Forums / Games / Halo: The Master Chief Collection (PC)

[Locked] IDEA TO SATISFY BOTH M+KB & CONTROLLER PLAYERS

OP Auraven2572

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
Alright, well, I felt like it wasn't worth backing my own idea after the general response I got from both here & Reddit, but I did want to add something else of note after dabbling in the recent Call of Duty: MW Open Beta.

The Beta was FULLY cross-platform. PlayStation, Xbox, and PC players were all able to matchmake with one another, and they came up with a simple but effective solution to the control method balancing debate!

In the pregame lobby, all players had their platform + control method indicated with an icon next to their name. It's worth mentioning that some console games now feature very very basic mouse & keyboard support, including CoD:MW, so there were actually some PlayStation & Xbox users sporting the mouse & keyboard indicator.
The matchmaking mixed platforms in almost every game but made a clear effort to match users by control method. I could tell that the game had a bias towards rounding up controller-users together by having parties with at least one mouse+keyboard user queue with other mouse-users & mixed parties.
To prevent abusing the system (like disconnecting your controller midway into a controller-dominated match), the game LOCKS you to your selected control method -- the menus will remain fully accessible, but gameplay will ONLY RESPOND to what you opted for in the settings before the match.

This allowed my friends and I (who, despite being all PC gamers, prefer controller) to have the choice of both a console-esque AND hardcore PC gaming experience from the PC platform.

To be fair -- CoD: MW is a new game on a single new game engine and is gunning for as many new features as possible (such as console mouse&keyboard support & crossplay, which - let's face it - is NOT an easy task for older, chunkier games like the classic Halos), but I feel like this system sets a standard for the OPTIMAL crossplay competitive multiplayer experience. It's a soft version of what I proposed above, but better & less strict. It's basically soft-segregation based on control method...but it doesn't actually split the community.

Since the way that I proposed this type idea was clearly not unanimously likeable, what about the way that CoD:MW did it? Can anyone disagree that such a system, crossplay or not, would benefit player's online experience, especially in Halo? The only ways that I could think to improve it to appease anyone fearing a split community would be to:
- Include an option for controller users to manually override the bias
- Install an automatic override that deactivates the bias if the player population in one or both of the player pools drops too low & is resulting in unreasonable queue times
A clean straight to the point solution is Input based matchmaking, even the reboot for MW is using this and is crossplay on all platforms, PC/XO/PS4.

If you're on pad, it'll match you with pad players, if you're on KB/M it will match you with KB/M. For when you and a friend are on different inputs itll send you into a mixed pool. Let people play on what they prefer, it's not rocket science.
Definitely laughing at myself for scrolling past your comment because I literally just posted about it and thought it was remarkably similar to what I proposed here and definitely felt like a fair & flexible approach to the crossplay system. The reason why I brought it up here is that even though MCC will likely not support crossplay at launch (probably never due to the technical nightmare it could pose), I feel that a system like this would be worth it & appreciated to allow the controller-oriented gameplay of Halo to survive & coexist with the mouse&keyboard player base even after Xbox as a home console has fallen out of relevance. Regardless of that, I completely agree that MW's system is on-point & the ideal at this time.
Skill-based matchmaking solves all of this. Separate on in Social, together in Ranked. If you don't want to be beaten by MKB users, then use MKB.
I can agree to this as a compromise, as while I think that Halo's competitive scene via controller is deserving of preservation, I would at the very least like to see the social playlists balanced in some way so people are paired with who they are most likely to have a balanced & fair game with.
I fear I'll be avoiding PC for PvP altogether. I don't want to have to do that, but I'm also looking for a casual experience where I just kick back in social slayer, have fun, and not worry about getting absolutely wrecked.
I feel for you and you echo the sentiment most of my friends interested in returning to the game are saying (save for having a trackball mouse, but that's no matter lol). I get that most people are saying to toughen up but I'm definitely with you in the sense that I typically just want to kick back to something fun. I typically avoid Overwatch for this very reason, as even in Quickplay & other casual modes, there is a heavy bias towards competitive play & playing to win. I feel Halo was popular because it served EVERYONE, the diehard pros & the after hours couch joes alike. I personally feel that having the same kick-back-and-play attitude will be difficult on PC even in social slayer because even "casual" & "social" playlists in PC games today are still generally tense as hell. Just saddens me that many people really don't care
Honestly I wouldn't be bothered if they just mixed both MKB and controller together without a filter. Controller players complain about MKB having greater precision and MKB players will complain about controller aim assist. Everyone has their johns and unless its top tier gameplay mixing both won't have that big effect on casual gameplay.
Wish I felt the same & I get you but the issue is that it's -pretty- safe to say that the greater precision & agility of mouse+keyboard gaming puts aim assist to absolute shame & will have some sort of an impact on the casual playlists.
VelixGV wrote:
I think people who play on PC should just stop using controllers for shooters. It's stupid.
Sure thing dude!
Zombie3153 wrote:
I'm not sure how suggesting you deal with your choice of input is a "bad mindset," but you'll notice I didn't say "get good" anywhere in my post. I don't care how you want to play. I do care about the ill-considered petitioning of 343 to further dilute matchmaking pools. MCC on xbone had over a dozen playlists last time I checked... divide that by another factor of 4 or 5 for regional considerations/ping matching and you already have some pretty small pools of players. Dividing that by another factor of 2 for input method is an awful idea.

