Hello Guest, please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Login with username, password and session length.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?  (Read 773 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« on: August 10, 2008, 01:03:09 am »
  • *
  • Reputation: +12/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4849
Is our internet just not good enough yet?
I mean, you can easily and affordably get 7mbps internet.
With all this next-gen power, how come we can't even get 32 vs 32?
Yeah, sometimes there is such a thing as too many people, but why hasn't been attempted?
I mean, I would love to play a game where graphics didn't really factor in since you can use the power to make a huge map and place 100+ people in it just shooting the !@#$% out of each other.
It would give new meaning to the word "deathmatch".

The only game I played that allowed over 32 players overall is Counter Strike: Source.
How come with our next-gen systems we still only see 8 vs 8? was Halo 3 16 vs 16?
I don't know as I never played it, but every other fps game I have is either 8 online or 16 online.
Hard to find a 32 online for the systems.

Just saying, when will we really see a jump in max players online per match?
Logged
  • Super Fan Gamers!
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2008, 01:03:57 am »
  • Lionfish App dev
  • *
  • Reputation: +1/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3456
Because the more players you add, the less personal the experience with those people online becomes, and it isn't even fun...?
Logged
  • Lionfish Apps
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2008, 01:04:29 am »
  • Super Hero Time!
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 4859
Logged
Quote from: Vash on March 05, 2011, 09:24:21 pm
!@#$% I lost my entire post, god dammit.
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2008, 01:05:14 am »
  • *
  • Reputation: +12/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4849
Quote from: Moldorma on August 10, 2008, 01:03:57 am
Because the more players you add, the less personal the experience with those people online becomes, and it isn't even fun...?
Who cares?  I don't play online games to make friends.  I do it to improve my skill and have fun.  Getting friends is a bonus.  I love playing CSS with 28 vs 28.  It's a blast.
Logged
  • Super Fan Gamers!

Mirby

Drifter
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2008, 01:07:21 am »
  • To bomb or not to bomb...
  • *
  • Reputation: +6/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 4162
I think that's what Resistence 2 features for online, if that helps.
Logged

Mirby Studios | Share & Enjoy now available! (Links above!) | Games I've Beaten
Quote from: Mamoruanime
I like-like it :D
  • Mirby Studios

Dantztron 3030

Mammy's Favorite Storyteller!
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2008, 03:51:07 am »
  • b e p i s
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3594
Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising.

120+ players. Believe it.
Logged
Quote from: CeFurkan on September 10, 2010, 08:30:51 pm
well i dont have that system and it is very hard to care about everything when you are single
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2008, 11:27:47 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6206
Quote from: Theforeshadower on August 10, 2008, 01:03:09 am
Is our internet just not good enough yet?
I mean, you can easily and affordably get 7mbps internet.
With all this next-gen power, how come we can't even get 32 vs 32?
Yeah, sometimes there is such a thing as too many people, but why hasn't been attempted?
I mean, I would love to play a game where graphics didn't really factor in since you can use the power to make a huge map and place 100+ people in it just shooting the !@#$% out of each other.
It would give new meaning to the word "deathmatch".

The only game I played that allowed over 32 players overall is Counter Strike: Source.
How come with our next-gen systems we still only see 8 vs 8? was Halo 3 16 vs 16?
I don't know as I never played it, but every other fps game I have is either 8 online or 16 online.
Hard to find a 32 online for the systems.

Just saying, when will we really see a jump in max players online per match?
A deathmatch, with over 100+ isn't fun, as you have almost no chance of shooting somebody else. You'll be lucky if you managed to kill one or two people before getting hit by 20 bullets... Maybe a team deathmatch would be nice with so much people.
Logged
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #7 on: August 11, 2008, 12:07:33 am »
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 647
Just look at Battlefield, I think the huge userlimits work just fine.
Logged
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #8 on: August 11, 2008, 12:21:01 am »
  • *
  • Reputation: +2/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2376
IMO there are not many communities with that much players to constantly host 60vs60 deathmach.
Logged
Re: Why no 60 vs 60 yet?
« Reply #9 on: August 11, 2008, 02:16:51 am »
  • :D
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2418
Foreshadower, look up Tribes 2.  Game is ages old, but had 64-person servers.

And dude? more importantly, look up MAG. 256 player deathmatch.


(also, smaller games are generally better.  I would rather play a 5v5 than 16v16 in CS:S anyday)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »

 


Contact Us | Legal | Advertise Here
2013 © ZFGC, All Rights Reserved


Page created in 0.149 seconds with 58 queries.

anything