The Energon Pub

Autobot032 wrote:What about HMW nights?

Seibertron or someone else could post a night when everyone will be on, and just meet up online and have a melee all evening.

It depends on how many people can be in a match at once. Which is typically 16, and i'm certain more than 16 people play HMW...

CRAP stop making me want to play HMW again!

amcgrath929 wrote:Yes you have to pay to play online with the 360, but it also hasn't gotten hacked or semi-crashed like the PS3's did last week.

None of what you said makes sense. I seem to recall someone starting a (Fairly frivolous) lawsuit over the XBL servers going down, and I don't even know what you mean by "hacked." Do you mean individual online matches having hackers in them? I have it on very good authority (The XBL moderators themselves, which I assume is very good authority) that XBL matches can be hacked. And it's not like XBL hasn't gone down before.

Shadowman wrote:

Autobot032 wrote:What about HMW nights?

Seibertron or someone else could post a night when everyone will be on, and just meet up online and have a melee all evening.

It depends on how many people can be in a match at once. Which is typically 16, and i'm certain more than 16 people play HMW...

CRAP stop making me want to play HMW again!

amcgrath929 wrote:Yes you have to pay to play online with the 360, but it also hasn't gotten hacked or semi-crashed like the PS3's did last week.

None of what you said makes sense. I seem to recall someone starting a (Fairly frivolous) lawsuit over the XBL servers going down, and I don't even know what you mean by "hacked." Do you mean individual online matches having hackers in them? I have it on very good authority (The XBL moderators themselves, which I assume is very good authority) that XBL matches can be hacked. And it's not like XBL hasn't gone down before.

No, I am not saying that XBL cant get hacked or go down at all. My only point was you pay for the online service on the 360 because it is "policed." At least the Halo server is. And I was referring to the PS3 server going down last week when they actually asked everyone not to play their PS3 for a while. I have the actual email in my inbox. Something about it was wiping out everyones gaming achievements.

Back to the topic though, I hope since this game is being compared to Gears of War in game play style, that War for Cybertron has its own twist on the horde mode

...OMG...just...wet...myself...

amcgrath929 wrote:No, I am not saying that XBL cant get hacked or go down at all. My only point was you pay for the online service on the 360 because it is "policed."

There's a finite number of moderators, and an infinite number of matches going on at any given time. They can't catch everyone, sad as it is.

amcgrath929 wrote:At least the Halo server is. And I was referring to the PS3 server

Just so you know, there isn't just one server, there is a very, very large number of servers. if they had just the one server, it would be online for maybe ten minutes every day because the number of people trying to access it at once.

amcgrath929 wrote:And I was referring to the PS3 server going down last week when they actually asked everyone not to play their PS3 for a while. I have the actual email in my inbox. Something about it was wiping out everyones gaming achievements.

That was a freak accident, one of the firmware updates for the PS3 went wrong. It had nothing to do with online play.

Shadowman wrote:

Autobot032 wrote:What about HMW nights?

Seibertron or someone else could post a night when everyone will be on, and just meet up online and have a melee all evening.

It depends on how many people can be in a match at once. Which is typically 16, and i'm certain more than 16 people play HMW...

CRAP stop making me want to play HMW again!

Well, if it's limited to 16, how about two or more concurrent matches, and then everyone switches over so they all get a turn. Make like tournament or something. Have someone just sit in and watch the match for scorekeeping purposes.

Yes i know all of this Shadow. You's have to be a complete moron to think one server could run all of that. My one point was, you made the comment that the only problem with the Xbox 360 was you had to pay for online play. I was simply stating their reasoning for the pay to play.

I wish it were free as well, but, whats another fifty bucks for 13 months

amcgrath929 wrote:Yes i know all of this Shadow. You's have to be a complete moron to think one server could run all of that. My one point was, you made the comment that the only problem with the Xbox 360 was you had to pay for online play. I was simply stating their reasoning for the pay to play.

And my point is that none of these reasons are beneficial. There are still hackers, the moderators can't possibly catch them all, and it still goes down just as often. (Which, by my count, is one time for both)

Shadowman wrote:

amcgrath929 wrote:No, I am not saying that XBL cant get hacked or go down at all. My only point was you pay for the online service on the 360 because it is "policed."

There's a finite number of moderators, and an infinite number of matches going on at any given time. They can't catch everyone, sad as it is.

amcgrath929 wrote:At least the Halo server is. And I was referring to the PS3 server

Just so you know, there isn't just one server, there is a very, very large number of servers. if they had just the one server, it would be online for maybe ten minutes every day because the number of people trying to access it at once.

amcgrath929 wrote:And I was referring to the PS3 server going down last week when they actually asked everyone not to play their PS3 for a while. I have the actual email in my inbox. Something about it was wiping out everyones gaming achievements.

That was a freak accident, one of the firmware updates for the PS3 went wrong. It had nothing to do with online play.

It clearly says HEAD TO HEAD multiplayer in the news post, why did you even start this complaining on online multiplayer? heck, everyone here seems to think this has something to do with online play. it clearly says head to head, though! that's part of the appeal they're going for! the first head to head transformers gameplay since those beast wars fighting games. I'm sorry, I had to get that out of my system, carry on with the debating of xbl's merits and faults.

sigurdgram wrote: It clearly says HEAD TO HEAD multiplayer in the news post, why did you even start this complaining on online multiplayer? heck, everyone here seems to think this has something to do with online play.