My understanding is there's already some form of skill-based matchmaking going on under the hood. Skill-based matchmaking becomes worse and worse as the player pool becomes smaller and smaller. It also removes the need to do what you're asking. Who cares if you're getting matched against kbm or controller players if they're playing at a comparable level?

A great way to ensure that Halo *doesn't* get a "big win" is to decimate the quality of the matchmaker and inflate queue times by needlessly diluting the player pool
I'll eat that, you never said to get good so that's on me -- was a reactionary assumption since "handicapping myself" by using a controller felt dismissive of the point of my proposal.
Which is where I will explain that I understand a competent skill-rating system would _ideally_ solve the issue...but I gotta say, I don't agree and I have zero confidence it would work in that way for the lowest tiers of controller-users. It also doesn't solve for the fact that the players I'm referencing play on both...and lowest level controller-gameplay is still lightyears behind lowest-level PC-gameplay. Setting hard playlists would divide the playerbase but I would, then, reference Call of Duty Modern Warfare's approach which seamlessly parties players based on their control method & i'd argue is and will be successful by closing the gaps between the player bases while ensuring players are matched with others using a similar method of control. It's not a hard filter, so I'd like to know how that would hurt -- especially if overrides are implemented to ensure it is not active if it happens to affect queue times.
"Some people might be turned off from playing with mouse and keyboard so let's fracture the community and screw the matchmaking"

Yeah... that seems like a healthy alternative.
It can and should be done without fracturing the community. If the system were implemented in a way like CoDMWs, it's a soft filter. I can't think of a good enough argument against that without sounding like you think something like completely random queues would be preferable over an intelligent matching system.
If you want to use a controller play it on the xbox. Don't ruin Halo for everyone else because you want your precious controller.
I probably shouldn't reply to you but...I just thought it was funny bc regardless of your ACTUAL opinion, you clearly didn't read, don't understand, and/or don't know what I'm talking about.
darth pol wrote:
PC as a whole is a far more competitive scene. People who want to play casually will just have to hope that the MMR system works to their liking.
I’m sure people will still be able to enjoy the game casually but realistically, people have to acknowledge that if they want to play on PC it’s going to be a much more competitive environment
I agree with you in regards to Ranked playlists, but I'm simply of the opinion that MMR is not a good enough system for the social playlists.
Damn. People are already worried about good players before the game comes out. If big team battle gets too sweaty, why not just boot up a private match? I think worrying about players getting good is a bad practice and will end up having games be developed the way fortnite is. Rather than people wanting to be good, cry for the devs to nerf good players.
This is in regards to social playlists primarily. There should be a way to matchmake for non-sweaty controller-user matchmaking.
Legitsky wrote:
I think this is a fair option. It would prevent veteran kb&m players queuing up with average or below average controller players and completely dominating the lobby.
It would be very fair for social playlists on PC, right?
A clean straight to the point solution is Input based matchmaking, even the reboot for MW is using this and is crossplay on all platforms, PC/XO/PS4.

