Forums / Community / Matchmaking Feedback & Discussion

[Locked] Matchmaking Feedback Update – June 12

OP ZaedynFel

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
eLantern wrote:
which means Halo 5: Guardians' life-cycle has quite a ways to go yet; in fact, it's not even quite half-way if late 2019 is the actual release date for Halo 6.
That's pretty scary. Halfway done and it already feels like it's burned out and stale imo. The game definitely needs at least one more big update before H6 because these new games coming out certainly aren't going to help things.
ZaedynFel wrote:
Smaller update this week since it’s been quiet with E3.
I thought I’d address a question we see often when we talk about features that it we agree are good, but I say we won’t see in Halo 5.
We hear things like:
  • Why can’t we get that in H5?
  • How hard can that be?
For some features, it can be incredibly hard. I’ll try and explain why.
The features I call out as not ones we’ll see in Halo 5 are usually ones we are building on new technology that isn’t compatible with Halo 5. The main reason we are changing the tech is so we can make future changes like this much faster and easier.
To make those changes without that new tech, we would have to rip a bunch of people away from making progress towards the next game to change tech that we won’t be using in the future. That type of request will generally get lower priority than features that can be used both now and in the future as well.
So when I say we won’t be seeing something in Halo 5, it’s usually because there’s no way to put it into Halo 5 in a way that will carry forward. Instead, we’ll put it directly into the next game.
When I talk about features that we CAN do now, it’s features that are built on tech that we CAN carry forward into the next Halo, or new tech that is compatible with Halo 5 and easy to carry forward. In those cases, I try hard to get those improvements in.
Everything is a tradeoff. Do we add this feature to H5? Or to the next game and finish the next game sooner? Both are super important to us, so we prioritize based on what makes the most sense going forward.
Can i ask something that is a little off topic?
What does it happen to gameplay/players if one player ping the server around 20/30ms and another player ping the server around 300/500 ms? (real example: Playing HCS on focused from Italy on EU NL server against players from all around the world like south africa, mexico, south america, etc..)
How does the game manage this kind of situation?
Who are the players that take advantage of this situation? the 30ms player, the 300ms player or none?
Is there any kind of "added latency" that compensates the difference in latency between players?
This makes a ton of sense. As much as I love Halo 5, it's best that main development goes towards Halo 6 - don't want to tear resources away when needed.
Collet005 wrote:
Can i ask something that is a little off topic?
What does it happen to gameplay/players if one player ping the server around 20/30ms and another player ping the server around 300/500 ms? (real example: Playing HCS on focused from Italy on EU NL server against players from all around the world like south africa, mexico, south america, etc..)
How does the game manage this kind of situation?
Who are the players that take advantage of this situation? the 30ms player, the 300ms player or none?
Is there any kind of "added latency" that compensates the difference in latency between players?
I don't know much about how Halo handles this, but I know we don't add any artificial latency to the players with better ping.

I have in the past implemented the code for lag compensation in other titles, and in those cases, even though it made it so the 300ms player could hit a 30ms player more easily than before, the 30ms player would still always win a 1-1 matchup.
Scar04c wrote:
This makes a ton of sense. As much as I love Halo 5, it's best that main development goes towards Halo 6 - don't want to tear resources away when needed.
...or maybe consider bulking up the work force temporarily via short-term contracted programmers or asking Microsoft for assistance by contracting out another 1st party developer in order to address both games as necessary? Also, if the budgetary cost to do so is a real concern for 343i then I'm sure the upper brass of management (including Microsoft Studios who's the producer) ought to be capable of handling a temporary pay reduction (5%, 10%, 15%, or 20%) as a helpful compensation gesture toward expanding the pay roll for a period of time -- until the matter or matters get resolved.