I have two problems with this:

1. Why did you quote one of my posts, which had absolutely nothing to do with what you were talking about?

2. It WILL be online multiplayer. No one does offline-only multiplayer anymore.

Shadowman wrote:

Editor wrote:Depending on how detailed the CAC ends up, I forsee some HMW grudge matches in the near future.

Now that I think about it, if the multiplayer ends up being good, it means HMW will no longer be the only multiplayer TF game worth playing.

Abraxsis wrote:Meh....I can't stand multiplayer. Wish these companies would put 100% development into having an excellent solo game instead of splitting development into solo/multi.

You're one of a very small number of people who thinks that. Most games benefit from a multiplayer mode, and more often than not, lack of multiplayer is a burden.

And "splitting development" isn't that big a deal. They aren't making a new game, they're just adding a few extra components to one mode.

Not everyone likes multiplayer, it's not such a small number as you seem to think. There's a lot of us out there.

I can't see how any game's solo story benefits at all from having a multiplayer aspect. Nor do I see how it would be a burden to not have multiplayer. I would think not having to spend money developing a multiplayer side would heavily benefit the solo game, there would be more funds for developing the solo game, and possibly more time since the time spent on multiplayer could be put to fine tuning the solo aspect.

The way I see it, if a company wants a great solo game they'd not try to add on any sort of multiplayer. Or if a studio wanted a great multiplayer experience they should make a total multiplayer game, made just for that market. When I buy a game that has multiplayer I have to consider if I want to pay for basically half or quarter of a game I'll never use, and sometimes that game goes unbought. And when I see reviews touting the greatness of a games multiplayer side, but giving little info on the solo game I don't buy it, usually. I just have no desire to play people I don't know for no purpose other than to waste time, or get an achievment I don't need. At least solo games give you a good story to play through.

Take halo ODST, to buy the game a solo player is forced to buy the multiplayer disk along with it. Solo players are charged extra for content they don't want. Multi players were also charged extra for the solo game they might not have wanted. I won't buy that game because I'm being forced to buy a disk I have zero use for.

It doesn't matter if you like it or not, games tend to suffer without multiplayer. A solo game, no matter how good it is, has to end eventually. Mutliplayer only ends when they shut down the multiplayer servers.

That said, name one time a single-player mode has suffered because it also had a multiplayer mode.

I'm starting to have high hopes for this. It could be the fusion of BF2 and Transformers I've wanted for a long while.

[quote

Also, and this is very much anticipated, in the head-to-head matches, players can create their own Autobot or Decepticon characters!
][/quote]

I think i'll put Cy-Kill in there.

very mixed feelings on this

On one hand, I want to be able to make my own TF and bust some Decepti-chops.

On the other, I rarely play on XBLive (unless it's a free weekend or I've gotten a 24 hour pass or something) so I'd rather the developers concentrated on making the single player game as good as it can be. Co-op campaign (on and off-line) should be a given in this type of game, but getting customisable characters to work properly, as well as creating an interface for it and making a bunch of new maps for a deathmatch type of game isn't going to be something someone can knock up in 5 minutes before they finish their shift. It'll take time and effort, which I'd rather spent on the single-player/campaign mode.

Just give us a fully customisable selection of TFs for an MMO please?!

craggy wrote:It'll take time and effort, which I'd rather spent on the single-player/campaign mode.

What exactly do you think would change if they didn't create a multiplayer mode? I'm interested to hear what you think.

Fun fact, there's dozens of people working on this game. They've got more than enough effort going to both singleplayer and multiplayer, to the point that putting any more effort in either direction won't cause any real change.

well, there are only ever going to be a finite amount of resources given to the developers, that's time, money and manpower.
I'll admit ignorance as to the number of people working on the game (and obviously the money involved) but I fear that there could be a situation where things are planned for the single player game that maybe aren't finished (areas, weapons, characters, whatever), but because the multiplayer part might not be working right (surely it's harder to make a game work when there are more human players doing the random things that us humans do...particularly if they're using customisable models as opposed to the stock ones in the main game) parts of the single player game might be cut down, or dropped in order to get the people working on them to help out with the multiplayer stuff.
Maybe not. There might be more than enough people working on this game that that sort of thing won't happen. They might have enough money to hire more people to cover the workload if one part of the game or another became too problematic to be solved by the number of workers in the time left before release. There might even be no problems with the game at all, and everything works as intended first time. That last part seems highly unlikely however, and in a game I'll be playing primarily as a single player game, I'd prefer that that part of it worked as flawlessly as possible. Like I said, I'd love a TF game with fully customisable character models and the option to interact with hundreds of other players. I'd just prefer that it was one that was designed and marketed as such from the beginning.

craggy wrote:but I fear that there could be a situation where things are planned for the single player game that maybe aren't finished (areas, weapons, characters, whatever)

Fun fact, things get dummied out of games all the time, it doesn't matter if there's multiplayer or not.

craggy wrote:There might be more than enough people working on this game that that sort of thing won't happen.

There is. There's enough people working on this project that making more of them work on the singleplayer campaign would be pointless.