Why is Resistence 40 MP players and Halo 3 only 16 MP players?

[QUOTE="ChiChiMonKilla"]Live is p2p that's why so it has issues with lag while psn has servers and about RFOM looking better imo they are about a tie.lordxymor

So, where does the Live fee go?

cod3 has a maximun of 24 players ,hell i will love if it got 40 players or 32

[QUOTE="bobaban"][QUOTE="kryloc"][QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"]I think halo 3 is only 12 player.slothboyadvance

They just updated it. Couple days ago it was only 12, now its 16:)
Shotty Snipers got and update aswell, now it appears less often and slayer appears more often in ranked matches.

Serious? Reduced Shotty Snipers... Greatest news ever!

I know Xbots are hilarious they like to praise whatever MS does.

Too bad Bungie is the one who updates the game and not Microsoft, otherwise your sentence might make a fraction of sense.

I don't think he realizes I was being serious... I hate shotty snipers.

Halo=Greatest FPS franchise. 9.5!:lol:

RFOM=Poor Man's Halo

Art_424

LMFAO!! :lol::cry:

[QUOTE="-D3MO-"]

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Graphically

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Gameplay wise

R:FOM >>>> Halo 3 in amount of players in a multiplat match

hmmm

DarthaPerkinjan

640p > 720p?

Resistance looks better, has destructable enviorments and has more units on screen at once.

Since you won't answer him I will

The reason why Resistance has more players online is because the laggy peer to peer online play of Xbox Live would create too much lag. Also the 360 can barely handle the game as it is, that's why they down scaled it to non HD standard defintion 640p

Since when does the resolution make the graphics better?

Resistance looks like a late last gen game, and the gameplay is boring.

It takes no team work and no skill online, whereas Halo 3 works better with a 16 player system.

[QUOTE="joey101010"][QUOTE="DarthaPerkinjan"]640p > 720p?DarthaPerkinjan

I'll take high definition over standard defintion anyday

If you don't know anything you're talking about then you should shut up.

[QUOTE="DarthaPerkinjan"][QUOTE="-D3MO-"]

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Graphically

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Gameplay wise

R:FOM >>>> Halo 3 in amount of players in a multiplat match

hmmm

Maverick_Chaos1

640p > 720p?

Resistance looks better, has destructable enviorments and has more units on screen at once.

Since you won't answer him I will

The reason why Resistance has more players online is because the laggy peer to peer online play of Xbox Live would create too much lag. Also the 360 can barely handle the game as it is, that's why they down scaled it to non HD standard defintion 640p

Since when does the resolution make the graphics better?

Resistance looks like a late last gen game, and the gameplay is boring.

It takes no team work and no skill online, whereas Halo 3 works better with a 16 player system.

[QUOTE="Maverick_Chaos1"][QUOTE="DarthaPerkinjan"][QUOTE="-D3MO-"]

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Graphically

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Gameplay wise

R:FOM >>>> Halo 3 in amount of players in a multiplat match

hmmm

ChiChiMonKilla

640p > 720p?

Resistance looks better, has destructable enviorments and has more units on screen at once.

Since you won't answer him I will

The reason why Resistance has more players online is because the laggy peer to peer online play of Xbox Live would create too much lag. Also the 360 can barely handle the game as it is, that's why they down scaled it to non HD standard defintion 640p

Since when does the resolution make the graphics better?

Resistance looks like a late last gen game, and the gameplay is boring.

It takes no team work and no skill online, whereas Halo 3 works better with a 16 player system.

I've played RFOM quite a bit, and it's distinctly mediocre.

Halo 3 is so terrible it's played a hell of a lot more than RFOM, say what you like they must be doing something right.

More players does not = better game. An 8V8 on halo 3 isn't all that fun 4v4s are much better, you can communicate, work better and you can kill someone without someone else shooting you in the back right away before you can do anything.

[QUOTE="ChiChiMonKilla"][QUOTE="Maverick_Chaos1"][QUOTE="DarthaPerkinjan"][QUOTE="-D3MO-"]

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Graphically

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Gameplay wise

R:FOM >>>> Halo 3 in amount of players in a multiplat match

hmmm

Maverick_Chaos1

640p > 720p?

