Just no. It hurts my head just imagining a world where what you say is true. Halo 2 host is way more noticeable. I out BR the host in H3 all the time. In Halo 2, if i see host 1v1, i disengage because if they are med or far- they win br figt easy. If they are close, they win every melee or BxB or BxR. ANd that crap above about "only exact same time mellee host wins", news flash- most players will punch at the same time at close range after a br fight. Host is always 100 ms ahead due to ping.... have you ever played on a tv with a 30 or 40 ms response rate? now double or triple that and that is how delayed your punches are.Hexor wrote:Well if the hit detection is terrible, that applies to the sniper. So I already gave you the link. :)MLG xSasquatch wrote:COuld you link me to where Walshy said H3 sniper was useless? Keep busy with that :)Hexor wrote:Did you actually just say host advantage was stronger on a client-side hit detection game than on a server-side hit detection game? LOL. Halo 3 is terrible to play online. The hit detection is awful and about as good as GOW 1 hit-detection. Having host on Halo 3 makes me twice as good because my shots actually hit my opponents. I'll average a 1.5 K/D off-host but I've yet to have under a 3.0 K/D game while host on Halo 3. I don't think Walshy wasn't good either.MLG xSasquatch wrote:Halo 3 wasn't nearly as bad online as Halo 2 was (I played both quite a bit). Host advantage was much stronger in Halo 2 as well. I agree that the bullet refunding, blood shots, etc was very frustrating.Have you watched snipedown or any pro play online with a sniper? Hardly useless. Hit detection was easily good enough to play, but was poor enough that if the host was bad, then shots were so hard to hit. People that say the comments you did about either are parroting other people that hate the game, or never was good enough or played enough to experience competitive halo (MLG Playlist).Cowards Block wrote:no, halo 2 did not release in 2004 the way it is on MCC. when halo 2 originally released on xbox, it would take like 5 melees to kill someone, grenades were much weaker, and the BR was as bad as halo 3's. MCC's version is obviously Halo 2 Vista, complete with its notoriously awful hit detection. as for halo 3, it always sucked online. sluggish, poor hit detection, useless sniper.Idiolectic wrote:See, you'd think I'd pull host all day, ya'know with Gigabit internet being a thing... But no, I rarely pull host. It's upsetting when it's P2P, and people are lagging all about because the host is streaming Netflix, Youtube, Twitch, and a Twitter feed on seven different tablets. Meh, at least I get on dedi's consistently.
These games released exactly how they are now, when they released then. Halo 3 was a laggy pile, Halo 2 was a laggy pile, Halo CE was a laggy pile, Halo 4 was a laggy pile. They always had lag, especially refunding, there's nothing to do about it, this is what people wanted, but that's what rose colored glasses do to you. Everyone remembers these games working perfectly, but some of my fondest memories in Halo 2 was watching people get pissed at the lag-- it was funny.
In all reality however, the games do need work on their netcoding. There's no excuse for how it is, even if this is how it originally was. People expected perfect gameplay, but sorry to break it to you, dedicated servers aren't a magical box that makes it so there's no issues. They need to take the time to completely gut the netcode, and rewrite it-- And that's going to take a considerable amount of time, especially when taking into account that there's currently five separate games, all running on different engines, all working on separate servers, whilst using different code. It's hard, tedious work, that needs to be done.
ANd you mustnt have played H2 online much then. I woudl take host in H2 over host in H3 anyday of the week. H2 host was the biggest advantage of any halo game... ever. Reasons include an automatic 4 shot BR cros map, winning every BxB and BxR fight, and the melee system is set up so that the host always wins. Go try team swords or a boxing game against the host... you will never win. Now... none of the above is true for Halo 3, and I played through most of my professional Halo 3 career offhost online. Was it frustrating wen the host was way over on the west coast? Yes. But was it worst than Halo 2? not at all.
I've played a ton of Halo 2 games online and know how the system works very well.
Halo 2 host wins if both players melee at the exact same time. But that happens so rarely it's almost a nonfactor. We're talking about a third of a blink in time. If you're always meleeing the host at the same time within 100 ms, you deserve to lose. Unless you're bad at Halo, this might impact maybe 1 kill a game. In Halo 3, if it's even remotely close, you just trade kills. This isn't a better solution because you end up trading a lot more often than you should have. The shooting advantage with host in Halo 3 is far more significant than it is in Halo 2. In Halo 2 it's an ever so slight improvement, a lot of times not even noticeable unless at extremely far distances. In Halo 3, at any distance besides close range, it's night and day.
Hit Detection is unacceptable for competitive play
OP THE qrunt