Jump to content
valaea

Rank All Halo Multiplayer Experiences on 1-10 Scale

Recommended Posts

Wait, when was this tourney? Was it streamed? Any footage on YouTube?

 

.... Why does your profile picture look like a drunk Gandhi?

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Hm? No it isn't. Who gave you that idea?

 

See? They're arbitrary rankings of 1 through 10 based on opinion.

 

Halo CE being a 5/10 for online play means that it's not bad, but not good either. It's wholesomely average.

Ranking all of the Halo's in the same post is explicitly comparing them. Enough of the trolling.

 

 

I can respect Rick's opinion because he clearly says yeah getting a LAN together is tough for me but the game itself is awesome and a 9/10 on MCC.

 

If you know you're gonna get neg bombed just explain yourself and why you are saying something controversial. Not what Swan did, he called everyone sheep because they disagreed with him and called him out for not considering halo PC or mcc.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Ranking all of the Halo's in the same post is explicitly comparing them. Enough of the trolling.

 

 

I can respect Rick's opinion because he clearly says yeah getting a LAN together is tough for me but the game itself is awesome and a 9/10 on MCC.

 

If you know you're gonna get neg bombed just explain yourself and why you are saying something controversial. Not what Swan did, he called everyone sheep because they disagreed with him and called him out for not considering halo PC or mcc.

I explicitly gave CE an 8/10. I am neither trolling nor is my opinion controversial.

 

That aside, the 1 through 10 system isn't used to compare the games. That makes absolutely no sense. If I liked Halo 4 the least and CE the most, I would have to make H4 and 1 and CE a 10 and stuff the other games in between. But as you can see, there are plenty of posts with neither 1s or 10s.

 

A direct comparison system would use <> marks, ala CE > Reach > H3 or Reach < H4 < H2.

Share this post


Link to post

I didnt play h2 online, just on the couch with my friends. CE was way before my time.

 

CE: N/a

2: N/a

3: 8

Reach vanilla: 2

Nbns: 5

4: 6

MCC: completely broken, N/A

5:8

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

lol

 

You're rating a game based on a port (an incredibly shitty one), where the original wasn't even designed to be played online. 

 

Are you going to rate Goldeneye a 2/10 for not using a dual-analog system, despite the fact that it was an N64 game?

 

You're mad that I gave CE an 8/10?

 

If I were going to rate CE, I'd use the LAN score, not the online score.

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

You're mad that I gave CE an 8/10?

 

"I'd easily give Goldeneye an 8/10 if it had dual analog controls." 

 

The point is, why would you even mention that in the first place?

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

lol

 

You're rating a game based on a port (an incredibly shitty one), where the original wasn't even designed to be played online. 

 

Are you going to rate Goldeneye a 2/10 for not using a dual-analog system, despite the fact that it was an N64 game?

 

 

Off topic:

 

You can select controller input 2.3 in Goldeneye, which uses two n64 controllers to control 1 player. Hold controller 1 in your left hand and use the analog stick to control all character movements. Use controller 2 in your right hand and have another analog stick that controls the entire aiming system. Only thing I think is awkward is controller 1's Z should fire where controller 2's pulls up the crosshair. I learned this last year after going back and playing it. It feels oddly amazing.

 

Also, there is a speed run out there that uses two players and this control scheme. One of them does all the aiming and one does all the moving.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

I explicitly gave CE an 8/10. I am neither trolling nor is my opinion controversial.

 

That aside, the 1 through 10 system isn't used to compare the games. That makes absolutely no sense. If I liked Halo 4 the least and CE the most, I would have to make H4 and 1 and CE a 10 and stuff the other games in between. But as you can see, there are plenty of posts with neither 1s or 10s.

 

A direct comparison system would use <> marks, ala CE > Reach > H3 or Reach < H4 < H2.

I was talking about Swan, whom you were defending.

 

And no you wouldn't have to do ratings like that at all. There are only 6 halo games so you can start at 4/10, or use decimals, or give two games the same rating and say they are approximately equally good. Honestly, can you just tell me if you're trolling because this is getting embarrassing. You're saying you cannot compare things in a rating/10 system. The OP actually averaged out the ratings so you could see which ones people liked the most. This is called a COMPARISON.

Share this post


Link to post

"I'd easily give Goldeneye an 8/10 if it had dual analog controls." 

 

The point is, why would you even mention that in the first place?