If you're on pad, it'll match you with pad players, if you're on KB/M it will match you with KB/M. For when you and a friend are on different inputs itll send you into a mixed pool. Let people play on what they prefer, it's not rocket science.
Definitely laughing at myself for scrolling past your comment because I literally just posted about it and thought it was remarkably similar to what I proposed here and definitely felt like a fair & flexible approach to the crossplay system. The reason why I brought it up here is that even though MCC will likely not support crossplay at launch (probably never due to the technical nightmare it could pose), I feel that a system like this would be worth it & appreciated to allow the controller-oriented gameplay of Halo to survive & coexist with the mouse&keyboard player base even after Xbox as a home console has fallen out of relevance. Regardless of that, I completely agree that MW's system is on-point & the ideal at this time.
Skill-based matchmaking solves all of this. Separate on in Social, together in Ranked. If you don't want to be beaten by MKB users, then use MKB.
I can agree to this as a compromise, as while I think that Halo's competitive scene via controller is deserving of preservation, I would at the very least like to see the social playlists balanced in some way so people are paired with who they are most likely to have a balanced & fair game with.
I fear I'll be avoiding PC for PvP altogether. I don't want to have to do that, but I'm also looking for a casual experience where I just kick back in social slayer, have fun, and not worry about getting absolutely wrecked.
I feel for you and you echo the sentiment most of my friends interested in returning to the game are saying (save for having a trackball mouse, but that's no matter lol). I get that most people are saying to toughen up but I'm definitely with you in the sense that I typically just want to kick back to something fun. I typically avoid Overwatch for this very reason, as even in Quickplay & other casual modes, there is a heavy bias towards competitive play & playing to win. I feel Halo was popular because it served EVERYONE, the diehard pros & the after hours couch joes alike. I personally feel that having the same kick-back-and-play attitude will be difficult on PC even in social slayer because even "casual" & "social" playlists in PC games today are still generally tense as hell. Just saddens me that many people really don't care
Honestly I wouldn't be bothered if they just mixed both MKB and controller together without a filter. Controller players complain about MKB having greater precision and MKB players will complain about controller aim assist. Everyone has their johns and unless its top tier gameplay mixing both won't have that big effect on casual gameplay.
Wish I felt the same & I get you but the issue is that it's -pretty- safe to say that the greater precision & agility of mouse+keyboard gaming puts aim assist to absolute shame & will have some sort of an impact on the casual playlists.
VelixGV wrote:
I think people who play on PC should just stop using controllers for shooters. It's stupid.
Sure thing dude!
Zombie3153 wrote:
I'm not sure how suggesting you deal with your choice of input is a "bad mindset," but you'll notice I didn't say "get good" anywhere in my post. I don't care how you want to play. I do care about the ill-considered petitioning of 343 to further dilute matchmaking pools. MCC on xbone had over a dozen playlists last time I checked... divide that by another factor of 4 or 5 for regional considerations/ping matching and you already have some pretty small pools of players. Dividing that by another factor of 2 for input method is an awful idea.

My understanding is there's already some form of skill-based matchmaking going on under the hood. Skill-based matchmaking becomes worse and worse as the player pool becomes smaller and smaller. It also removes the need to do what you're asking. Who cares if you're getting matched against kbm or controller players if they're playing at a comparable level?

