This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for R3DN1N3
R3DN1N3

765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#1 R3DN1N3
Member since 2006 • 765 Posts
Hey is it me or is anyone else here bored and frustrated playing an xbox game online with few players? I mean it should be norm to have 32 player servers nowadays yet all I see so far this generation are 1-8 players online and the highest right now being 24 players.... This is kinda rediculous when u consider PC's going 32 and even 40 with other games. I still have fun but I seriously think 360 games should start making larger servers. 16 player servers are soo last generation and I cycle between my 360 and PC because of this reason. Am I the only one bothered by this?!
Avatar image for k_nen808
k_nen808

177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 k_nen808
Member since 2002 • 177 Posts
i agree.  to me, the more people, the more fun.
Avatar image for Mikerules868
Mikerules868

2153

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Mikerules868
Member since 2004 • 2153 Posts
I think PDZ has 32..
Avatar image for sandabs
sandabs

110

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#4 sandabs
Member since 2007 • 110 Posts
I know, there used to be billions of people online in Halo 2, now there's only the same eight people I see every time I go online.
Avatar image for Mikerules868
Mikerules868

2153

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Mikerules868
Member since 2004 • 2153 Posts

I know, there used to be billions of people online in Halo 2, now there's only the same eight people I see every time I go online.sandabs

Thats pretty ******* up then because there is usually 50,000 people on @ a time. i know that not as much as it used to be but the game is almost 3 years old. 

Avatar image for sandabs
sandabs

110

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#6 sandabs
Member since 2007 • 110 Posts
Well, last time I played it, it was three in the morning, so maybe that has something to do with it.
Avatar image for R3DN1N3
R3DN1N3

765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#7 R3DN1N3
Member since 2006 • 765 Posts
I'm not sure if this is gonna get me suspended but DAMN even the PS3's Resistance carries a 40 player server so it can't be that Microsoft can't do it. Maybe it will get better later on as more games get published but only time will tell. I know that Halo 3 will most likely emphasize it's multiplayer side of the game when it comes out but I hope they start the trend of having a bigger player capacity on release. Halo 3 is gonna be succesful, that's almost a guarantee so I really hope other companies try to follow up with them. One can only hope.
Avatar image for CaUs3
CaUs3

2903

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 CaUs3
Member since 2006 • 2903 Posts

COD3

24 people

Avatar image for arfy2
arfy2

1613

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 arfy2
Member since 2006 • 1613 Posts

i agree.  to me, the more people, the more fun.k_nen808

Yeah same. thats why I'm so interested in Huxley. I know its supposed be an MMOFPS but any word on how many players will actually be supported in game?

Avatar image for R3DN1N3
R3DN1N3

765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#10 R3DN1N3
Member since 2006 • 765 Posts

COD3

24 people

CaUs3

Actually after this post I'm gonna be on my way to get Call of Duty 3. Don't get me wrong I'm happy with a 24 player server but it's the fact that we "SHOULD" be able to play these games with more people is what gets me annoyed. It's like knowing that you can better than that but instead u half-A$$ it.

Avatar image for R3DN1N3
R3DN1N3

765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#11 R3DN1N3
Member since 2006 • 765 Posts

[QUOTE="k_nen808"]i agree.  to me, the more people, the more fun.arfy2

Yeah same. thats why I'm so interested in Huxley. I know its supposed be an MMOFPS but any word on how many players will actually be supported in game?

Not sure but I hear that the player capacity is gonna be rediculously HUGE!

Avatar image for playwithfire17
playwithfire17

770

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 playwithfire17
Member since 2006 • 770 Posts
I like small online arenas. *meh*.
Avatar image for arfy2
arfy2

1613

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 arfy2
Member since 2006 • 1613 Posts
[QUOTE="arfy2"]

[QUOTE="k_nen808"]i agree.  to me, the more people, the more fun.R3DN1N3

Yeah same. thats why I'm so interested in Huxley. I know its supposed be an MMOFPS but any word on how many players will actually be supported in game?

Not sure but I hear that the player capacity is gonna be rediculously HUGE!

Excellent :D I hear what u are saying. The technology is there to have huge servers and give us a great gaming experience but everyone is just too lazy to implament it and make it work :(

Avatar image for DZBricktop
DZBricktop

2914

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 DZBricktop
Member since 2007 • 2914 Posts
I'm not sure if this is gonna get me suspended but DAMN even the PS3's Resistance carries a 40 player serverR3DN1N3
Having it and useing it are 2 different things. I havent been in a game of Resistance with more than 10 people yet. But i do agree, some games are perfectly designed for larger groups and they just dont have them.
Avatar image for GalaxiaN69
GalaxiaN69

49

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 GalaxiaN69
Member since 2004 • 49 Posts
I could be wrong but I thought most 360 games use the console as the server which brings the number of players down. Limited by the console and that persons broadband connection. Yes something like Huxley supports more players because you're joining dedicated game servers but most things like Halo2, PGR3, CoD are limitd by your connections upload speed.

