-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Socom Servers vs. Xbox Live

Xbox

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
5 replies to this topic

#1 of 6 OFFLINE   HalRoth

HalRoth

    Agent

  • 28 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 20 2003

Posted May 01 2003 - 05:47 AM

Why oh why, doesn't Xbox have servers like sony does for socom. They are definately necessary. I asked myself today, if Socom were on the Xbox, would I play that or GR. And after little thought, i said Socom. Cause the graphics do suck on the PS2, and the voice chat doesnt work too well. But minus that, and Socom would probably be the top xbox live game, mainly because of hte servers, 8v8 every game.

#2 of 6 OFFLINE   Brett Hancock

Brett Hancock

    Supporting Actor

  • 929 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 17 2001

Posted May 01 2003 - 06:41 AM

I agree but I think if we give it time X-Box will have a game that will dominate socom. Counter Strike, Rogue Spear, and Wolfenstein I think all have a good shot of having 8 vs. 8 play and with the better voice communication I can see me playing these more then socom.

#3 of 6 OFFLINE   JasonKrol

JasonKrol

    Supporting Actor

  • 507 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2001

Posted May 02 2003 - 01:38 AM

Brett,
I wonder if he means the fact that SOCOM has dedicated servers, and most Live games rely on Peer-to-peer. Meaning, I dont know too many people with T1s in their house to be able to host a full 8v8/16 player game.

That being said, if RTCW, CS, RS, any 16 player game will ultimately fail and suck if its truly dependant on p2p technology because noone will be able to host a full 16 player game.

I cant wait for RTCW, but I fear that what I said will ultimately prove to be true, and the game will fade for me because I will always rather play a full 8v8 on SOCOM than a sketchy/laggy 3v3 or 4v4 at best of RTCW.

Someone mentioned this and I thought it was a great line; "Xbox Live = $50 buddy list" . Posted Image


-Jason

#4 of 6 OFFLINE   Tom Vodhanel

Tom Vodhanel

    Screenwriter

  • 2,191 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 04 1998

Posted May 02 2003 - 02:36 AM

I wonder if this is what is causing a lot of the delays with Halo2..trying to make a 16 player on line work with the current bandwidth? MotoGP does very well with 16 for the most part...and that would seem to need a fair amount of bandwidth.

TV

#5 of 6 OFFLINE   Brett Hancock

Brett Hancock

    Supporting Actor

  • 929 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 17 2001

Posted May 02 2003 - 02:58 AM

Good point. The developers and numerous game sites have reported that Wolfenstein will in fact feature 8 vs 8 player battles which if its true is obviously a very good thing. I know that this piece of info has to be taken with a grain of salt but when I think back I dont remember being told that ghost recon would support 8 vs 8(but I could be wrong) Also you would like to think that the developers have figured out how to use xbox live and work with it better so more players is possible. If none of this happens however I might just have to break down and buy a t1 line.

#6 of 6 OFFLINE   James St

James St

    Supporting Actor

  • 959 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 1999

Posted May 02 2003 - 04:24 AM

Quote:
That being said, if RTCW, CS, RS, any 16 player game will ultimately fail and suck if its truly dependant on p2p technology because noone will be able to host a full 16 player game.
I cant wait for RTCW, but I fear that what I said will ultimately prove to be true, and the game will fade for me because I will always rather play a full 8v8 on SOCOM than a sketchy/laggy 3v3 or 4v4 at best of RTCW.


Well put. This has been my biggest disappointment with Live. I prefer to play with a large group of people especially when they are all from HTF. Socom provided an awesome experience for me that XBL really hasn't been able to match yet.