The article doesn't really match the title. This one researcher didn't have the final say and was just reporting results of playtesting
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Polygon: How a former Microsoft Researcher could have ruined Halo 2's multiplayer
- Thread starter Cranster
- Start date
Server browsers and lobbies will always be better for creating communities. Matchmaking has benefits for ranked skill progression for very popular games, like Dota 2, but is a death-sentence when the population is low. Games like Day of Defeat: Source will continue to be played for years by fans only because of server browsers and the communities they foster.
After playing a game of halo I need fresh blood for the next round and halo matchmaking is perfect. You are in straight away into the next game without having to faff around. Lobbies only work if you want to carry on playing with the same pool of people over and over which when playing ranked is normally not what I want.
I harbor a vehement dislike for the modern status quo of automated matchmaking above all else, because I've seen the kind of negative long term impact it has had on community fostering for multiplayer games in the PC space.
Pretty much all my favorite memories of online multiplayer gaming have been thanks to player-run server communities that not only enabled pleasant bonding and socialising between server regulars and mitigated toxic behavior (both through enforcement of rules by admins and just plain old psychology when players know they'll be returning to the same server with the same people and want to maintain a positive reputation), but also ensured longevity once the games had grown older and been marginalized into niche territory.
Pretty much all my favorite memories of online multiplayer gaming have been thanks to player-run server communities that not only enabled pleasant bonding and socialising between server regulars and mitigated toxic behavior (both through enforcement of rules by admins and just plain old psychology when players know they'll be returning to the same server with the same people and want to maintain a positive reputation), but also ensured longevity once the games had grown older and been marginalized into niche territory.
The article reminds me of a video by Errant Signal from a number of years ago going about how Overwatch and Team Fortress 2 differ in their design approach, including how players are matched together, and how the respective games seem to be designed around that.
My opinion though, I'm not all that happy with the implementation of randomised matchmaking for much of the multiplayer gaming space today. I can't imagine sticking with a game like, say, Warhawk for up until the servers closed if it only had a matchmaking option. It's gotten to the point where if I learn a game in my interest only has matchmaking, that interest diminishes significantly. That being said, I do appreciate that some devs see the value of a server browser. DICE bringing it back to their console iterations of their Battlefield games, and ironically Halo itself seems to have brought back something akin to it. It's not perfect (my gripe being how the browser UI is laid out), but it's still better than nothing.
My opinion though, I'm not all that happy with the implementation of randomised matchmaking for much of the multiplayer gaming space today. I can't imagine sticking with a game like, say, Warhawk for up until the servers closed if it only had a matchmaking option. It's gotten to the point where if I learn a game in my interest only has matchmaking, that interest diminishes significantly. That being said, I do appreciate that some devs see the value of a server browser. DICE bringing it back to their console iterations of their Battlefield games, and ironically Halo itself seems to have brought back something akin to it. It's not perfect (my gripe being how the browser UI is laid out), but it's still better than nothing.
Resistance (at least the first two) on PS3 would do that. Ranked games would have a matchmaking system while the unranked varieties use a browser.
Matchmaking is convenient but it also absolutely killed the sense of community in these games. And it can be frustrating not having much control over maps being played next.
I prefer when games offer both custom servers/lobbies as well as matchmaking. Games went from being an access point to many unique communities to these collections of random people that all hate each other by default or have voice off. It sucked a layer of fun out of playing games online.
I prefer when games offer both custom servers/lobbies as well as matchmaking. Games went from being an access point to many unique communities to these collections of random people that all hate each other by default or have voice off. It sucked a layer of fun out of playing games online.
Lobbies are still better for people not in US or EU regions cause you can't trust devs to not force you into a 250 ping game because they rather put you in a game where you're gonna have a shit experience than just tell "Sorry bro, no dice."
OP
OP
I think for a game like Halo matchmaking makes the most sense. Most PC lobbies are horribly inconsistent.