A great way to ensure that Halo *doesn't* get a "big win" is to decimate the quality of the matchmaker and inflate queue times by needlessly diluting the player pool
I'll eat that, you never said to get good so that's on me -- was a reactionary assumption since "handicapping myself" by using a controller felt dismissive of the point of my proposal.
Which is where I will explain that I understand a competent skill-rating system would _ideally_ solve the issue...but I gotta say, I don't agree and I have zero confidence it would work in that way for the lowest tiers of controller-users. It also doesn't solve for the fact that the players I'm referencing play on both...and lowest level controller-gameplay is still lightyears behind lowest-level PC-gameplay. Setting hard playlists would divide the playerbase but I would, then, reference Call of Duty Modern Warfare's approach which seamlessly parties players based on their control method & i'd argue is and will be successful by closing the gaps between the player bases while ensuring players are matched with others using a similar method of control. It's not a hard filter, so I'd like to know how that would hurt -- especially if overrides are implemented to ensure it is not active if it happens to affect queue times.
"Some people might be turned off from playing with mouse and keyboard so let's fracture the community and screw the matchmaking"

Yeah... that seems like a healthy alternative.
It can and should be done without fracturing the community. If the system were implemented in a way like CoDMWs, it's a soft filter. I can't think of a good enough argument against that without sounding like you think something like completely random queues would be preferable over an intelligent matching system.
If you want to use a controller play it on the xbox. Don't ruin Halo for everyone else because you want your precious controller.
I probably shouldn't reply to you but...I just thought it was funny bc regardless of your ACTUAL opinion, you clearly didn't read, don't understand, and/or don't know what I'm talking about.
darth pol wrote:
PC as a whole is a far more competitive scene. People who want to play casually will just have to hope that the MMR system works to their liking.
I’m sure people will still be able to enjoy the game casually but realistically, people have to acknowledge that if they want to play on PC it’s going to be a much more competitive environment
I agree with you in regards to Ranked playlists, but I'm simply of the opinion that MMR is not a good enough system for the social playlists.
Damn. People are already worried about good players before the game comes out. If big team battle gets too sweaty, why not just boot up a private match? I think worrying about players getting good is a bad practice and will end up having games be developed the way fortnite is. Rather than people wanting to be good, cry for the devs to nerf good players
Legitsky wrote:
I think this is a fair option. It would prevent veteran kb&m players queuing up with average or below average controller players and completely dominating the lobby.
It would be very fair for social playlists on PC, right?
Yeah. Social playlists.
Alright, well, I felt like it wasn't worth backing my own idea after the general response I got from both here & Reddit, but I did want to add something else of note after dabbling in the recent Call of Duty: MW Open Beta.

The Beta was FULLY cross-platform. PlayStation, Xbox, and PC players were all able to matchmake with one another, and they came up with a simple but effective solution to the control method balancing debate!

In the pregame lobby, all players had their platform + control method indicated with an icon next to their name. It's worth mentioning that some console games now feature very very basic mouse & keyboard support, including CoD:MW, so there were actually some PlayStation & Xbox users sporting the mouse & keyboard indicator.
The matchmaking mixed platforms in almost every game but made a clear effort to match users by control method. I could tell that the game had a bias towards rounding up controller-users together by having parties with at least one mouse+keyboard user queue with other mouse-users & mixed parties.
To prevent abusing the system (like disconnecting your controller midway into a controller-dominated match), the game LOCKS you to your selected control method -- the menus will remain fully accessible, but gameplay will ONLY RESPOND to what you opted for in the settings before the match.

This allowed my friends and I (who, despite being all PC gamers, prefer controller) to have the choice of both a console-esque AND hardcore PC gaming experience from the PC platform.

To be fair -- CoD: MW is a new game on a single new game engine and is gunning for as many new features as possible (such as console mouse&keyboard support & crossplay, which - let's face it - is NOT an easy task for older, chunkier games like the classic Halos), but I feel like this system sets a standard for the OPTIMAL crossplay competitive multiplayer experience. It's a soft version of what I proposed above, but better & less strict. It's basically soft-segregation based on control method...but it doesn't actually split the community.