I only mention this because in the past with the economic recession and stagnation our country was/is in the private sector company I work for enacted a similar plan to help keep most full time employees employed at the company during the especially rough times. As part of the plan they focused on leaning out the full time employees while prioritizing the hiring of some temporary part-time or contracted workers where and when it made sense. That decision allowed the company to become more financially flexible and efficient per the work load since they didn't need to pay the somewhat fewer retained full time workers overtime when production temporarily spiked or ramp'd up nor did they need to put that potential time burden onto their schedules too. Also, by having the high wage earners (upper brass) absorb a chuck of the company's financial impacts via a temporary pay wage reduction it took a potential cost burden away from the part of the company's pay roll that more than likely couldn't afford to absorb a negative financial impact as well as away from the product cost itself. Anyways, my point is that there are often options a company can make available in order to deal with matters such as this without compromising either their current or future products; plus, harm their public image or persona as a company that's devoted to their product(s) and customer base -- which I believe 343i to be.
I for one have enjoy Halo 5 for the most part, but I firmly believe that 343I and Microsoft should be 100% focusing on Halo 6 now. Sure, it's be nice for one final update for Halo 5 but (and this is speaking from a business point of view) what would be the point. It wouldn't bring in more fans or sell more games or anything. Halo 5 had a decent run but it's time to focus on Halo 6.

Microsoft/343I need all the time they can get for Halo 6 because it needs to be AMAZING!! System seller type amazing!! Let's be honest here, Halo 6 will be the first big game (no offense to Forza) for people to consider buying an Xbox One X system. I'm guessing Halo 6 will be coming next sept-nov sometime, if not and it's fine if it's not but then Microsoft​ better have some new killer IP announcements and/or some 100% exclusive (none of this time game exclusive bullcrap that does nothing!) third party games for next year's E3 or they just wasted a crap load of money making X1. I know myself and many others have ZERO interest currently to get a 1X (heck even an Xbox for a lot of people with there poor games line up coming out over the next 12 months. Yes some games look neat but nothing is a OMG I NEED THAT!! Or System seller that's coming. I love Ori for example but it isn't a system seller) but Halo 6 might convince me, and others to buy an X1.

Microsoft needs games.... beautiful looking, great sounding, story driven, fun games!!! Great games sell systems and Microsoft needs some badly! I hate to say this, but I think there is more pressure now on 343I then ever before to deliver on Halo 6.