People drop all the time, it can take a while to fill up, etc. I remember finding a server in battlefield being a pain because the good ones always had a queue. Or in Gears of War where if you killed the host they'd just boot you.
Halo needs a CUSTOM game browser but other than that matchmaking has been a godsend.
Basically required if you have ranks too.
People drop all the time, it can take a while to fill up, etc. I remember finding a server in battlefield being a pain because the good ones always had a queue. Or in Gears of War where if you killed the host they'd just boot you.
Halo needs a CUSTOM game browser but other than that matchmaking has been a godsend.
Basically required if you have ranks too.
The worst thing that Future soldier did was to kill the lobby system used in GRAW1 and 2. Aside from being basically COD in 3rd person.
This needs to be re-iterated.
Bungie (I believe it was Candland) basically perfected the multiplayer party/lobby UI and design. We saw CoD and other games straight up copy it. It was JARRING when a multiplayer game that came out years after Halo 2 refused to follow this formula. Battlefield games come to find. Forming a party in those games has been consistently TRASH. Give me the player tags on the top right and let the party leader bring everyone into whatever game.
It's 2019 and games are still fucking this up.
OP
OP
I miss lobbies. I like when games include both options.
I remember using a virtual lan program back in the day for Halo 2. There was a lot of modded stuff to play which was interesting.
I remember using a virtual lan program back in the day for Halo 2. There was a lot of modded stuff to play which was interesting.
Server browser > matchmake.
I miss the days of hanging out with the boyz on my favorite UT2004 servers without actually being friends, but knowing they would be there.
I miss the days of hanging out with the boyz on my favorite UT2004 servers without actually being friends, but knowing they would be there.
I enjoy optional browsers in battlefield when looking for a particular map. But only cause those matches can be 20+ minutes long.
Halo 2 was such magic the first time I match made. I couldn't believe it.
Halo 2 was such magic the first time I match made. I couldn't believe it.
This is a prime example of users and focus group mentality not knowing what is actually good for them and stifling originality and innovation. Don't wonder why games out of the AAA industry all seem to be playing it so safe and being so samey these days. Kudos to Bungie!
This is similar to what happened to many social websites pre-Facebook that caved in to users clamoring for full profile page customization, only to turn them into monstrous insufferable piles of hot stinking garbage with auto-playing music, horrible designs, broken UX, etc. This is the kind of shit that killed myspace. You should be very careful about listening to users and the kind of feedback you derive from them. This is in great part why I admire Nintendo for sticking to their guns of providing next to zero options in their games: You don't need to adjust the volume of every type of audio, because it's already been done for you. Simplicity of use is king. This is also why Apple got so big with the iPhone.
This is similar to what happened to many social websites pre-Facebook that caved in to users clamoring for full profile page customization, only to turn them into monstrous insufferable piles of hot stinking garbage with auto-playing music, horrible designs, broken UX, etc. This is the kind of shit that killed myspace. You should be very careful about listening to users and the kind of feedback you derive from them. This is in great part why I admire Nintendo for sticking to their guns of providing next to zero options in their games: You don't need to adjust the volume of every type of audio, because it's already been done for you. Simplicity of use is king. This is also why Apple got so big with the iPhone.
Definitely for Console experiences it's a godsend. Halo 2 blew my mind by how great and revolutionary it was back in the day. I think Console players (who generally want to get into matches as quick as possible) generally prefer matchmaking while PC players (who generally like more control) prefer Browsers. I think having the option to do both nowadays would be pretty ideal of course.
I'm not really looking back fondly on the decision to stifle control from players and generally giving me the miserable experience of frequently playing maps I didn't want and having to suffer through questionable gametype setups at the whims of the devs.
This thread has honestly showed that there are cons both ways.
I do think more and more games have been trying to add more choice into matchmaking or allowing for servers AND matchmaking.
Having fond experience of both I will say this. With server based multiplayer, the highs are very high. You and your friends have a favorite server. Great maps. Great settings. A community forms. More choice etc.
