Twinreaper

Halo 2 for the pc is far more active them people state. You can always find at least a minimum of 20-30 servers and at most about 5-10 good servers always full at all times.

As I had said he touched based on the ranking system in mm. Im not getting all worked up...though it may seem like it some times. I actually thougjt OP did a fairly decent job as a first post for this sort of.topic. Mg only primary concern is the influx of new members that dont take the proper time to.search for the posts that we already have like this. Members need to start using the search feature a little more.

Although your post was layed out and tbought out fairly well, but you simply cannot post up that you know anything about core mechanics without providing technical data in relation to tag values or physics/collision handling. I do applaud you sense of style though. Dmr is.not.hitscan. Hitscan.weapons do not have a defined projectile speed, as seen in the weap tags on the DMR. The speed of the projectile.is.meerly increased to.simulate hitscan...but it is not. Vehicles were nerfed because they were strong against infantry weapons. Biggest complaint about vehicles in Halo 2 and 3 was how ward it was to take.them.down with standard respawn.equipment. The vehicles in Reach are balancex between sacrificing armor.for power. Yet again simple.minds.dont.grasp the ranking system Reach uses. It isnt about credits or actual.rank. The mm system compares.your commendations to match you up.against players.....if that is you adjust the custom.search setting. Ive heard far more than enough whining about your precious bragging system. Not everyone wants it...deal with it.

No, SI's involvement was strictly related to "graphic layers" and "geometry". Although they did have very little mention when it came to CEA, the project they were involved in. I suspect they are working on something else but I do remain interrsted to see if the things they are working on, are in part, part of a large release other than just the 360.

First off Snipesnide, the port is exactly how it was on Xbox 1. Vibrant, is a good way to describe it, it has seen some pickup in the last few months. The reason it is not the stellar title it could be, is simply because it requires Vista or 7 to run properly and enjoy multiplayer. Forget what people say about it on Xp, it plays much better on Vista on 7....if you have an up to date machine...but thats another whiney ass tale for another day. The game costs you a measly $10 to $15 bucks....we aint exactly breaking the bank or the allowance funds here. It's agreat port with lots of map making potential. trust me, I'm a co-leader for the H2MT on Monstrmoose.

Netcode is no easy task to modify. writing a brand new code structure with latest networking models based on current networking protocols can take alone, upwards of a year to two years. Thats complete integration and fromm scratch though. to modify the reach engine, it would be an equal venture. they would first have to use the basic kernel if you will, and add onto that. Unfortunatly it isnt as easy as changing a flagged value.......unless the server support coding was already in there.....hmmmmmm

These items are not what is crippling halo. Halo redefined the genre and lead the way for console fps'. But also in doing so it built an army of wannabes and competition. Halo has never truely evolved as other titles did. It is still the same core gameplay...same old story that sells short of every title, and still clings to a console only release. MW3 didnt sell a **** ton of games by doing the things that halo did. While you cannot compare the games equally, you can compare.drive, ambition and determination to.be the #1 fps title. Sadly....Halo has fallen short since Halo 2 with this.

Servers are only half the issue. The rest is in Blam! 's netcode. You can have all the servers u want....but unless great support for data handling is incorporated into the engine........then its just useless hardware.

I know this sounds really stupid but I have to ask..... a. Are you starting Reach via the "games" section and launching it from the hdd b. is reach and not cea in the dvd drive c. is your xbox set to launch games as soon as they are inserted or recognized?

My main problem is not the game itself or the mechanics. I can play on either TU settings or classic. I prefer classic but can appriciate TU as well. The playlists are supposed to be maintained and.created with the sole purpose of giving players options to enhance their gaming experience. Forcing people to play playlists that use only TU settings defeats the entire purpose of having them. True that I could simply just make custom games, but friends are not always available or willing to play when I have time. So the only choice I have is to.either not play, or use the playlists. Using the playlists again, offers me no.choice at all since they want to apply the TU settings to everything...assuming that a majority of people agree on having the TU settings. Dog and I had a discussion the other night, bringing to light that a wider majority of players dont join sites or.use any type of.feedback tool given the time it takesbfrom real life.

