Frontlines multiplayer demo on Live News

/Mocks kids

1st ruddy comment!
I'm teh 1337.

32 player sounds laggy to me! :)
Will give it a blast.

If by dedicated you mean P2P then you are correct.

The singleplayer demo was quite good, will definetly give this a closer look.

This rocks online.

@ cabbadgecase: Yep, dedicated Kaos servers FTW.

Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom, rules.

/falls of chair!!!

This is what i've been waiting for, the new battlefield! I'll pretend I didn't play the single player demo!!!

Woooooah... 32 players online... it really does show how far behind the PC online gaming is on the Xbox 360 in terms of the number of players, doesn't it? I was regularly playing 32 player UT2004 and Call of Duty online games years ago and with little or no lag. And free too (bar the ISP subscription obviously).

just had 2 games in the dedicated servers and it wasnt the best, nice 1 sec lag between getting in and out of veichles and shooting rockets. Hope it runs smoother when i try it later as the games pretty good but too rough with the lag

Yeah, Darren, PC gaming has always been lightyears ahead of console gaming in terms of online gaming. And this new-fangled "HD" crap has been standard in PC games for about 10 years.

But, my experience with PC gaming recently has been really rather meh, so i've pretty much switched to console gaming these days.

"it really does show how far behind the PC online gaming is on the Xbox 360"

I chose standardised hardware, unified integrated network and friendslist over extortionate upgrade costs and terminal incompatability any day. Online console gaming is just fine. Frontlines, however, I found to suck balls quite deeply.

But I loved Desert Combat! So I must like this right? PLEEEEAASE!

Why does it suck balls???

Is it the servers, or is it just the game in general?

After playing CoD4, Frontlines felt like a treacle-soaked vaguefest. Partly due to the controls, partly due to another lame UE3 implimentation. Infinity ward have effectively ruined the online FPS genre as far as I'm concerned, as nothing out there can match the sharp, fluid and beautiful CoD4.

That's just my opinion of course.

Thanks, I know where your coming from, COD4 does shame most of the competition with it's quality, i've not even touched Halo 3 since it came out!

But I think to compare COD4 to the likes of Battlefield/Frontlines I think is slightly unfair as they are totally different games.....I still go back to Modern Combat now on the 360 (dispite the 2 maps online situation) and I can enjoy both for what they are.

So for the time being, or at least till I get home and try it for myself i'm gonna asume your being a little harsh!

Heres hoping!!!!

Perfect Dark Zero had 32 players without lag, so it's nothing new. No specific reason it should have lag. It might, but try it and see.

@farticusmaximus,

After playing CoD4, Frontlines felt like a treacle-soaked vaguefest. Partly due to the controls, partly due to another lame UE3 implimentation. Infinity ward have effectively ruined the online FPS genre as far as I'm concerned, as nothing out there can match the sharp, fluid and beautiful CoD4

==============================

I'm guessing you played on the PC. The PC with 32 players with the same maps as the 360 with 12 was a frag fest. Just goes to show, more players is not always better, although PC gamers often brag, that it is... It depends on the map and the gametype.

I seem to remember Gears of War did quite well with 4 on 4...

from the beta i am sure there is support for 64 players on the PC and the maps are pretty big, so more players or the maps may end up looking empty

@Anthony_UK

I'd also rate Battlefield above Frontlines, but as I said, that's only my opinion. For me smoothness is paramount in a shooter.


@JackB

I'm referring to the 360 version. I do agree on the size issue though, I prefer FPS's with a maximum of around 8v8, with maps that allow you to get to the action quickly. Then again I dont 'do' stealth or sniping in shooters, I'm too impatient.. ;)

COD4 supports 32 players with the PC version? Good grief - you probably don't survive 10 seconds at a time. Those maps are way too small. It's bad enough with 12-16 players trying to weave in and out of random 'nades - with 32 people tossing them, it must be like trying to get through a mine field. Search and Destroy must be especially worthless, unless they limit the # of players for that gametype.

Regardless of that, 32 players might make Frontlines better since the maps seem a bit larger. Definitely giving this a go.

just had a play and it's better than I thought it would be. Got loads of kills because people aren't keeping an eye out for the drones!!!!

@farticusmaximus,

I'm referring to the 360 version. I do agree on the size issue though, I prefer FPS's with a maximum of around 8v8, with maps that allow you to get to the action quickly. Then again I dont 'do' stealth or sniping in shooters, I'm too impatient.. ;)

================

Hmmm, that's surprising. I have almost 9 days now on COD 4 online multiplayer (yeah, I know I have a problem...), but I don't hear many people complain about frags on the 360. PC's it's crazy, because of 16 players vs 6 as potential grenade targets.

I use Bandolier instead of the 3 grenade perk on all maps and just don't see grenades as a big problem, but then again I know where to go to not get hit with grenades. I used to hate Martydom, but rarely get killed by that anymore either.

EDIT: Yeah, I love 6 on 6 in COD 4. Enough players to be fun, but it still gives me a fighting chance to keep track (somewhat) of my teammates and the enemy (those without UVA of course).

Slower games could use a few more enemies, but it gets tough to keep track of everyone in a fluid environment if it gets to many more than that. Gears was pretty good with 4 on 4. In many games with a little communication everyone could get on the same page and keep track of where everyone was.... Most FPS's are often mayhem.

@JackB
I think you've got the wrong end of the stick with Farticus' comments. He loves CoD4 on the 360.

I wasn't going to download this after the single player demo which left me wanting to go back to CoD4. Gave it a chance after someone pointed out it is meant to have improved from the single player release.

In the end it's actually not that bad. I just had time to test the engine - it lets you set up a private match so you can run about and explore without being twated constantly - but it has definitely improved. The overall look is still a little rough, and the engine isn't as smooth as could be - but it was better than before. I'll give it a go against real people tonight, but I'm probably still left waiting for BF:BC for my larger scale battle fix. For now I am content with CoD4 :)

"I think you've got the wrong end of the stick with Farticus' comments. He loves CoD4 on the 360."

Tis true. I was agreeing with you JackB, I prefer to have managable numbers. Enough to always be able to find action, but few enough to have the odd bit of cat'n'mouse.