But the lows are VERY low as well. You get booted for being too good or too bad or not adhering to some stupid arbitrary honor rules. You have to wait in a queue. Your favorite server does not have room for your friend. Unbalanced teams (numbers wise a lot of the time in ones where you can freely switch). etc.
Matchmaking is generally a more stable experience. You will play on maps you hate. You will play on maps you love. You won't hit those highs but you won't hit those lows either.
I've loved matchmaking ever since Mario Kart Wii, especially being able to vote on the tracks. Lack of a system like this in the first Sonic All-stars racing game was a deal-breaker for my friends and I, and we haven't looked at any of the series since then (I have no idea if they do match-making in the latest one). We did play some Wipeout Omega Collection, but were severely disappointed by the lack of a matchmaking and track voting system. We never really stuck with it like we did with Mario Kart Wii and 8.
Every online console game eventually using matchmaking (and party chat turning it silent) ruined online console gaming for me. It's just too mechanical. Each round feels similar to the last one - there's no room for spontaneity.
The only reason matchmaking became ubiquitous was because Halo 2 was so popular. But it wasn't popular because of matchmaking, or even because it was really that good of a game. It was popular because it was the highly anticipated sequel to a truly groundbreaking game. If Halo 1 had been online like Bungie intended, Halo 2 would've eventually died off as people got sick of the clunky gameplay, and it wouldn't have the reverence that it does today.
Almost all my favorite moments in online gaming - Worms Armageddon, UT '99, UT 2003, MechAssault, Rainbow Six 3, Project Gotham Racing 2, Unreal Championship, Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow - have used game browsers. The one exception is PUBG, which demands matchmaking by design. My favorite moment in Halo 2 was a Rocketball match which was either in one of the less popular playlists where you have to wait forever to get a game, or a custom game that I was lucky to stumble across.
Bungie laughs at people who think like this, but I'm 100% with them:
The only reason matchmaking became ubiquitous was because Halo 2 was so popular. But it wasn't popular because of matchmaking, or even because it was really that good of a game. It was popular because it was the highly anticipated sequel to a truly groundbreaking game. If Halo 1 had been online like Bungie intended, Halo 2 would've eventually died off as people got sick of the clunky gameplay, and it wouldn't have the reverence that it does today.
Almost all my favorite moments in online gaming - Worms Armageddon, UT '99, UT 2003, MechAssault, Rainbow Six 3, Project Gotham Racing 2, Unreal Championship, Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow - have used game browsers. The one exception is PUBG, which demands matchmaking by design. My favorite moment in Halo 2 was a Rocketball match which was either in one of the less popular playlists where you have to wait forever to get a game, or a custom game that I was lucky to stumble across.
Bungie laughs at people who think like this, but I'm 100% with them:
From https://halo.bungie.net/news/content.aspx?cid=25650
If Bungie owned a restaurant:
I'd pre-pay $50.00 to get in, then:
Maitre 'd: Welcome to Cafe de Halo2 Monsieur. Would you like to sit at the steak/chicken/lamb table with 4 people or the pork/turkey/duck table with 6 people.
Me: Actually, I'm meeting some friends who are already here, can I join them?
Maitre 'd: No.
Me: No?
Maitre 'd: No.
Me: Why not?
Maitre 'd: This is a new type of restaurant sir. Sit down, you will enjoy it.
Me: Ok, I'll take the steak/chicken/lamb table
Maitre 'd: Fine. I will find you a table in 15 minutes.
Me: 15 minutes, but there's plenty of open seats?
Matre 'd: Yes, but we are going to find the best seat for you. It takes time.
Me: Well, is there a wait at the pork/turkey/duck section.
Maitre 'd: I don't know, you'll have to choose that to find out.
Me: OK, I'll try that.
Maitre 'd: Alright, yes there is a wait.
Me: Fine, I'll try that.
15 minutes pass, I get seated with 7 strangers.
Me: I'll take the duck.
Waiter: I'm sorry sir, we don't do it that way here. We bring you what we decide to bring you.
