How many hours have you logged into the multiplayer for halo mcc?
Are Sony remasters really remasters?
- Thread starter BIGJOHN
- Start date
- Status
Move the goal posts all you want, Yank. Doesn't change the fact that you're simply attacking a straw man. As for Drive club, yeah, not only did it get delayed a year, but when it FINALLY did release, it still had tons of stuff missing... thanks for bringing that up. Par for Sony's course. Overpromise, under-deliver, and leave customers out in the cold.
In any case, this whole tangent of yours is irrelevant.
Call them ports, remasters, remakes, etc. - MS gives people a better product when it re-releases content from previous generations. That's just a fact of this generation right now.
X1 has better ports from previous gen high budget exclusives, and X1 has more high-budget exclusives built from the ground up for this generation of consoles. No contest, really.
Not to sound dumb, but what exactly is match making and why is it so important?
I know it matches players of similar skills together. Is there anything more to it than that?
I know it matches players of similar skills together. Is there anything more to it than that?
Wow. Just wow. Halo MCC is not broken. Yeah the mp was and it was a bummer but it works now.
What was achieved was pretty amazing and like what GordoSan said, you can switch between the original version and the updated version which I did and got a greater appreciation for what they've accomplished.
Like every other thread this one turned into belittling this and that and vs. this and that bulls***.
What was achieved was pretty amazing and like what GordoSan said, you can switch between the original version and the updated version which I did and got a greater appreciation for what they've accomplished.
Like every other thread this one turned into belittling this and that and vs. this and that bulls***.
Absolutely. Anyone claiming MCC's MP is broken or "a disappointment" is just broadly displaying to the world they're biased to the point of no return, and cannot see clearly anymore. It's not just untrue, it's demonstrably false.
But is it giving them a better product if you knowingly give them one that is broken?
Talk about overpromise and underdeliver
The Nightmare Continues As 'Halo: The Master Chief Collection' Cancels Its Own Tournament
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertc...-chief-collection-cancels-its-own-tournament/
How Bad Is ‘Halo: The Master Chief Collection’ For Microsoft?
Recently, VG247 gave a rundown of the problems still on show in The Master Chief Collection, detailing several examples of the wait times needed to join games. VG247 is not alone, either. A quick look at Reddit shows that even though there have been some improvements, players are still suffering with serious problems, with some saying that “matchmaking is still a broken joke.” With over two months since the game’s release, it is incredible that the multiplayer issues have still not been resolved entirely.
In fact, given the status of The Master Chief Collection, it should never have been released in such an incomplete way. Halo is one of the most well-known franchises in the video game industry, and given the size of Halo’s fanbase it is no surprise that the community is disappointed. Even after multiple updates and fixes, there are still serious problems that have not been fully addressed. All in all, Microsoft and developer 343 Industries may have been lucky that The Master Chief Collection launched at the same time as a number of other high-profile, buggy games.
http://gamerant.com/halo-master-chief-collection-hurt-brand-microsoft/
https://www.reddit.com/r/halo/comments/3d9ypg/still_frustrated_about_the_state_of_mcc_so_am_i/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertc...-chief-collection-cancels-its-own-tournament/
How Bad Is ‘Halo: The Master Chief Collection’ For Microsoft?
Recently, VG247 gave a rundown of the problems still on show in The Master Chief Collection, detailing several examples of the wait times needed to join games. VG247 is not alone, either. A quick look at Reddit shows that even though there have been some improvements, players are still suffering with serious problems, with some saying that “matchmaking is still a broken joke.” With over two months since the game’s release, it is incredible that the multiplayer issues have still not been resolved entirely.
In fact, given the status of The Master Chief Collection, it should never have been released in such an incomplete way. Halo is one of the most well-known franchises in the video game industry, and given the size of Halo’s fanbase it is no surprise that the community is disappointed. Even after multiple updates and fixes, there are still serious problems that have not been fully addressed. All in all, Microsoft and developer 343 Industries may have been lucky that The Master Chief Collection launched at the same time as a number of other high-profile, buggy games.
http://gamerant.com/halo-master-chief-collection-hurt-brand-microsoft/
https://www.reddit.com/r/halo/comments/3d9ypg/still_frustrated_about_the_state_of_mcc_so_am_i/
Yes, it's giving them a better product. It's also doing the right thing, and making up for the problem by giving free content.