Resistance looks better, has destructable enviorments and has more units on screen at once.

Since you won't answer him I will

The reason why Resistance has more players online is because the laggy peer to peer online play of Xbox Live would create too much lag. Also the 360 can barely handle the game as it is, that's why they down scaled it to non HD standard defintion 640p

Since when does the resolution make the graphics better?

Resistance looks like a late last gen game, and the gameplay is boring.

It takes no team work and no skill online, whereas Halo 3 works better with a 16 player system.

I've played RFOM quite a bit, and it's distinctly mediocre.

Looks like a late last gen game? C'mon, get some glasses, thats not even close. Takes no teamwork or skill? Thats another garbage comment. Try playing a CTF or Meltdown game against a party or a clan (and unlike Halo 3, this game has clan support). And its not like every game is 20 vs 20. And the weapons have a better variety than Halo 3. And again, when a game is inherently unbalanced, due to the two races (human and chimera) the game obviously takes skill.

You've either never played Resistance (more than 5 minutes anyway) or you have a blind devotion to Halo 3 and cannot accept the fact that its not the only quality FPS.

Halo=Greatest FPS franchise. 9.5!:lol:

RFOM=Poor Man's Halo

Art_424

two words...

Dedicated Servers


something pc gamers are used to, and ps3 owners are getting used to. 360 mostly uses p2p, because it is cheaper than renting servers. there are some games on 360 that use them tho from what i heard.
Mandingo101

If P2P is cheaper then isn't it ironic that XBL costs while PS3/PC online gaming is free? Not only that but doesn't XBL already make enough cash ffrom the advertising it does?

[QUOTE="-D3MO-"]

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Graphically

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Gameplay wise

R:FOM >>>> Halo 3 in amount of players in a multiplat match

hmmm

DarthaPerkinjan

640p > 720p?

Resistance looks better, has destructable enviorments and has more units on screen at once.

Since you won't answer him I will

The reason why Resistance has more players online is because the laggy peer to peer online play of Xbox Live would create too much lag. Also the 360 can barely handle the game as it is, that's why they down scaled it to non HD standard defintion 640p

H3 is the most hailed MP experience for XBL, but yet, it still can't support more than 16 players.

that simply proves that XBL sucks and its a rip-off.

Valhalla with 16 players is far too chaotic. I hate the inane comments of "why not more players?" when even 16 is too many for Halo.Ninja-Vox

16 players maybe too many but its always nice to have the option to add up to 40 players rather than just be limited to 16. Some people may want to play with more than 16 while others won't but yet again its nice to have the option.

[QUOTE="Art_424"]

Halo=Greatest FPS franchise. 9.5!:lol:

RFOM=Poor Man's Halo

blazinpuertoroc

Thats a good point. Even though I don't really care about Resistance and still don't own the game. I can't wait for whats in store for us come next month when some real good fps games come out for ps3.

U know if u played Halo 3, resistance Mp sucks compared to it.MgamerBD

Maybe...Maybe. But then again is Resistance your real competition? The game does offer more players for multiplayer but I don't consider the game to be Halo3's competition....thats all coming out next month. Can't wait for next month there will even be some good action/adventure games on the way too.

I can't stand Resistance online, Halo 3 destroys it. The 40 people game arn't half as exciting as the chaotic full scale vehicle battles of SandTrap.NAPK1NS

Warhawk is much better. lag free and nice match making, not to mention that it can support twice the number of players than H3 :wink:

[QUOTE="Mandingo101"]two words...

Dedicated Servers


something pc gamers are used to, and ps3 owners are getting used to. 360 mostly uses p2p, because it is cheaper than renting servers. there are some games on 360 that use them tho from what i heard.
PelekotansDream

If P2P is cheaper then isn't it ironic that XBL costs while PS3/PC online gaming is free? Not only that but doesn't XBL already make enough cash ffrom the advertising it does?

What avertisement?

