discussed together much.
> 2533274850869596;4:
> > 2585548714655118;2:
> > From a technical perspective I guess **more players = less vehicles, explosions, plasma effects.**But why 12. As per the MP overview - “This is just the certain beautiful slice of sci-fi chaos”. **By making in 12 v 12 on an appropriate sized map they can curate the experience.**If you have more players you have to make the map bigger… you have to keep the players spread out… it’s harder to run with your mates. That doesn’t sound very Halo.
>
> Yeah these are pretty much the points for why I don’t see a 64 player experience happening any time soon. 32 tops I could see for a specialized mode, but anything higher than that? Not any time soon. A possibility, but highly unlikely.
I personally like the smaller game modes, but I would love to see something that feels more like a full warzone.
I kind of imagine a map the size of Forge world from reach filled with NPC combatants and dozens of players. I get that this would be different and that’s why I would like it in addition to the standard playlists.
Anyway, I appreciate the responses. I was suspecting that it was a decision based on player experience and the feel of Halo and wanted to see if that was what the community thought.
They’ve mentioned in passing that they’re testing larger player counts for MCC right now. I think they said somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 players. If they’re testing it for MCC, then they’re bound to be doing the same for Infinite. It might not be there at launch, but we could definitely see some bigger player count games added on in the future.
> 2670661386182421;6:
> They’ve mentioned in passing that they’re testing larger player counts for MCC right now. I think they said somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 players. If they’re testing it for MCC, then they’re bound to be doing the same for Infinite. It might not be there at launch, but we could definitely see some bigger player count games added on in the future.
I wonder how well a Conquest type mode would translate into Halo! Sounds fun.
> 2535469609708123;5:
> > 2533274850869596;3:
> > Personally I wouldn’t write a larger mode off just yet. We only saw that was Big Team 2, not Dominion 2.0 or Warzone 2.0 or whatever else. Not to mention what might be added post-launch.
> >
> > That said, what Battlefield’s doing is kind of irrelevant here, since Halo’s got a different ‘vision’ compared to what Battlefield’s going after.
>
> I referenced Battlefield from a technical perspective of a multi-player FPS running reliably with much larger lobby size. I agree that they are so different that outside of a simple networking comparison, they shouldn’t be discussed together much.
>
>
> > 2533274850869596;4:
> > > 2585548714655118;2:
> > > From a technical perspective I guess **more players = less vehicles, explosions, plasma effects.**But why 12. As per the MP overview - “This is just the certain beautiful slice of sci-fi chaos”. **By making in 12 v 12 on an appropriate sized map they can curate the experience.**If you have more players you have to make the map bigger… you have to keep the players spread out… it’s harder to run with your mates. That doesn’t sound very Halo.
> >
> > Yeah these are pretty much the points for why I don’t see a 64 player experience happening any time soon. 32 tops I could see for a specialized mode, but anything higher than that? Not any time soon. A possibility, but highly unlikely.
>
> I personally like the smaller game modes, but I would love to see something that feels more like a full warzone.
> I kind of imagine a map the size of Forge world from reach filled with NPC combatants and dozens of players. I get that this would be different and that’s why I would like it in addition to the standard playlists.
>
> Anyway, I appreciate the responses. I was suspecting that it was a decision based on player experience and the feel of Halo and wanted to see if that was what the community thought.
There are 2 aspects to player count. The 1st its technical possibility. We don’t know too much about the slipspace engine but given its ability to render larger map sizes along with increased AI complexity and a game moderatore that curates AI spawnbs and systems based on the players actions, we could assume its powerful enough to handle more than 24 players.
This leads me to the second aspect, gameplay and the games philosphy behind it. Battlefield is a twitch shooter with exteremely large maps and vehicle mechanics. Its sand box is designed to limit player numbers on a conisstent basis through quick deaths, downed states and now the weather system which removes players from active fights. It works cause realistically the match is meant to be hectic with low life times which benefit larger player count modes. Heck, even battle royals are like this given a majority of the round is killed in the 1st 5 minutes. Battlefield also lacks any form of arena systems so everything is determined by the loadouts selected. There are no control locations outside of a couple choke points in a map or the objective. This allows for players to essentially move freely and leave room for escape (there are maps that are designed against that idea where its all 1 choke point like metro).
Now lets look at halo, a game in in which is designed around longer kill times and player creativity. The long kill times in itself negate the matches ability to self prun player numbers to keep the game from feeling unfun (in BF you can die in quick succession but you except it cause thats how the health system is presented). Say they upped the match to 50 players, we now have a mode where players have a high kill time, a high chance for combat counterability (given health and equipment), and then the arena style systems. When you include all those systems, it becomes less “fun” and more of a mess. Players now expect a bit more of a chance when it comes to a fight but with an increase player count, you get a potential decreased kill time cause of the increase in team shooting (always there but less prevelant with less people). That is frustrating. You then have the arena systems creating nonesense by making odd control points that are not the objective. While this works wonders with lower player count maps/modes, it can create annoyance in higher ones.
IMO, the choice to go with 24 players instead of more is purely desgin driven given the type of game Halo is. While theoretically one could make a large battlefield style mode in halo, I would argue people don’t play halo to play battlefield. They play Halo to play Halo. So its version of BTB should still play like an arena shooter instead of a twitch shooter like BF and both have an easier or hard time when it comes to being “fun” with more players.