Me: What? But I don't want pork, can I request to not get pork.
Waiter: No. And quit whining. If you don't like pork, go home and cook with your friends. You should be grateful we opened this restaurant.
Me: Sorry. Bring me what you want.
[One excellent piece turkey arrives, and I eat it]
Me: Waiter, are there side dishes or anything?
Waiter: No sir, you must leave now. Your 6 minutes is up. Come back later with these friends you met here?
Me: Met, who had time to meet anyone? You made me leave in 6 minutes?
Waiter: I'm sorry sir, you must go. You should chase the 7 people from your table and ask if they'll be your friends. And, sir, if you want to eat what you want when you want it, I suggest you cook at home with your friends. You ingrate.
If Bungie owned a restaurant:
I'd pre-pay $50.00 to get in, then:
Maitre 'd: Welcome to Cafe de Halo2 Monsieur. Would you like to sit at the steak/chicken/lamb table with 4 people or the pork/turkey/duck table with 6 people.
Me: Actually, I'm meeting some friends who are already here, can I join them?
Maitre 'd: No.
Me: No?
Maitre 'd: No.
Me: Why not?
Maitre 'd: This is a new type of restaurant sir. Sit down, you will enjoy it.
Me: Ok, I'll take the steak/chicken/lamb table
Maitre 'd: Fine. I will find you a table in 15 minutes.
Me: 15 minutes, but there's plenty of open seats?
Matre 'd: Yes, but we are going to find the best seat for you. It takes time.
Me: Well, is there a wait at the pork/turkey/duck section.
Maitre 'd: I don't know, you'll have to choose that to find out.
Me: OK, I'll try that.
Maitre 'd: Alright, yes there is a wait.
Me: Fine, I'll try that.
15 minutes pass, I get seated with 7 strangers.
Me: I'll take the duck.
Waiter: I'm sorry sir, we don't do it that way here. We bring you what we decide to bring you.
Me: What? But I don't want pork, can I request to not get pork.
Waiter: No. And quit whining. If you don't like pork, go home and cook with your friends. You should be grateful we opened this restaurant.
Me: Sorry. Bring me what you want.
[One excellent piece turkey arrives, and I eat it]
Me: Waiter, are there side dishes or anything?
Waiter: No sir, you must leave now. Your 6 minutes is up. Come back later with these friends you met here?
Me: Met, who had time to meet anyone? You made me leave in 6 minutes?
Waiter: I'm sorry sir, you must go. You should chase the 7 people from your table and ask if they'll be your friends. And, sir, if you want to eat what you want when you want it, I suggest you cook at home with your friends. You ingrate.
I consider the rise of matchmaking to go hand in hand with the decline in online multiplayer, it led to every game being this transitory experience that no one is invested in. It made toxicity the norm since there are no server admins or sense of 'place' to every game knowing that the next round will be an entire new set of players so people would just say whatever and get away with it. I very much miss the days of dedicated servers for more niche games as I believe those to be the way to go for both getting into games quickly (rather than sitting in a queue) and fostering community. I always likened a good server to something like a skate park, it was a place people just went to shoot the shit while playing their favorite game and once you found a handful of ones you were into it was all gravy. Matchmaking games have never given that same feeling and it's a huge bummer.
It really sucks it has become the norm, it's fine for some games but also terrible for others.
Not really because there were games that had these systems like Warcraft 3's battle.net before them, but as usual with Bungie they will get credit for inventing something just because they brought it to the console mass audience.
It really sucks it has become the norm, it's fine for some games but also terrible for others.
Not really because there were games that had these systems like Warcraft 3's battle.net before them, but as usual with Bungie they will get credit for inventing something just because they brought it to the console mass audience.
OP
OP
Heh, after playing a lot of MCC I find CE to be horrendously clunky. Ill play the shit out of Halo 2.
Also, you are wrong about why Halo 2 was so popular. Yes it was an anticipated sequel, yes it was a good game, but its staying power is honestly largely due to its online infrastructure. It's not just matchmaking. You had clans, a friends list, you could send invites and MESSAGES from the game. You were literally like 2 button presses away from getting your friend into a lobby with voice chat.