Yup, just as I was saying the other night. "not complete or polished" is way to vague a term for Frank to use. As I had stated, most things are probably asset placeholders while things like textures, shaders, cinematic finilazation and a myriad of ther things are brought up to polish or completed level. But do not go and assume that yhis means they nearing anything. Properly adjusting or creating shaders takes weeks alone just to polish and produce one or two of good high enough quality to be deemed acceptable for retail use. Also keep in mind, that just because MM was stated as being playable....doesnt mean that map geometry, animations, weapons or even data tracking is complete or polished. Most likely MM is being played on basic textured alpha phase maps with very basic play options. Unless something other than handpicked images or.video is posted up by 343, nothing can really be 100% confirmed or taken with any sense of reality. Hand selected pics will only show what they want you to see, if only it is actually to trick you into believing it looks like those pics in game or all over mm at all. Remember the Halo 2 dibacle? The showcased level and graphic layer used for it ended up not even making it into the actual game. Basically they created it with the intention of.building on it to shape Halo......but it all fell apart and we got what had instead.

Sorry for the late chime on this one...I dont check my threads as often as I should. This sounds like a bug in the checking of maps. Do you have Reach or the Reach map packs installed to the HDD? Did you optionally install the CEA maps to the HDD? Does this only happen on one profile? Just a few things i need to know first.

I ran both for a while AT one point I had 2 Halo PC servers going as well as crysis 2 and one Halo 2 server. ATM they are down since I am in the middle of packing and moving to a new apartment and new ISP service.

You know what needs to come back with the rank system? The clan option. if the ranking system is done right, according to what Skittlez, Spade and myself have viewed and agreed upon, they could easily apply this to a special playlist for clans where teams of the clan can compete for a special ranked clan playlist. it would be like if XBConnect and Live had a ranked love child. What would be better then seeing clans of people facing off in ranked games? It would be like MLG for casual or gamers who just dont care to go that extra devoted step to MLG. It would please people who like teamwork and deserve teamwork ranks of high levels. It could be done easily and comfortably...given people would like it or use it. To example this, the playlist would be this... One team goes into the playlist. In the lobby before the server searches for players, the server checks to ensure every party member is on the same clan. Then, it searches for clans of equal rank and pairs them up...and viola! True ranked team play. They then could go the extra step and have a playlist that coordinates with an event schedule. One clan challenges another a week from today. The opposing clan accepts, and if the clan doesn't show on the deadline of play, the team forfeits and the forfeit team loses rank experience points, and the team that showed up is given positive points. Simple yet effective use of the clan system.

No offense to anyone here, but your all biased. every single one of you whom have posted that the TU is good or should be applied to all gametypes and playlists are not casual gamers. You are the hardcore or competative types. This is exactly why I no longer play Reach. I dont have time to go thru and monitor my friends to see when they get on to do custom games so I have to use the Matchmaking lobby. Forcing me, a casual come and go guy to play by TU rules is ridiculous! Lets get one thing straight, everyone loves ZB so much because they didn't have there wittle pee shooter Battle Wiffle....awewww to f-in bad. Deal with it. Don't force me to play TU just because 343 wanted to please the MLG types after getting flamed by them. Can anyone else say "sell out"? Sure, lets go one sided and make everyone play with settings that only a vast majority of competative players enjoy. Again, this is exactly why i almost never did and never will play MM, I will play FF instead. I dont like being told how and by what rules I absolutely have to play by. I pay a damn good amount of money for my family to enjoy Live, and I shouyld be able to choose which version of Reach I want to play period. neither 343i or Microsoft could possibly balt out a good enough reasonable defense or reason as to why I should be forced into TU settings. Furthermore for the record....the TU settings are not classic Halo. ZB means exactly that zero error! Where in halo ahs there ever been 0 error on a weapon. Do I need to post up those error values again for everyone? Classic Halo is almost always referred to as CE settings, which are wildly different from any other Halo title to date. The only Halo game that closely in terms of physics and handling ressemble Halo 1 at is Halo 3. Again, I can post the pulled data to support this if need be. But enough of my piss in your cornflakes rant that I am sure has angered everyone......in the end, it should be a choice, not a dictated and forced one. Give us the option of playing TU settings or not. DO NOT APPLY TU ACROSS ALL PLAYLISTS!!!!!