Because I'm emphasizing how bad CE's online netcode is. OG CE wasn't built for online play, but Halo PC clearly was. In fact, it's one of the few Halos, if not the only one with a server browser. My CE experience was determined by my LAN experiences because it's my best experience with the game. That's why I gave it such a high score. But if CE plays so poorly online that you have to LAN to get a good experience, then it's definitely worth mentioning.

 

I'm one of the relatively few lucky people who had consistent access to 16-player CE LANs years before MCC's release. I know how the game feels when everything works. But I'm not expecting perfection. All I'm looking for is a netcode that isn't terrible. MCC CE is playable, but the netcode is still bad. I'm being extremely generous by splitting my rating into three parts and choosing the best one. If MCC CE was the only CE I ever played, I would've given the game a 6/10.

 

That said, a lot of people seem to be misunderstanding the point of this thread. You're supposed to be rating a game based on your "multiplayer experience", not necessarily how good or bad you think it is. Halo 3 may not be the most competitive Halo, but I'd give it a 10/10 because of all the fun I had playing it.

Share this post


Link to post

I was talking about Swan, whom you were defending.

 

And no you wouldn't have to do ratings like that at all. There are only 6 halo games so you can start at 4/10, or use decimals, or give two games the same rating and say they are approximately equally good. Honestly, can you just tell me if you're trolling because this is getting embarrassing. You're saying you cannot compare things in a rating/10 system. The OP actually averaged out the ratings so you could see which ones people liked the most. This is called a COMPARISON.

 

This is what makes no sense.

 

The whole point of this topic is comparing Haloes to each other.

 

If you give Halo 1 a 5/10 based on online play in MCC then the other games all have to be below it then.

 

Halo 4 doesn't have great netcode. It has high bullet magnetism and hitscan weapons. Compared to CE which has projectile weapons. 343i did temporarily make CE hitscan with high bullet magnetism and the consistency was very good, but too easy. It's not perfect right now but I'd rather have a little inconsistency instead of getting jump 3'd by noobs.

 
You're saying that if I give Halo CE a 5/10 based on online play, then I have to rate every other game lower than it.
 
My experiences online with H3 and HR were much better than MCC CE's. Why should I forcibly lower my score because of that?

Share this post


Link to post

That said, a lot of people seem to be misunderstanding the point of this thread. You're supposed to be rating a game based on your "multiplayer experience", not necessarily how good or bad you think it is. Halo 3 may not be the most competitive Halo, but I'd give it a 10/10 because of all the fun I had playing it.

A dog shit on my head the first time I played halo 2. -10/10.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

This is what makes no sense.

 

 

You're saying that if I give Halo CE a 5/10 based on online play, then I have to rate every other game lower than it.

 

My experiences online with H3 and HR were much better than MCC CE's. Why should I forcibly lower my score because of that?

You must have had the blessing from Jesus himself if Halo 3 played that well online for you. But I will concede this point because I have no idea how good your connection was.

Share this post


Link to post

A dog shit on my head the first time I played halo 2. -10/10.

Yeah, and it's a valid opinion. Imagine someone playing a game with a ton of hackers (aka every COD before the latest release). If the hacking gets so bad that it makes him quit, his experience is gonna be terrible regardless of how good the game might've been.

 

You must have had the blessing from Jesus himself if Halo 3 played that well online for you. But I will concede this point because I have no idea how good your connection was.

Yes, I had a good connection that pulled host a lot. Realistically it would've been a 6/10 or 7/10 for matchmaking, but customs and Forge made up the difference.

Share this post


Link to post

Ok this thread is starting to get a little ugly.

 

There are multiple factors that can go into the rating. I expect anyone who understands competitive 2v2 to rate CE higher than someone who had played more BTB maps and other random game modes. I expect people who LAN'd a bunch of CE to rate it higher than someone getting into the MCC version which is complete shit.

 

I can imagine people who missed out on the LAN experience at launch have no idea why we rate the multiplayer as highly as we do. If these people went back and played Goldeneye today, they'd hate it.

 

You also have to remember what each title had brought to the series besides game mechanics. Matchmaking in Halo 2 was not only the first in the series, but completely revolutionary compared to other XBL games at that time. Halo 3 had some amazing match making as well, but also featured forge maps and a great file share system.

 

I think rating CE low is fine if you missed out on its golden era or didn't invest time into the amazing depth it had. Some sort of insight as to why it's rated lower than other games that arguably have poor mechanics should prevent the negs.