We would literally make gametypes called PGL. Stands for Pre-Game Lobby. We wouldn't play the game, we would just sit in the lobby and shoot the shit with each other. People quite literally met up in Halo 2 lobbies in order to decide what game they were going to play. It WAS Xbox live and its innnovations basically paved the way for the baseline Xbox 360 features.
I was playing Halo 2 on my 360 up until Halo 3 released because honestly no other multiplayer shooter came close until Halo 3 and soon after CoD4.
Matchmaking was pretty good in H2, but I was really frustrated with it in Halo 3 and to a lesser extent Reach. I pretty much liked all the maps in H2, but getting put into Foundry/Foundry based maps or other Forge garbage in the later games was upsetting. Like, I would never have played some of the worst maps like Foundry outside of maybe like 10 times if I had control, but that control was taken away by matchmaking. Or crap like AR starts on Sandtrap or Valhalla. That shit is just moronic.
i miss the days when there would be an actual admin on the server so they could kick any dickheads off the servers. now all you can do is mute people and hope the automatic punishment system does it's job.
Yeah, I for one loved getting kicked off a server for using a weapon the admin deemed cheap.
Or for killing the admin 1 too many times.
Fun times in the days of server lists.
Halo 1's netcode (much of which dates back to the 2003 PC version) is shit, plus there's a bunch of other problems in the MCC version that the original Xbox version didn't have.
It actually has a crazy skill ceiling when played on LAN with old machines. Pro players use pickup timers, manipulate teammate spawns by standing in certain places, and grenade launch weapons over to themselves.
Matchmaking is definitely the best way to play imo, but only when the systems in place know how to properly match you with others. This is why Halo's worked so well. Most other multiplayer games out there...not so much.
I agree it has a great skill ceiling, but it's still clunky as fuck to play. It also falls apart above 2 v 2.
I mean sure if you like being spawn killed and grenaded before you can pull your pistol out. The spawns are ATROCIOUS and theres just explosions constantly.
i played on the same coubter strike source server for 5 years, admins banned bad behavior racism and players trolling. i knew any weekend i could casually hop on and play with guys id been playing with for years and the server would be populated fully until 3 in the morning. So yeah i miss the community of server browsers. Though a lot of people are confusing a lobby system with a server browser and those are not the same thing.
I have to disagree. Not saying it wouldn't have been popular without matchmaking, but the way they handled matchmaking was a big part of Halo's online success, imo. Like I said before, it's not only matchmaking that made it work right, it was a combination of other features combined with matchmaking that did. Namely, the fact that there was a ranking system that properly matched you with other players of your skill level, the fact that you get matched at the beginning of the game and play the full game with the same players, the fact that you stayed with those players in the next match if you/they don't quit, and the fact that custom games existed for people who wanted to make their own rules.
In truth, games should have a combination, however they should be separated. In other words, when I matchmake, it shouldn't put me into a custom game. Matchmaking should put me in a standardized gametype with similarly skilled players. Custom game browsing is where I should be able to apply filters to find something more specific.
The reason most matchmaking is shit is because they lack one of the things mentioned above. They're not skill based, they don't continue with the same players for the next match, they throw you in the middle of a game (often one where people quit so you end up in a lopsided game), or they throw you into a custom game.
Server browsers can also be done right, but they're also usually not. The main reason I think matchmaking is overall better is because it starts everyone off on an even playing field, it fills up games to be fully populated, and it can can do things automatically like finding other players with equivalent skill level. It also better enables standardized gametypes designed by the developers who I trust to balance the game much better than your average Joe. Having a custom game counterpart to allow for modifications/playing with your friends is why Halo worked so well overall. Adding a custom game browser is the only thing they could have done better, imo.
Racism and harassment was an instant ban in most Battlefield servers as well. Now It's pretty much the norm in online gaming.