Since the way that I proposed this type idea was clearly not unanimously likeable, what about the way that CoD:MW did it? Can anyone disagree that such a system, crossplay or not, would benefit player's online experience, especially in Halo? The only ways that I could think to improve it to appease anyone fearing a split community would be to:
- Include an option for controller users to manually override the bias
- Install an automatic override that deactivates the bias if the player population in one or both of the player pools drops too low & is resulting in unreasonable queue times
I agree that it is the optimal way to go about it. Hopefully we hear more about the subject soon.
It can and should be done without fracturing the community. If the system were implemented in a way like CoDMWs, it's a soft filter. I can't think of a good enough argument against that without sounding like you think something like completely random queues would be preferable over an intelligent matching system.
It's not like it would be fracturing it for very long. Looking at Microsoft's recent action along with the longstanding and increasing disdain shareholders have against Microsoft being in the consol market the Xbox line probably won't be around much longer (relatively speaking)
It can and should be done without fracturing the community. If the system were implemented in a way like CoDMWs, it's a soft filter. I can't think of a good enough argument against that without sounding like you think something like completely random queues would be preferable over an intelligent matching system.
It's not like it would be fracturing it for very long. Looking at Microsoft's recent action along with the longstanding and increasing disdain shareholders have against Microsoft being in the consol market the Xbox line probably won't be around much longer (relatively speaking)
Xbox isn’t going anywhere dude. Phil Spencer pulled it out of the dirt and I don’t think they’re about to stop now
I don't see how "input based matchmaking" is even possible. If you have a controller attached to a PC, it does not disable the keyboard and mouse.

In every PC game I've ever played that supports both types of input, if both are present then they're active at the same time (meaning, for example, you can literally switch between the keyboard/mouse combo and the controller seamlessly, while playing, as many times as you want.)
BenGrasset wrote:
I don't see how "input based matchmaking" is even possible. If you have a controller attached to a PC, it does not disable the keyboard and mouse.

In every PC game I've ever played that supports both types of input, if both are present then they're active at the same time (meaning, for example, you can literally switch between the keyboard/mouse combo and the controller seamlessly, while playing, as many times as you want.)
You can make a game ignore one or the other, or annoyingly whichever device it detects first such as dark souls 1 which is very annoying when you've got multiple devices connected.

So while using a controller the kb+m would still work in windows, and perhaps even in the game's menus, but you would be unable to move, aim, or do any actions with them. Same for the inverse.
BenGrasset wrote:
I don't see how "input based matchmaking" is even possible. If you have a controller attached to a PC, it does not disable the keyboard and mouse.

In every PC game I've ever played that supports both types of input, if both are present then they're active at the same time (meaning, for example, you can literally switch between the keyboard/mouse combo and the controller seamlessly, while playing, as many times as you want.)
You can make a game ignore one or the other, or annoyingly whichever device it detects first such as dark souls 1 which is very annoying when you've got multiple devices connected.

So while using a controller the kb+m would still work in windows, and perhaps even in the game's menus, but you would be unable to move, aim, or do any actions with them. Same for the inverse.
The problem with that is it would basically have to assume that if a controller is plugged in *at all*, it means you definitely want to use the controller.

I have a wired Logitech F310 that I use for third-person games like the Batman Arkham series, and I leave it plugged in all the time just the same as my keyboard and mouse so that it's ready to go whenever.
BenGrasset wrote:
BenGrasset wrote:
I don't see how "input based matchmaking" is even possible. If you have a controller attached to a PC, it does not disable the keyboard and mouse.

In every PC game I've ever played that supports both types of input, if both are present then they're active at the same time (meaning, for example, you can literally switch between the keyboard/mouse combo and the controller seamlessly, while playing, as many times as you want.)
You can make a game ignore one or the other, or annoyingly whichever device it detects first such as dark souls 1 which is very annoying when you've got multiple devices connected.

So while using a controller the kb+m would still work in windows, and perhaps even in the game's menus, but you would be unable to move, aim, or do any actions with them. Same for the inverse.
The problem with that is it would basically have to assume that if a controller is plugged in *at all*, it means you definitely want to use the controller.