That absolutely is literally and factually over-delivering. It's beyond anything that was ever promised.
I think the textures look better, maybe they are redone or touched up in this case. Its still pretty insignificant, but noticeable zoomed in.
Doing the right thing would have been delaying the game. Nice that they gave ODST for free. Does suck for people that got the game for Christmas when the game was still broken though.
You're kind of ignoring that huge shadow they textured in. That's not insignificant or an "only-noticeable-when-zoomed."
Yeah I disagreed with you at first. But this thread proved you right.
I think there could be interesting discussion about how each company approaches repackaging their games. But it looks like things went south.
Last edited:
That's your opinion. I disagree.
Personally, I'd rather get a game which had fully functional and solid campaigns (not to mention gorgeously improved) to sink my teeth into while I wait for MP, then to just have to wait until MP was right. Plus, by having the game out earlier, customers actually got to voice feedback and get other things changed/incorporated into the game which they otherwise wouldn't have been able to.
My biggest beef with it is that the moment we knew we couldn't release a fully fleshed out and robust/stable MP, we should have slapped a "BETA" label on it, and let people know that the MP wasn't up to snuff, but we'd get it there as fast as we could.
That way, anyone who was more excited for the campaigns anyway (which I'd fall into that bunch) wouldn't have to endure any delay, and our customers who were excited for MP wouldn't have expectations that the MP would be up to snuff. They'd know that we're still actively working on it.
Textured in shadow? shouldn't a light source or globe automatically cast that? Even if it isn't GI?
Way to quote articles from nearly 7 months ago, genius. We've established the game had a rocky start.
I am talking about now. I, and many others from this and other sites play every week. You've played it never. Good job.
All you ever do is s*** on the console. f***ing troll. I don't like to resort to name calling, but you deserve it.
Last edited:
The lighting engine looked like complete ass in any daytime scene in the game and IIRC, lots of the stuff was prebaked and did not actual react to light-sources.
So, it actually casting a legit shadow is kind of nice for this remastered version.
Not a dumb question at all.
There's A LOT that goes into proper matchmaking, and ever since Halo 2 introduced the concept of algorithmic matchmaking instead of just people looking for open slots in a list of sessions, it's been something that's only grown in complexity.
Matchmaking has to have an incredibly rich set of rules which handle the logic around what to do with gobs and gobs of data... and when a problem arises in matchmaking, it can kill the entire MP experience (as was the case with MCC). To give just a handful of examples:
1. If matchmaking doesn't consider open/moderate/strict NAT configurations, then its can result in endless circular searches that never resolve.
2. The Xbox service gives users the ability to police the community to some extent, and if gamer A doesn't like gamer B, then matchmaking needs to respect that. But a bug in the way a game handles that could cause matchmaking to fail, or take far longer than it should.
3. Streaming-installs are allowed, which means player A could try to play an MP game before they have all the content, and player B (whom has all of the content downloaded) could be improperly matched with player A, causing the game to get into an unhandled scenario, and the game could crash.
4. If rules like session search time-outs aren't managed properly, time-outs could be set to occur too frequently, which results in users never getting into a session. Imagine a scenario where even in ideal conditions, it takes about 10 seconds to list, identify, filter, and ultimately select a single user as an acceptable one to be matched with. Now imagine that devs think that step should never take more than 30 seconds. Imagine too that the team began matchmaking for only 4 player games and therefore set the max time before timing out and re-running a search to 120 seconds. But now imagine they ship with support for 16 players. Well, if they didn't properly update matchmaking settings, a 16-player game would never be possible, because even in BEST conditions, it still would take 10 seconds for a single user to join, and 10x16 = 160 seconds, but the matchmaking time-out is configured to time-out after only 120 seconds.
I could go on, and on... but the point is, yes, matchmaking is very challenging. Bungie started something incredibly smart with matchmaking, and it's a really cool advancement in MP gaming (which has totally taken over from the old-school 'find a session, and jump in' model)... but yeah, it's complex and not easy to get right.