Good evening everyone. Tonight I have layed to sleep, my home server that hosts out community Teamspeak Channel and our Halo 2 PC dedicated server. I am transitioning my moving from my current apartment to the new one for 2 weeks, and sadly I cannot devote time to maintain it right now. Also i have discovered today, a strange grinding noise in the power supply unit. I think it's dying. Anyway, expect everything I host and contribute to be down for a period of 3 to 4 weeks. I am also switching ISP providers so I have the pleasure of re-doing host files and domain changes also. Please be patient as once I have finished moving and re-configuring everything, I have great things ahead to deploy to this wonderful community. Stay tuned and safe . Reaper out!

Finally someone.else.brought it up! Thank You Kilee! Its the one aspect of mm that everyone.seems to.forget....the drwaded 16 player max. Give us an.epic map.as large as forgeworld with 32 players!!!! Epic carnage!

I play both Halo PC and Halo 2 Vista. in fact i.run a dedicated 343 Community server for us.

This is exa tly what i want to see happen ^^^^^^. Each type of gametype should have its own individual rank...not just one all around rank. Breaking it down as Spade said is the way to go. Giving set types of playstyles and objectives, the things you get points for.

Thats the trick. I do think the team that won should be rewarded for winning.....but at the same time I woukd like to see people who play getvsomething out of it rather than nothing. Your idea and my idea are pretty similar.....i say give points to the top two players of the losing team via points on performance...and the winnjng team gets double points for everything. that should give team and soloists a good reason to compete and compete hard....i thinks.

I can see where you are coming from, but when it comes down to game-types that involve teams, not everyone is and will be a good team player with a full roundabout set of skills. Even if you are able to communicate with your team via a headset...there is no guarantee that any one of your teammates is good at a particular game-type or position in game-type. The problem with overall rank, is it rewards for simply being present on a winning team...even if you did nothing to contribute or actually weighed your team down to an almost loss for the team. And that dead weight should get rewarded for being on the winning team? I am not saying that win/loss shouldn't be counted towards your rank, but it should not have the same weighing effect as it did in Halo 2's very flawed system or even Halo 3's tiny bit better system. On the note of your CTF theory, it would not work as great as it sounds on a post. In the event your theory would hold true, you would get players spamming the game-types simply to get kills, medal and all other varieties of point gaining things...basically anything but flag captures. Since your theory rewards players with points simply for getting those things, even if it isn't helpful at all or tied to the objective at hand, it would create boosters and straight out slayer play. Every single gametype should have it's own set of skills defined in which you are measured for it. Adding things like kills to a gametype or even wins is great...but straight killing would defeat the purpose of teamwork. Assists, flag captures, flag kills, etc should be gametype skill rewards in things like CTF..not just killing anyone you see the whole time. The reason I suggest an individual rank assessment is so that people who do this in CTF games and game-types alike, could not play against people who are truly there for the teamwork and game-type experience. I see it all the time in Halo 2 now...even with a rank system on various websites and in game...people still join just to straight out kill and humiliate the opposition lone wolf style. Rank needs to be based on the entire service performance of the individual..otherwise half the rank someone obtains is not by themselves but with the help of others,.....which logically dictates that you are not as good as the rank number you have. Think about it for a second.... You are in a lobby with someone who has played every day since Halo 4 released. the only type of game-type the player hasn't played at all is Team slayer. This person is not good at killing people but is good at driving, capturing, defense etc.... Should this dead weight of a player be able to join a slayer objective game-type if he cannot kill even 4 people during the match? I can see it already starting before it is even released....people who claim to be such true skill players and hardcore MLG types don't want a real measure of skill based on individual performance...because they have no true skill. They have to rely on a team of players to advance. Real life and sports is not like gaming at all. In real life you have set teams or teams selected on individual performance. No team takes a pitcher at spring training who has no strike outs and gives up hit after hit....so why would a MM lobby want or let that player play even if his rank is equal? Halo does not have set teams that always play against each other, it constantly evolves and changes per match, so you cannot compare the two. That all being said, if someone truly wants to brag about being the best, he would any day of the week, place his individual skill achievements against others....not just his piddly "Oh but I wont 75 out of 80 matches"...cause the truth is YOU DIDN'T WIN ****! Your team did. "No I in Team" ring any bells? At the end of the day when all is said and done, everything you do in-game should reflect your rank or skill number, not just some or certain aspects of the game. Reach did a great job showcasing the various ways in which they could monitor and to what depth your actions could be recorded and displayed. If you took Reach's depth in terms of player tracking, and added point equations into it, you would have a very broad and wide range of skill assessments that would really pair you up against players with your actual skill set. You can try to argue that, but is logical in design.