I have a wired Logitech F310 that I use for third-person games like the Batman Arkham series, and I leave it plugged in all the time just the same as my keyboard and mouse so that it's ready to go whenever.
Not at all, putting it in the settings menu will do fine. Only problems would be potentially on the first launch, or if you want to change back to keyboard but don't have a controller onhand, but manually changing the settings would suffice too.
It can and should be done without fracturing the community. If the system were implemented in a way like CoDMWs, it's a soft filter. I can't think of a good enough argument against that without sounding like you think something like completely random queues would be preferable over an intelligent matching system.
It's not like it would be fracturing it for very long. Looking at Microsoft's recent action along with the longstanding and increasing disdain shareholders have against Microsoft being in the consol market the Xbox line probably won't be around much longer (relatively speaking)
Xbox isn’t going anywhere dude. Phil Spencer pulled it out of the dirt and I don’t think they’re about to stop now
I think he means in the long long run by relatively speaking. Even though I am a huge Halo nut and an Xbox fan, the console needs to evolve with what commands the most interest and profit. Console sales are a nice boon to the big player companies, but the PC platform is (relatively speaking, like within 20 years) going to outlive consoles in the long run. I'm not trumping PC gaming as indomitable however, as some nonsense like Google Stadia or another hardware-free streaming platform could challenge both.

The PC platform is what will outlive everything in terms of existing, & with the amount of work being put into MCC PC, I would like for them to succeed in making it as immortal/longlasting as possible. Eventually, 10 years from now, Xbox One and Scarlett will be going out of fashion but the PC platform will still be sitting there, & putting Halo there will make the series last for a loooong time.
BenGrasset wrote:
BenGrasset wrote:
I don't see how "input based matchmaking" is even possible. If you have a controller attached to a PC, it does not disable the keyboard and mouse.

In every PC game I've ever played that supports both types of input, if both are present then they're active at the same time (meaning, for example, you can literally switch between the keyboard/mouse combo and the controller seamlessly, while playing, as many times as you want.)
You can make a game ignore one or the other, or annoyingly whichever device it detects first such as dark souls 1 which is very annoying when you've got multiple devices connected.

So while using a controller the kb+m would still work in windows, and perhaps even in the game's menus, but you would be unable to move, aim, or do any actions with them. Same for the inverse.
The problem with that is it would basically have to assume that if a controller is plugged in *at all*, it means you definitely want to use the controller.

I have a wired Logitech F310 that I use for third-person games like the Batman Arkham series, and I leave it plugged in all the time just the same as my keyboard and mouse so that it's ready to go whenever.
I'm just going to address the first bit. No, they can have it so that the game will only recognize one input-type via the settings menu. In Call of Duty Modern Warfare, for example, you went into the settings and selected controller or mouse & keyboard. If you selected controller without having a controller, for example, the game would block all mouse & keyboard inputs for in-game actions. All you could still do is hit Esc to access the menu and...quit lol. The setting cannot be changed mid-game or in an already existing lobby -- it much be set before you queue.

Yes, most current games obviously don't have this feature & so most people will assume the worst and stick to M+KB even if they want to use controller sometimes, but with people having a strong preference for one or the other, a feature like this allows the game to NOT split the community but prevent unfair mixed sessions where Mouse & Keyboard will almost always mop the floor.
BenGrasset wrote:
I don't see how "input based matchmaking" is even possible. If you have a controller attached to a PC, it does not disable the keyboard and mouse.

In every PC game I've ever played that supports both types of input, if both are present then they're active at the same time (meaning, for example, you can literally switch between the keyboard/mouse combo and the controller seamlessly, while playing, as many times as you want.)
It's very, very simple.

Copy Modern Warfares implementation.
wolvAU wrote:
BenGrasset wrote:
I don't see how "input based matchmaking" is even possible. If you have a controller attached to a PC, it does not disable the keyboard and mouse.

In every PC game I've ever played that supports both types of input, if both are present then they're active at the same time (meaning, for example, you can literally switch between the keyboard/mouse combo and the controller seamlessly, while playing, as many times as you want.)
It's very, very simple.

Copy Modern Warfares implementation.
Please don't revive old threads.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2