Also the gametype and, probably most importantly: the map.
The 32-player TF2 servers that run stock maps are a bit too hectic for me, but it's fun every once in a while. That said, this has nothing to do with ONLY the actual number of players..it's a combination of things. Some maps in some (PC) games actually feel very empty with only 24 players.
Number of players matters little if the maps and modes are designed correctly for them. For instance 12 players in a MW2 map can feel clustered because the maps are itty bitty, while 256 players in a game of MAG feels fine because the maps are huge and the action broken up so that you're not all clustered in one area. Same with Warhawk, 32 players just fine, but KZ2 felt cluttered because the maps seemed optimized for 24 or so.
I think it's a lot of fun. I always go for the servers with the most players and highest player cap. If I want to play a multiplayer game I want an extreme balls to the wall experience.
I think it's a lot of fun. I always go for the servers with the most players and highest player cap. If I want to play a multiplayer game I want an extreme balls to the wall experience.PS2_ROCKS
it can be fun... but i tend to miss the feeling that im actually influencing the outcome of the battle in big games.
32 is a great number in BC2. You just can't suck or you'll die a lot though. It's so much more chaotic and fun when you have more players.DragonfireXZ95
I don't see the issue with it. It makes it tougher for you to stay alive and forces you to be more situationally aware. If you aren't a fan, there are tons of other servers with lower players counts. That's what is great about dedicated servers.
It's different. How many games support 16 players? Thats often time the cap for many games Increasing the cap automatically makes the game experience different. While it's more common on the PC it's still pretty cool. It might feel like too much in the more recent Call of Duty and Battlefield titles since they were built more for console but they're much more fit for it in earlier installments.
I agree with TC, somewhat. Recently I played a game of Rush on BC 2 (32 man), it was so just too friggin chaotic, everyone was alive for 30 seconds, on an average. But it also happened to be one of the most enjoyable MP game I have ever played, but I get where the TC is coming from.
Because 50 people playing on Shipment in CoD4 is epic. :lol:
It's just preference. I doubt it's a platform thing either. I'm sure if consoles could overshoot the player limit like that, they would. 32-man GTA4 is lovely.
i dont know why people like playing cod with 64 people, thats just ridiculous. unless the maps are modded, games are never going to work with more players than the developers set.
I dont know why but i cant stand PC gaming for alot of games. TF2, L4D and BF are fine for me. But i cant stand the cod pc community. All they do is spam and play cheap, then act like you're the noob for not jumping around like an idiot and dropshotting. All they do is throw grenades and use OP weapons. Every now and then ill get into a decent game, but the more players, the worse. I prefer to play with 10-15 players, limiting the spam and allowing you to actually spawn! I dont know, i played COD4 on the pc and never bought another COD game on PC. I re bought it for my Xbox and loved it, althought i wish i could use my mouse and key board. I dont know i guess its the mentallity of the community, if that makes any sense....that was all kind of off topic but eh
I like playing in 40 man servers in COD4.... 50 can get a little chaotic, plus all the granade spammers,and martydom can be a bit much with so many people in the map.
GTSaiyanjin2
Same. Though in maps like Wet Work I think the best is around 15. You get to use more strategy.
Because 50 people playing on Shipment in CoD4 is epic. :lol
Mystic-G
:lol: ... yes it is! I have such fond memories of that. I remember playing 50 person FFA and topping the leaderboard. I used to level up each game, lol.
Battlefield 1942 was amazing 32 vs. 32 back in the day. Most of my friends were playing FPS on consoles with 4 player split screen only at the time lmao (unless you did system link) :P
64 player BF 2 was intense back in the day. especially playing as a medic, it got pretty hectic, a small feeling of empathy of real warzones, but not really actually.
[QUOTE="dannytanner79"]Let me preface this thread by saying I'm a PC gamer. I prefer PC over consoles for a multitude of reasons. Recently I've become more aware of the max players that developers have created for the game vs. what a lot of PC servers are running. For example, Bad Company 2. I first started on the PS3 which I believe has a max of 24 (maybe 16 player servers too?). For the most time the maps seemed balanced to me and quite enjoyable. Then I got it for PC and started going into 32 player servers. Die, spawn, die spawn, lag lag lag. I decided to try a few 24 man servers and I instantly felt the difference. There was more teamwork and less spamming of nades and such. The gameplay was very smooth which made me think the 32 man servers were just pushing the game beyond its limit. Other games that I found similar experiences with (minus the lag part) were TF2 and COD 4. Heck, in TF2 the scoreboard doesn't even scroll all the way down for 32 player servers because the game wasn't designed for it. Call of Duty becomes air strike/nade spam fest. It just seems to me that these severs take the skill and fun out of the game by jamming more players than the game was intended for, and it ultimately feels like an unpredictable spam fest. So which servers do you prefer? The ones that exceed the developer's limit or those that honor it? I use to be for more players but now I'm starting to sway to original design numbers set by the game devs. PC FPS sometimes have multiple square kilometer maps in which case 50 players may not be nearly enough.
Too much? I'm still contemplating why console shooters don't have enough players. More people means more chaotic combat, which is much more fun.
ocstew
It's not spawning and then getting killed by someone who spawn behind you That only happens in COD and other games with totally cluster****ed spawn systems.
Too much? I'm still contemplating why console shooters don't have enough players. More people means more chaotic combat, which is much more fun.
Brownesque
It's not spawning and then getting killed by someone who spawn behind you That only happens in COD and other games with totally cluster****ed spawn systems.
The scale of the fight at those numbers is what really makes it great, because you have to coordinate across several squads and members to come out successful. Play BF2 on a 32v32 designed map and you'll see.
I would say Planetside too but I'd be surprised if it's servers are even still up.
Log in to comment