So how are you claiming they didn't use light sources to create the shadow? And why pretend the shadow doesn't dramatically improve the image quality? You are just downplaying large differences as being "you need a magnifying glass to see this."
Not a dumb question at all.
There's A LOT that goes into proper matchmaking, and ever since Halo 2 introduced the concept of algorithmic matchmaking instead of just people looking for open slots in a list of sessions, it's been something that's only grown in complexity.
Matchmaking has to have an incredibly rich set of rules which handle the logic around what to do with gobs and gobs of data... and when a problem arises in matchmaking, it can kill the entire MP experience (as was the case with MCC). To give just a handful of examples:
1. If matchmaking doesn't consider open/moderate/strict NAT configurations, then its can result in endless circular searches that never resolve.
2. The Xbox service gives users the ability to police the community to some extent, and if gamer A doesn't like gamer B, then matchmaking needs to respect that. But a bug in the way a game handles that could cause matchmaking to fail, or take far longer than it should.
3. Streaming-installs are allowed, which means player A could try to play an MP game before they have all the content, and player B (whom has all of the content downloaded) could be improperly matched with player A, causing the game to get into an unhandled scenario, and the game could crash.
4. If rules like session search time-outs aren't managed properly, time-outs could be set to occur too frequently, which results in users never getting into a session. Imagine a scenario where even in ideal conditions, it takes about 10 seconds to list, identify, filter, and ultimately select a single user as an acceptable one to be matched with. Now imagine that devs think that step should never take more than 30 seconds. Imagine too that the team began matchmaking for only 4 player games and therefore set the max time before timing out and re-running a search to 120 seconds. But now imagine they ship with support for 16 players. Well, if they didn't properly update matchmaking settings, a 16-player game would never be possible, because even in BEST conditions, it still would take 10 seconds for a single user to join, and 10x16 = 160 seconds, but the matchmaking time-out is configured to time-out after only 120 seconds.
I could go on, and on... but the point is, yes, matchmaking is very challenging. Bungie started something incredibly smart with matchmaking, and it's a really cool advancement in MP gaming (which has totally taken over from the old-school 'find a session, and jump in' model)... but yeah, it's complex and not easy to get right.
Thanks Flynn. That was a heck of a description.
Val can be good people. But he definitely has a thing with Xbox One. Or more so it's fans imo.
I'm not entirely satisfied with my Wii U purchase. But I don't see the need to post constant negative comments about it.
Yeah I am pretty much done with giving the MS owned XB a chance. With XBO having nothing worth keeping it for.It's probably for the best. It's just not working out.
I will stick with the more popular gaming companies who have been successful in gaming due to higher quality devices....oh and the PC. Prob is I need to get a buyer and considering I put money into it I don't want to sell for $175 st GS.
Truth hurts so bad that you didn't READ everything posted which has older and current for examples The reddit is CURRENT as a mofo.
Predictably ASSume I never played it cause I didn't buy the POS lol.
Don't sell it for $175, just give it to me.
For free.
I'm setting up another room for music recording, movies and games... I need another XBO.
Wait, isn't this thread about remakes? There are 4 entire campaigns that have worked flawlessly for MCC from day one.
Why are we even bringing busted match-making into this? Really? I honestly don't play online that much anyway. I have played a few great online matches with this and I've also had some issues connecting with matches. The actual game play is ace, once started. In fact, the entire package now is ace. I really don't see a need to pick this game apart anymore for a match-making issue when we are clearly talking about remakes. The first Halo didn't even have online play (just lan) and other games mentioned don't have online play either. Again, there are 4 entire campaigns!
Its a subpar console with subpar specs. Don't see the point in owning a XB anymore as it has worse versions of 3rd party games and lack luster exclusives.I don't think I will buy a MS made XB console again nor do I think MS will make another XB.
anywayz
Kept it for Halo 5 which looks promising even though it technically runs like a last gen game(low res) and its not all about visuals however after Halo 4 I can't trust 343i to handle Halo 5 so the point? I think it will be a letdown.
But yeah its mainly its fans here at union that I have issue with.
You are a tool and a fool. Please do all of us a favor and quit pretending to be a gamer.
- Status