[QUOTE="PelekotansDream"]

[QUOTE="Mandingo101"]two words...

Dedicated Servers


something pc gamers are used to, and ps3 owners are getting used to. 360 mostly uses p2p, because it is cheaper than renting servers. there are some games on 360 that use them tho from what i heard.
Deihmos

If P2P is cheaper then isn't it ironic that XBL costs while PS3/PC online gaming is free? Not only that but doesn't XBL already make enough cash ffrom the advertising it does?

What avertisement?

I don't hate the advertisements I find it nice actually but if if Microsoft make money by allowing companies to advertise their games, music etc then why do we need to pay?

[QUOTE="Deihmos"][QUOTE="PelekotansDream"]

[QUOTE="Mandingo101"]two words...

Dedicated Servers


something pc gamers are used to, and ps3 owners are getting used to. 360 mostly uses p2p, because it is cheaper than renting servers. there are some games on 360 that use them tho from what i heard.
PelekotansDream

If P2P is cheaper then isn't it ironic that XBL costs while PS3/PC online gaming is free? Not only that but doesn't XBL already make enough cash ffrom the advertising it does?

What avertisement?

I don't hate the advertisements I find it nice actually but if if Microsoft make money by allowing companies to advertise their games, music etc then why do we need to pay?

I know what you are talkign about but i wouldn't consider it anything big . It's just information and I find a lot of them very informative. Now if it was anythign like Gamespot where you see stuff bouncing across the screen and pop upsthen that would be something different. That isadvertisement.

Halo 3 looks better than Resistance graphically...there's no doubt about that. Anyone who has played both knows this.

On the other side:

Resistance is 40 players online because every single server is a dedicated server. If there is one gripe with Halo 3 it is the amount of players. Now, don't get me wrong, more players doesn't make it better (Halo 3 is already much much better than Resistance), but Halo 2 was 16 players. I expected them to go to at least 24 like BF Modern Combat was on the 360 (which, ironically enough, had all dedicated servers).

My single gripe with Halo 3 and Bungie is that they should've scrapped the matchmaking system (how hard is it honestly to go into the guide, hit friends, choose the friend, and then just join his game?) and Bungie should've made all servers dedicated. Then they should've upped the amount of players to 32. With dedicated servers it would've easily been done...hell, they could've done 40 easily as well. This is what they should've done.

Answer: because 40 player halo would suck. period. There's a reason why people can be really good at halo and people can be really bad at halo. It's because there's organization and a strategy involved, as opposed to just 40 people online in one game randomly blowing the hell out of eachother. duble_Needler23

That is why I am glad GEARs was only 4 v 4. It meant you get games with small teams where everyone quickly was able to communicate and play as a team, with large groups it can be hard to organise any worthwhile strategy.

I ain't against 40 player games however.

[QUOTE="-D3MO-"]

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Graphically

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Gameplay wise

R:FOM >>>> Halo 3 in amount of players in a multiplat match

hmmm

DarthaPerkinjan

640p > 720p?

Resistance looks better, has destructable enviorments and has more units on screen at once.

Since you won't answer him I will

The reason why Resistance has more players online is because the laggy peer to peer online play of Xbox Live would create too much lag. Also the 360 can barely handle the game as it is, that's why they down scaled it to non HD standard defintion 640p

You cant even tell the difference between the two, its not a big deal.

[QUOTE="-D3MO-"]

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Graphically

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Gameplay wise

R:FOM >>>> Halo 3 in amount of players in a multiplat match

hmmm

DarthaPerkinjan

640p > 720p?

Resistance looks better, has destructable enviorments and has more units on screen at once.

Since you won't answer him I will

The reason why Resistance has more players online is because the laggy peer to peer online play of Xbox Live would create too much lag. Also the 360 can barely handle the game as it is, that's why they down scaled it to non HD standard defintion 640p

Did you read the article on why bungie CHOSE to put it into that style of picture? Eh, mr fanboy?

[QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"]Valhalla with 16 players is far too chaotic. I hate the inane comments of "why not more players?" when even 16 is too many for Halo.odin2019

16 players maybe too many but its always nice to have the option to add up to 40 players rather than just be limited to 16. Some people may want to play with more than 16 while others won't but yet again its nice to have the option.