 

I'm glad you clarified Cookie that your opinion is based off PC, which is really considered an awful port with a terrible netcode. I'm not surprised it's rated low. The fact that the game was never designed to be played in an online environment doesn't really matter to me. Maybe I'm ignorant to the process, but after seeing how amazing the Perfect Dark remake on XBLA was, I can't cut gearbox or 343 any slack. Their netcode was amazing, their remake was amazing and the added options are really cool. I think it's entirely possible to have a good netcode on CE, not easy but it should be possible.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Off topic:

 

You can select controller input 2.3 in Goldeneye, which uses two n64 controllers to control 1 player. Hold controller 1 in your left hand and use the analog stick to control all character movements. Use controller 2 in your right hand and have another analog stick that controls the entire aiming system. Only thing I think is awkward is controller 1's Z should fire where controller 2's pulls up the crosshair. I learned this last year after going back and playing it. It feels oddly amazing.

 

Also, there is a speed run out there that uses two players and this control scheme. One of them does all the aiming and one does all the moving.

It's really interesting.  Not sure if this is the exact run you're talking about, but they give a little introduction to how it works.  

 

I don't know how to embed videos.  

 

https://youtu.be/hWDRtyq3Yhg?t=420

Share this post


Link to post

Hi all - my idea in creating the thread was that the rating would be a balance between personal/nostalgia factors and competitive/quality factors.  This is why I said "multiplayer experience", trying to make it a general term.  For those who care strongly about competitive merit, that will be the main factor in determining their score.  But having fun matters too; I'd say that Brood War is very competitive but I don't have much fun playing it, so it's actually important, imo; pure competitiveness maybe shouldn't be the only criterion.

 

For me, my rating for Reach v7 is a bit inflated because I played a shit-ton of that game on LAN with my friends and made a bunch of forge maps ... but I can't still can't rate it too highly because of problems with the game.  

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

IMO the maps on Halo CE were mostly not thought out, the movement was awkward and fidgety and the pistol was too OP.

You are objectivley incorrect on all of these things- that's a fact, not an opinion.

 

You can say something along the lines of, "H1 wasn't fun for me," and that's okay. The strength of the pistol and map design are two large factors for CE objectivley having more depth and a steeper learning curve than any other Halo game.

 

Again, this is fact, not opinion.

  • Upvote (+1) 5
  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Because I'm emphasizing how bad CE's online netcode is. OG CE wasn't built for online play, but Halo PC clearly was. In fact, it's one of the few Halos, if not the only one with a server browser. My CE experience was determined by my LAN experiences because it's my best experience with the game. That's why I gave it such a high score. But if CE plays so poorly online that you have to LAN to get a good experience, then it's definitely worth mentioning.

You are still rating the game based on a port - a port that was designed for 56k connections - and made very, very little effort to distinguish between OG CE and the PC version (and the MCC version, apparently). 

 

Halo 1 was not designed to have online multiplayer. Ranking it with online multiplayer in mind is asinine. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Read that.

 

I love CE. It's a great game fundamentally, hence why I gave it an 8/10. But there are some glaring issues such as slidey movement, poor jumping, and blatant spawn problems in BTB, most of which are refinement issues that would bump it up to a 10/10 if fixed. If I were going to rate CE, I'd use the LAN score, not the online score.

 

Regarding online, I'm not looking for perfection, I'm simply looking for something decent. MCC CE is a roulette if you're playing off-host, and while it's certainly better than Halo PC was, the netcode is pretty bad. In comparison, I still hop onto UT every once in a while and it plays wonderfully online.

I read your post and I understand that your perspective on playing Halo 1 online is tainted by playing Halo PC. The whole point of my post was to give you a different perspective from someone that has a little bit more of a positive experience with playing Halo 1 online. My question to you is would your perspective on playing Halo 1 online change if you were to play OG Halo 1 via Xlink Kai or if you were to play Halo PC on stunt_man's servers?

 

I didn't have an issue with your overall ranking of Halo 1 because I understand that nothing in this world can be 100% perfect and Halo 1 has flaws just like every other video game. My issue was with you completely dismissing Halo 1's online play solely due to the fact that you had a bad experience with playing Halo PC. I understand that Halo PC is a bad port and has a ton of bugs but I'm sure that there were other alternative ways at that time that would of allowed you to play Halo 1 online(referring to XBC and Xlink Kai).

 

I agree that the shot registration in MCC CE is far from perfect but I tolerate it anyways because it's the only way that I can conveniently get my Halo 1 fix, I rather play MCC CE over any other Halo game that's on the Xbox One. I would also play OG Halo 1 via Xlink Kai and play Halo PC on stunt_man's servers but I need to get a new PC before I can do that.

