View Full Version : I wonder why they didnt suppot XBL 3?
04-23-2005, 09:23 PM
i was wondering this myself and am pretty sure other ppl too. i been looking in the forums but i cant find anything saying why not xbl 3. does anybody knows?
04-24-2005, 03:48 AM
I have no idea - in my view that is the single thing that could have been better.
04-24-2005, 03:52 AM
Because it came along in the middle of development, they would of had to recertify the game which would have delayed it another six months.
04-24-2005, 06:47 AM
nah , certification is a 3day process , max a week :)
They didnt since they focused on other stuff, you rather want a flawless experience with XBL 2.0 then a glitchy itchy with XBL 3.0 :)
And some XBL 3.0 stuff is there, you can send invites / friend requests using voice, which is not XBL 2.0 ;)
04-24-2005, 11:20 AM
ever since they added that voice chat thing to all XBL, u can even send voice messaging with XBL 1.0 i think.
04-24-2005, 06:50 PM
yea but still i think they shoudl use xbl 3 better. is just my opinion and lot of ppl think that way too.
thanks for the answers thoug.
04-24-2005, 07:11 PM
Isn't voice invitations an XBL 3 feature? I only wish there was a clan/squad feature.
04-25-2005, 05:26 AM
They way games are staged, lack of clans, and no voice messaging other than invites is what will keep this game from entering the upper echelon of gaming experiences. This game really needs these features to be an up-to-date title. Don't get me wrong the in game graphics and game play are great, but the thing that makes Halo2 (sorry for the reference) has as much to do with the feeling of community you get playing the game as much as actually playing it. It would just be super duper if they could at least add voice messages to this title. It can't be a big deal to program either since it is already there in some form. Seem that the developers just didn't think it important. They are dead wrong. Great game otherwise though.
04-25-2005, 07:33 AM
I agree with everything Pokester is saying.
Given the stellar reviews of UC2 and the extra “polish time” it had before shipping, I figured it was a sure thing. Now, I’m not so sure.
Even if the freezing and framerate problems are fixed (which are both concerns), the staging of multiplayer games is a big problem. I assumed this sort of thing would be at least as good as H2. But, to my surprise, there is a lot of ambiguity that makes it frustrating.
What is Epic going to do now to address these problems that all these people are reporting (glitches, bugs, and just bad design)?
Right now I’m getting the feeling of “we can’t repro it, but thanks for your $50 anyways”.
05-04-2005, 10:10 AM
If they added a clan feature that would be cool
05-10-2005, 10:37 AM
I would like UC2 alot more if it supported XBL 3.0 or some type of party system, the way you join and gather games makes it pretty inconvienent to get your friends in a game and set up teams easily.
05-10-2005, 11:57 AM
I'm happy with 2.0. 3.0 is sweet for the clan support and messaging stuff. But that is really the only difference. You can always do 3rd party clans (like...just a group of people and u have a site or whatever). I think this game is great, 3.0 would have given it that little push to make it "legendary" game, but without that it is still a great game. The bugs aren't that bad, its like they're fading with time almost.
I believe XBL 3.0 was not used because they would have rather had the great game and a little worse online play. And who knows, maybe 2.0 is less lag since there isn't as much messaging going on? Or maybe i'm just dumb...
05-10-2005, 08:17 PM
The whole notion that epic couldn't support XBL3 because of production concerns really doesn't pass the smell test for me. Halo2 has it and it was out what... 6+ months before UC2?
They'd better have a better excuse.
05-11-2005, 01:49 AM
are you an idiot? who cares that you cant send messages! messaging isnt everything .. you want to send messages, go in a chat room.... with game play like this, who wants to go in the menu and send messages? and they are working hard to fix the glitches and provide the fans what they want at very fast speeds. everyone demands stuff and *****es, but doesnt stop to think "hey coding a game is very time consuming and its very hard to find glitches in MILLIONS of line of code". I say GREAT job epic! i love your work!
by the way, 6 months is nothing in game devolopement. most likely april was the date they chose to release and market the game and refine it before halo. halo was a glitchy game to, and they JUST NOW released a patch for that (and that is incredibly slow for a patch).
your ignorance amazes us all.
05-11-2005, 05:00 PM
Well, I'm a CS major, and I've done plenty of commercial-level coding before. I'm not gonna say that 6 months is or is not a lot of time in game development, because I doubt either of us has much of an idea what's possible in 6 months, and without looking at whatever SDK supports XBL versions, we really couldn't. However, you totally missed the point: If a game that came out 6 months earlier had enough time to put in XBL3, then unless there's something I'm missing here, the whole "XBL3 came out too late in the development cycle" argument is bogus. If an epic guy sees this and would like to tell me what I'm missing, then the question is answered. Until then, the "XBL3 came out too late" statement just doesn't pass the smell test.
05-15-2005, 11:04 AM
XBL 3 support would have been nice, but it wouldn't have been that dramatic of a improvement.
All it would have added is the ability to send messages and a clan list. Clans have existed and thrived in both PC and console games long before any games had built in clan support. Honestly, if all that binds your clan together is a list inside a game, then you're probably not much of a clan.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.