If people can't handle even 16 players, they better avoid Unreal Tournament 3 then, cause games like it support up to 32 players, I would not be suprised if it has 64 player dedicated servers for death match and assault modes.

H3 is the most hailed MP experience for XBL, but yet, it still can't support more than 16 players.

that simply proves that XBL sucks and its a rip-off.

Game13a13y

Battlefield is 24 players online...you fail.

Dedicated servers (which is what resistance plays only on) means more players. If XBL was dedicated servers (and some games are) rather than P2P you could have over 40 playersplaying the game provided the game is setup right for it. As it is, i rarely get lag with even P2P online play.

So, as far as your comment goes, it's nothing but a biased, uninformed, and ignorant piece of fanboy dribble. Congratulations.

For the ignorant:

If you put all games on Xbox Live as using only dedicated servers (as Resistance and BF2MC use) then you could easily have games of more than 40 people. Problem is that with most games it's completely illogical to put that amount of players in a game (Halo 3 being an example).

It just shows how little most of these people know about what they're talking about.

For the ignorant:

If you put all games on Xbox Live as using only dedicated servers (as Resistance and BF2MC use) then you could easily have games of more than 40 people. Problem is that with most games it's completely illogical to put that amount of players in a game (Halo 3 being an example).

It just shows how little most of these people know about what they're talking about.

Puckhog04

Shows what people know?

Ever think some people like chaos in a death match setting? Play Warhawk some time with 32 people,it's just plain awesome. And yes u can still have skills in a room that full. Take the same map down to 8 player death match and its still just as fun. What I'm saying is the developers give us bs stories on why they didn't do this or that. Trust me if Gears could handle 16 they would have done it. If Halo 3 could handle 24 online they would have done it. So since they have such a hyped game they have to have some reason why it couldn't be done. Funny how Bungie said what Epic said, "it just doesn't feel right with over 16." But wha they are really saying is "if it had more then 16 players or 8 players we'd have to downgrade the graphics or it would frame skip like crazy and fry peoples 360's due to overheating and over use." Killzone 2's Multiplayer will be talked about some time this fall and we already knowit has better hardware use then Halo 3 as far as graphics is concerned. What if it holds more then 16 online? Ah oh then the setup for 360 owners really is poop.

[QUOTE="DarthaPerkinjan"][QUOTE="-D3MO-"]

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Graphically

Halo 3 >>>> R:FOM Gameplay wise

R:FOM >>>> Halo 3 in amount of players in a multiplat match

hmmm

bri360

640p > 720p?

Resistance looks better, has destructable enviorments and has more units on screen at once.

Since you won't answer him I will

The reason why Resistance has more players online is because the laggy peer to peer online play of Xbox Live would create too much lag. Also the 360 can barely handle the game as it is, that's why they down scaled it to non HD standard defintion 640p

You cant even tell the difference between the two, its not a big deal.

I can...I noticed it as soon as I started the game up.

PSN>XBLragrdoll21

lol, psn=no standard voice chat

f.e.a.r and call of duty 3 no voice ahha

[QUOTE="ragrdoll21"]PSN>XBLut3nophysics

lol, psn=no standard voice chat

f.e.a.r and call of duty 3 no voice ahha

why is huxley on xbox360 200 players online? ut3nophysics

[QUOTE="ragrdoll21"]PSN>XBLut3nophysics

lol, psn=no standard voice chat

f.e.a.r and call of duty 3 no voice ahha

I think he meant in terms of dedicated servers.

[QUOTE="ut3nophysics"]

[QUOTE="ragrdoll21"]PSN>XBLragrdoll21

lol, psn=no standard voice chat

f.e.a.r and call of duty 3 no voice ahha

nope, people on playstation .com said cod3 no voice chat.

[QUOTE="ut3nophysics"]why is huxley on xbox360 200 players online? ragrdoll21

it's coming out, are we forgetting perfect dark zero 32 players online with vehicles?