 

The whole point of this thread is to get people's opinions, I find matchmaking a big deal for a good multiplayer experience, saying it's illogical to not like a game because of its lack of features is irrational. IMO the maps on Halo CE were mostly not thought out, the movement was awkward and fidgety and the pistol was too OP. I'm allowed to have that opinion, sure if the game had a proper matchmaking system it would be bumped up above Halo 4 on my list however I had a better and prolonged experience on Halo 4 due to the matchmaking.

I didn't have an issue with your first post that had your rankings of the Halo games because that was your subjective opinion. My issue with you arised when you decided to state your subjective opinion as an objective fact in your second post. I understand that Halo CE isn't perfect and it has flaws just like every other game but I feel like some of your criticisms of Halo CE's multiplayer are just common misconceptions that stem from your lack of perspective. The only legitimate/valid criticisms of Halo CE's multiplayer that I felt like you brought up was awkward movement(jump delay, 180 glitch, and crouch grenade glitch) and Halo CE's lack of pillars(referring to online play, ranking system, lack of customization, forge, and theater). 

 

One of your complaints of H1's multiplayer is that the pistol is too OP but is that statement really true? The pistol has a fast TTK but doesn't the difficulty to achieve the minimum TTK balance out the power of the pistol? Do you happen to understand the difference between minimum TTK and average TTK? http://teambeyond.net/forum/topic/12361-why-kill-times-matter/

 

The benefit of Halo CE's pistol having a fast TTK is that it helps balance out the rest of the weapons in the sandbox because it empowers players off spawn to be able to defend themselves in various situations. The pistol having a fast minimum TTK empowers skilled individual players to be able to get kills on their own without having to rely on team-shooting. The pistol's fast TTK helps improve the pacing of the game. Even though the pistol in Halo 1 is the utility weapon(jack of all trades weapon) it doesn't necessarily mean that it's absolutely the best weapon to use in every situation. Every weapon in Halo 1's sandbox has a purpose except for the needler. 

 

You say that you feel like the maps in Halo CE weren't really thought out. Well can't the way you feel about Halo CE's maps be caused by your lack of perspective of how other FPS developers can design their maps? Halo CE maps were definitely designed differently from current modern Halo maps but is that necessarily a bad thing? Quake and UT maps were designed completely different from current modern day FPS maps but is that a bad thing? Just because you feel alienated when playing a map that is designed completely different from what you're used to doesn't necessarily mean that the map is bad it just means that you need to approach the map with a more open mind. I'm going to post some links to some youtube videos that I highly recommend for you to watch so you can get a different perspective on ways that FPS maps can be designed.

  • Upvote (+1) 8

Share this post


Link to post

You are objectivley incorrect on all of these things- that's a fact, not an opinion.

 

You can say something along the lines of, "H1 wasn't fun for me," and that's okay. The strength of the pistol and map design are two large factors for CE objectivley having more depth and a steeper learning curve than any other Halo game.

 

Again, this is fact, not opinion.

I disagree that these are facts. I think it's a fact that CE has the steepest learning curve yes, but his criticisms of maps, movement and the pistol's strength are firmly in the realm of subjective opinion. A case can be made that CE has bad movement with jump delay and stuff like that, and also that the pistol should be a 4sk. Maps are almost completely subjective though he is factually wrong if you take his statement literally that no thought was put into them since Hardy has talked about their design before.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

You are still rating the game based on a port - a port that was designed for 56k connections - and made very, very little effort to distinguish between OG CE and the PC version (and the MCC version, apparently). 

 

Halo 1 was not designed to have online multiplayer. Ranking it with online multiplayer in mind is asinine. 

Exactly what is so asinine about expecting the allegedly improved 2014 port of a game from 2003 to have improvements?

 

I gave MCC CE a 5/10 because it's an average experience. Netcode and lag issues contribute to that score. If we got dedicated servers and/or the netcode was fixed, it'd be an 8/10 experience just like CE LAN.

 

I'm not sure why you're so persistent about these ratings. Are you wondering why I gave CE an 8/10 overall? I made it very clear earlier that I docked two points because of gameplay issues. No matter how much you improve CE's netcode, it won't be a 10/10 in my eyes until those problems are fixed.

Share this post


Link to post

The whole point of this topic is comparing Haloes to each other.

 

If you give Halo 1 a 5/10 based on online play in MCC then the other games all have to be below it then.

Do they?

 

I love CE but I've had more fun in multiplayer in the other Halo titles (barring Reach). I'm not saying the rest of the series is more competitive, only that I had more fun playing the others.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.