No you don't....but you do however make the All-Star game by personal stats compared to others in your particular position, and whomever is better gets in. That being said, wins vs losses alone is a very sad basis for level. It is far too easy to boost up in level if you play with 3 friends whom are very good or create a party for you to game with. You cannot always control whom is on your team. Again, if my team does poor in CTF, but I excel in it and I capture 3 flags but lose the match....I go down in rank even when I played better than individuals on the opposite team. Again, how is that fair and translate to individual rank....please explain that one. Everyone talks about rank and how one persons rank means they are great...well if it is based on a team perspective, then an individual rank means jack ****.....cause it depends on the entire team....not individuals. SO how does Win/Loss in team objectives counting towards your rank even make sense? I don't like how you just singled out the casual gamer by saying basically we don't do "REAL" battles. I personally could tweak the AI system to a spank you SixWaysToSunday (see what i did there...a shoutout) and you'd be lucky to get 3 kills during the match. DOn't try to tell me playing against waves of AI is not "REAL", or lacks "skill". Get off youir high ******* horse with that ****** lord. That aside, I agree with your view on individual assessments affecting the rank. If all the people who are crying about wanting a true measure of skill really want it, they would support and endorse a standalone player assessment of all areas of their individual gameplay to calculate a rank...not just wins/losses. I said it before and I will say it again...when ever you go into battle against others albeit Rumbkle Pit or Team objectives, wouldn't you want to face people who have an exact matching of skill levels in all aspects of the game, or face someone whom may not have a mirrored skill level in particular objectives or gametypes? Personally if I play a match of Assault or CTF...I want to play against people who have the same exact or similar amount of individual stats in that gametype as I do....not someone who has the same number but can't defend/assault the flag for ****. Again, something like a selective choice for companions like the one I posted up would be a good way to do it. Select what your good at, and get put on a team needing said choice of skill. In the end, everyone is gonna complain about the ranking system anyway. everybody does it at some point in each game,...and no matter what it will happen with Halo 4. Mark my words...by week 4 of Halo 4 we will have about 20 to 25 hate threads about the H4 Rank System. I've been involved in modding and the Halo Community since the Xbox came out and Halo launched. I know this community well and have seen all varieties of community members.

Biggie Big Big Biggleworth! Woooot! Congrats bro...... welcome to the club! You are exactly the very definition of MoM. You'r activity and contributions to the community are invaluable and first class all the way! Congrats again.

The main problem with focusing on wins so much, is that not everyone will.contribute to the win. Say you have a well ranked player on your team and you are in a game of assault. The guy cant play for crap and gets killed every twonseconds and cant defend for ****. So by everyones reasoning....if his team won....he deserved the win points and to.rank up....versus people on the opposing team who played better than him and ranked down....simpky because they lost. How in any way or reasoning is that fair. Hell you couls have afk people in a team who hide and take a smoke.break....and simply because their team wins in the end...they get to rank up? Soundsblike a load of ****. Wins should get counted....but you should only get major.points for the win if youbactually contribute heavily via personalbstats for the match.

Nope. As much fun as it would be to be able to claim it as my own......this ass clown was a work all day today...lmao. Informative but I have yet to.glance through it to give it my stamp of approval.