I'd like there to be more playlists already, but I don't much mind. So eh.
But they're switching SWAT out instead of just adding another one? Mehhh... I can understand not wanting to split up the playerbase and whatnot, but they could bear to keep something like SWAT around permanently.
...If Grifball is reduced back to being a temporary playlist, I shall be a sad panda. --- I am a fan of My Little Pony. You do not have to watch My Little Pony.
Though in response to the number of playlists, I know a lot of people wanted them to reduce the total number for launch so the community wouldn't be so split up. You can check through the bungie forums and find a lot of that type of discussion. Though I have no clue who is in the majority on that argument. --- http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VWGoSc28B1M/0.jpg
I'm fairly certain it wasn't that high, but I can't find any documentation from the initial release. I could be wrong on that.
He may be 1 or 2 over, but that's pretty close to what Reach had.
I'll ask again, because you avoided the question: how is expecting the same level of service as previous titles "unrealistic?" "Because they're not the same game" is irrelevant. --- I've been known to write some pretty good stuff from time to time. Just ask the mods. They probably know me like a brother by now. -MIxeD
heres an idea. put oddball and koth back in objective with ctf. then you can add snipers, doubles, ffa slayer without splitting the players. i rarely ever se any obj. playlist with over 5000 people on it. and regicide sucks. grifball may be in but only as a custom game --- gt darren reefnugs
Something I think most people are forgetting with regards to adding in new playlists. I'm sure the actual implementation is pretty easy. Just changing parameters in whatever files define how the matches are set up. But they're also going to want to take some time to decide what maps work best for a given playlist, what kinds of weapons they should include, how they should handle the spawns ect ect. And once they make those decisions they're going to probably do some in house play testing to make sure those choices work well, are properly balanced, and all that other good stuff. So it's not just changing parameters, they have to also make sure they're making good decisions. --- This space reserved for future witty comment. Maybe it can be yours!!!! (Probably not).
I'll ask again, because you avoided the question: how is expecting the same level of service as previous titles "unrealistic?" "Because they're not the same game" is irrelevant.
I didn't avoid the question at all. But the implication that the number of playlists is the same level of service isn't exactly fair. In particular when you have different game modes in Halo 4. IIRC, invasion wasn't all that popular and that was part of the reason for it's elimination. The arena playlists primarily differed on the basis of their ranking system, not in the sense that they offered a truly different gameplay experience. The playlists that Halo 4 provides still cover basically of the same ground that Reach had without fracturing the community to the same degree. Yes, they took out a couple of modes. But when I am talking about being unrealistic I am talking about having all of his specific expectations met and his reaction to them not being in the game after a single week. And no, the fact that they are not the same game isn't irrelevant. What works in one game might not work in another game. And Reach and 4 play differently. --- http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VWGoSc28B1M/0.jpg
I hate to compare it to Reach, but all the game modes you are missing didnt come with that either, they were introduced over time. As with Halo 3 as well. There releasing modes every week so be patient.
And thats great you could code it yourself so fast. Apparently you arent aware of how much of a pain in the a$$ that Microsoft makes it for developers to release new content.