PC games tend to support more players as you're joining dedicated servers provided by companies like Jolt who have much greater bandwidth than your home connection.
Avatar image for limpbizkit818
limpbizkit818

15044

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#16 limpbizkit818
Member since 2004 • 15044 Posts
I would rather play an intense 4v4 match (cod2) with my team working together then a 64 player frag fest with half of the players not even having a mic *looks at bf2*. Dont get me wrong, large games can be fun sometimes. And it's not that the 360 can't handle it, there was an Xbox 1 game that supported 50 players.
Avatar image for KillerM24
KillerM24

1347

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#17 KillerM24
Member since 2006 • 1347 Posts
Pc games has like 64 man multi-play matches in battlefeild for the pc, but for the 360 its only 16 in battlefeild, what gives..
Avatar image for R3DN1N3
R3DN1N3

765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#18 R3DN1N3
Member since 2006 • 765 Posts
Actually battlefield 2 carries up to 24 players, but still....that's not enough. They should make dedicated servers. They'll probably be dedicated servers once they make PC and 360 games compatible with each other.
Avatar image for menduco76
menduco76

650

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#19 menduco76
Member since 2006 • 650 Posts

I would rather play an intense 4v4 match (cod2) with my team working together then a 64 player frag fest with half of the players not even having a mic *looks at bf2*. Dont get me wrong, large games can be fun sometimes. And it's not that the 360 can't handle it, there was an Xbox 1 game that supported 50 players.limpbizkit818

 

I see that thankfully, there is someone with a little common sense.  Not all games would benefit from huge amounts of people playing online.  Even something like Tony Hawk P8 I would fine increadible annpying if I had to compete with 30 other people at once.  Also, in order to get casual gamers into playing more on Live, implementing smaller teams helps, because the smaller the teams, the better the odds that you can come ontop at any given round.   Casual gamers dont want to go online and get trampled each and every time they try.

Plus, the thing with large amounts of people is that you need really large maps.  Gears of War would be HORRIBLE if you made the teams bigger.  Plus, the whole point xbox live is trying to drive home this generation is not just playing with a bunch of people, its ACTUALLY interacting with them.  Imagine how chaotic it would be to be on a team with 19 other people, half of them yelling "OVER HERE!!!" the other half singing.  By keeping the teams small you are actually helping the in game comunication, which in it of itself is a BIG plus for online games, and a MUST for games that require strategy. The more strategic the gameplay, the more it would be hurt by having large teams when it comes to playing over the internet.

You cant look at this issue in black and white and just say just because many games handle smaller amounts of people its not good.  There are games that shold be played with more people, and there are games that should be played with smaller groups of people.  So far, the majority of games out there should only have smaller teams.  And im fine with that.   The 360 has only been out a year and a few months....give it time, there will be games coming out that have huge servers eventually.

 

Avatar image for jhunte99
jhunte99

2673

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 jhunte99
Member since 2003 • 2673 Posts
PC has 64 player servers because they are dedicated. Xbox live doesn't have dedicated servers apart from games like ffXI and test drive unlimited. All other games like rainbow six vegas, gears of war etc. have servers hosted by ourselves and there would be way too much lag if the player max was 64. Dedicated servers on the PC in a game like counter strike source that have 64 players have something like 100Mbit connections, nobody has that in their home unless you live in south korea or something. To be perfectly honest i think there is no excuse to not have dedicated servers because we are paying money for xbox live... It's something you would expect.
Avatar image for LDouglasLJr
LDouglasLJr

5976

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 LDouglasLJr
Member since 2005 • 5976 Posts

Bandwidth on large scale is very expensive and I know this first hand as my job is a technology coordinator for a school district.  We also get major educational discounts for our items as well.  For a single T1 circuit we pay about $900 for it alone now if you add in all the transmission cost and such per month it pushs to cost up to about $3000.  We did get a small break when we added our second T1 and I created a multilink to bond to 2 T1's together.

Now for the next school year we are getting a much larger boost for about the same cost.  The way we were able to work that is all the schools in our area which is about 26 different school district went together to cut the cost down plus got grants from our state government to help build the infrastructure to support this.  In this we'll have 10Mbs of internet bandwidth.  Yes Microsoft has an unbelieveable amount of money to work with but they still have to watch their cost and work within the bandwidth of their area.  If the companies haven't built the infrastructure and not Microsoft then supporting that is a huge task.

Avatar image for R3DN1N3
R3DN1N3

765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#22 R3DN1N3
Member since 2006 • 765 Posts

Bandwidth on large scale is very expensive and I know this first hand as my job is a technology coordinator for a school district.  We also get major educational discounts for our items as well.  For a single T1 circuit we pay about $900 for it alone now if you add in all the transmission cost and such per month it pushs to cost up to about $3000.  We did get a small break when we added our second T1 and I created a multilink to bond to 2 T1's together.

Now for the next school year we are getting a much larger boost for about the same cost.  The way we were able to work that is all the schools in our area which is about 26 different school district went together to cut the cost down plus got grants from our state government to help build the infrastructure to support this.  In this we'll have 10Mbs of internet bandwidth.  Yes Microsoft has an unbelieveable amount of money to work with but they still have to watch their cost and work within the bandwidth of their area.  If the companies haven't built the infrastructure and not Microsoft then supporting that is a huge task.

LDouglasLJr

HUH....I never thought of it that way. I guess I can see what your saying.