So if I were 343I/Microsoft I would dump all my time, money and effort into Halo 6 to make sure it is mind blowing and MORE at LAUNCH! That's important too and don't think it isn't.
Can't connect to Lobby tonight tried everything unable to connect to the Halo 5 Guardians Lobby service no explanation
On the subject of dev focus - aye 343 need to focus on H6 to make it super duper awesome, and it goes without saying that I very much appreciate the efforts being made to improve matchmaking, fix aiming, introduce competitive settings etc but, as it seems we are going to be playing H5 for a good long while to come I think it's hugely important to maintain a small team focused on H5 content, and I'm not talking about relying on the awesome forge community, I'm talking about MS spending some money on a small crew to give us another map pack of dev made maps/content. Say drop it around Novemeber 7th along with a 4K patch, perhaps even make it Flood related given the upcoming Halo Wars DLC...
DawGFyTR wrote:
Can't connect to Lobby tonight tried everything unable to connect to the Halo 5 Guardians Lobby service no explanation
Please report issues like these n the support forums thanks, there is a pinned thread that you can use
I havent given power weapon indicators much thought since the beta, but now that we have hcs, would it be too much to ask for their removal? I miss actually having to time power weapons. That dynamic has been missing for much too long
I for one have enjoy Halo 5 for the most part, but I firmly believe that 343I and Microsoft should be 100% focusing on Halo 6 now.
100% focus on Halo 6? As in 0% toward anything else? I hope you've simply minced your words here a bit because let's be clear you can't really mean 100% focus on Halo 6 thus leaving zero follow-on support for pretty much all their other video game products.
Quote:
Sure, it'd be nice for one final update for Halo 5 but (and this is speaking from a business point of view) what would be the point. It wouldn't bring in more fans or sell more games or anything. Halo 5 had a decent run but it's time to focus on Halo 6.
The points from a business perspective:
  • Ensure their current products are able to maintain as much user base population as possible. The population may not necessarily grow as a title ages and new products become available to consumers within the marketplace, but they should strive to stabilize a healthy enough population level of continuously returning fans for the title to successfully achieve an enjoyably long primary life-cycle of play. Most importantly they don't want to create further reason for would-be returning players to move on from the product such as drastically reducing or fully dropping the support while it's still within its' primary life-cycle even if it is the second half of that life-cycle.
  • Reduce the harm that their public image or persona may take by ending or significantly dropping support of their current or past products that can be played on the current generation console. I mean hell, what message is being sent to their user base if they're not willing to support a title that's still within its primary life-cycle? Personally, that type of message is what discusses me regarding many other developers. It's also been one of the primary reasons why I've been such a strong Halo supporter and fan from the early days. Bungie's on-going online support for Halo 2 and Halo 3 was certainly strong throughout the primary life-cycle of those two titles. Halo: Reach also got pretty solid support from Bungie initially (and eventually from 343i) during its' primary life-cycle despite the game's criticisms and negative population hit. Halo 4 also got pretty impressive support by 343i throughout its primary life-cycle regardless to its less than stellar popularity; in fact, it was that on-going support in light of the struggles that truly endeared me toward investing into future 343i products via pre-order (aka loyal trust) and I rarely do that for any game developer any more.
  • Actually demonstrate to the public and their user base that they're a company that's truly devoted to their product(s) and their customer base. One particular method to do this is by providing on-going support for their titles (I'd argue it's the most important method); especially the current ones (aka primary life-cycle), as it demonstrates to those who enjoy their product and the Halo franchise that they care. Another method is to listen to what the fans of their product and the franchise enjoy and try to develop aspects of that joy into their future products. To me, these actions provide reason to be a supportive fan of them (as a company) and their products even if I don't have 100% interest in whatever the product is or fully agree with all of their decisions involved with said product because at least I'll know that they're going to fully back it as well as their user base. Where would my interest be with Halo 6 and my loyalty to 343i's future titles if I knew that they'd likely drop their support after a year into its' life-cycle; especially, if it wasn't as successful as hoped? The Halo FPS franchise titles tend to run on lengthy life-cycles; I mean, it's not as if they're setup to be produced fairly regularly from a different developer every year like Call of Duty is. Btw, thank God the franchise isn't produced that way or I'd probably get sick of it similar to how I got sick of Call of Duty. As you mentioned in comments I didn't quote, Halo needs to be a system seller for Microsoft and one aspect of that is per the on-going support the titles receive because it builds consumer trust for the franchise's brand.
Quote:
So if I were 343I/Microsoft I would dump all my time, money and effort into Halo 6 to make sure it is mind blowing and MORE at LAUNCH! That's important too and don't think it isn't.
Making sure Halo 6 is awesome and a more finished product at release is vital. I 100% agree with that, but I'm okay with them extending the release date further out than next year (your prediction) if that's necessary or find other means as a company to ramp up its production and development. In the mean time do what's necessary to keep the current title engaging and fun to play; again, perhaps look for other methods to ramp up the production and development of Halo 6 without significantly impacting the support that should be provided to the existing titles (on the current generation console) in a negative manner.
MaNemUmar wrote:
I havent given power weapon indicators much thought since the beta, but now that we have hcs, would it be too much to ask for their removal? I miss actually having to time power weapons. That dynamic has been missing for much too long
Yeah, i'll plus 1 this. Also for HCS remove nade hit markers.
MaNemUmar wrote:
I havent given power weapon indicators much thought since the beta, but now that we have hcs, would it be too much to ask for their removal? I miss actually having to time power weapons. That dynamic has been missing for much too long
I disagree - I feel the opposite! I love the power weapon timers visible in H5.

I played a lot of Halo CE back in the day, when everyone had to time the weapons themselves, because they were on a static timer like H5 but it wasn't visible in-game. Everyone good would run a timer of some sort, either a talking timer app, or a stopwatch... it was so annoying to have to setup a separate timer, but you had to do it. It didn't change the game, cause everyone did it, but it made things more annoying for everyone.

The on-screen timer in H5 just removes that annoyance. You still need to set up intelligently for the power weapons. And if you want to time things, you've got the powerups on hidden timers already!
MaNemUmar wrote:
I havent given power weapon indicators much thought since the beta, but now that we have hcs, would it be too much to ask for their removal? I miss actually having to time power weapons. That dynamic has been missing for much too long
It doesn't really make that much of a difference. Once people memorize power weapon respawn times, much like people have memorized Camo/Overshield respawn times, you'll still be doing the same things, whether you can see the timer in-game or not. You'll be setting up for said power weapon
eLantern wrote:
Aski wrote:
...h5 is done.
I disagree. Halo 5: Guardians is still easily my go-to video game of choice and I'm sure that's the case for a decent amount of other Halo fans too. I've looked forward to all the improvements that have been brought to it and all the future minor updates/improvements that'll continue to be brought to it as its primary life-cycle plays out. I hope that there will be at least one, if not more, massively big (headlined) content drop(s) that includes several developer created game-types/modes that I think ought to be implemented into the game plus perhaps a few new maps as well as customization and REQ items too. In all likelihood Halo 6 won't be available until late 2019 which means Halo 5: Guardians' primary life-cycle has quite a ways to go yet; in fact, it's not even quite half-way if late 2019 is indeed the actual release date for Halo 6. Btw, I definitely don't want Halo 6 rushed into its release -- they can wait till 2020 as far as I'm concerned and a big part of that is because Halo 5 is a quality product that I'll continue to enjoy spending time with while I mix my time with other new market place titles and MCC too. Halo 6 needs to feel very complete and polished when released, so take as much time as needed.

Nevertheless, as a good business decision I want to see 343i actively supporting their current FPS title all the way up to the release of their next major FPS title with some sense of priority, but I do understand that the company's resources will get directed accordingly as the new title approaches its release date (less for the current title and more towards the newer title); however, that should not equate to the current FPS title getting left for dead. Btw, I do not mean to indicate or insinuate that that's what's occurred or is occurring or will occur with Halo 5; I'm only expressing a strong opinion I have on a topic with which I carry some concern about. Also, I'd hope that 343i has a team that's focused on providing continued long-term support toward their past titles on the current console such as Halo Wars DE, Halo: Reach (backwards compatible), Halo: Spartan Assault, MCC, Halo 5, and eventually Halo Wars 2 after Halo 6 releases as I believe it to be critically important to their company branding and as exclusive Xbox titles that ought to have some influence on the console's sales numbers.
Hey I mean it's pretty much the only game I play, even with it's flaws. I do have the old Halo fan bias, even if it is a sucky Halo game I'll still probably play it...
Guardians was good, although the storyline sucked. I am a fan of storyline as well as multiplayer, I wish they could've nailed campaign as they did multiplayer. Like I said multiplayer still has flaws, but it's still pretty freakin' fun.
Playlist like Castle Wars would be cool to try out ranked every so often. You would not believe how fun those kinds of things get when played at the highest level. Halo 3 had ranked grifball and living dead a few times. Getting a high rank vs the community of players that actually play grifball is sooo hard to do. I imagine something like castle wars at a high level would feature crazy team pushes, coordinated sticky grenades, and creative flag routes. Not to mention the individual sword battles would be even more skillful.

Is it possible to try putting Castle Wars in as a limited of time ranked playlist to see how it goes? I know it'd be soo intense. It gets boring dropping numbers on people in social castle wars because they have zero idea on how to use any form of strategy.
Thank you, and happy father's day!
Any word on when the next season starts??
Is it possible to try putting Castle Wars in as a limited of time ranked playlist to see how it goes? I know it'd be soo intense. It gets boring dropping numbers on people in social castle wars because they have zero idea on how to use any form of strategy.
Another 16 player playlist that gets ranked while BTB doesn't? Screw that. You'd still have people using zero strategy in ranked as well, btw.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2