Steel Battalion: Line of Contact

[Papercut]

God damn its frustrating Still think you're in the minority; I've played 20 hours online now and still haven't had any issues.

How much upstream bandwidth do you have?

[Commander Marklar]

256k dude, on NTL.

I'm on their 1mb connection (1024/256) playing thru the Linksys Router, with Xbox in the DMZ (maybe ports and **** cause problems?). I usually have 2/3 bars, so my ping is below 200ms (going off Capcom's guide).

I've hosted a couple of games fine, 3vs3 in campaign and free mode. The people I usually play with have the same upstream, various cable/dsl connections. Usually played mixed US/UK games, with the odd European joining. Japanese players are too far away for mixed UK games (plus, they totally rape everyone too, US included).

Maybe just some diligence in session selection is required? I dunno, there isn't a lot I (or anyone else) can do!

[Papercut]

256k dude, on NTL.

Weird, I thought upstream bandwidth was the main problem with peer to peer games, but ADSL (which I'm assuming most LOC ppl have) is normally 256K upstream too.

I wonder if it helps that you're hosting games with a public IP address in your dmz, rather than natted with a private address. It shouldn't really.

Bit of a mystery these LOC problems. Its put me off getting the game so far.

Capcom need to pull their finger out, and create a bunch a game servers with a patch to use them.

[Strider]

God damn its frustrating Still think you're in the minority; I've played 20 hours online now and still haven't had any issues. Nobody has mentioned it the past few days, so all you lag'ers leaving have probably made it better for everyone else

But it's impossible for many of us to experience that depth, Marklar.

That's exactly my point -- I don't approve of a bad review as the content of the game hasn't been experienced properly to warrant any kind of game play review (imho).

That's the problem though Marklar, you're assuming that I've spent no time at all playing campaign mode. I've devoted more than enough hours of work (and my own time) which is why I've stated in the review that the game is probably the most immersive experience you can get on live (when it actually works of course).

[Brats]

256k dude, on NTL.

I'm on their 1mb connection (1024/256) playing thru the Linksys Router, with Xbox in the DMZ (maybe ports and **** cause problems?). I usually have 2/3 bars, so my ping is below 200ms (going off Capcom's guide).

I have exactly the same setup as you (1 meg NTL connection and Linksys router). I've spoken to loads of people with issues and they seem to be completely random .

I am going to try again tonight though .

[Commander Marklar]

That'd be nice, some of my proper Live friends can play then

Not sure how it'd run off a server though, negating the peer-to-peer nature of the title. Obviously, the state needs to be maintained if the original "host" disappears, so beyond the lobby (which I'm assuming is central to Live, like most games - for Optimatch, etc..), I assume the game hooks everyone in together, like PSO. Once a game is over, you have to sign out and the game logs you into your force's campaign screen automatically (back to the servers). Server reset doesn't affect games in progress, until the end of the session when an upload takes place (stats, points, etc... I guess the state is "invalid" at this point, so upload bombs and the "campaign cannot be played" warning hits players).

Didn't you buy that one Neil had, Papercut?

[Papercut]

nah, haven't bought it.

[Commander Marklar]

That's the problem though Marklar, you're assuming that I've spent no time at all playing campaign mode. I've devoted more than enough hours of work (and my own time) which is why I've stated in the review that the game is probably the most immersive experience you can get on live (when it actually works of course).

Maybe I am... How long you been playing? Not wanting to question your integrity, but you've experienced turn transitions, different factions, optional parts, awards, rank upgrades, etc... ?? I find something new every day in this and I've only played for little over 20 hours actual playtime

You're paid to write stuff up about this though and you're entitle to your opinion, it is probably justified. I think I jumped the gun slightly with your original post, being such a SB fanboy. If I'm unhappy, after reading what the mag says, I'll just cancel my sub

[hankwangford]

That's exactly my point -- I don't approve of a bad review as the content of the game hasn't been experienced properly to warrant any kind of game play review (imho). Maybe if you just printed "Capcom screwed this game up so bad, we refuse to review the game until such a time it is playable"; you understand my point??

I kinda agree with you, but said reviewers do have a obligation (well, to those who are paying for their 96 pages ) to get a review out on time, and such a statement is perhaps more of a slap in the face than actually giving it a bad review.

But, what, maybe he has deadline in 2 weeks; that will have been 4 weeks since the PAL version appeared. FOUR WEEKS for Capcom to sort it out. EIGHT WEEKS since it's first release. You cannot debate that it isn't sheer laziness.

I would mark Splintercell PT down for having an iffy singleplayer myself

[Brats]

I see a bad review as a positive thing for the game.

As I said before, there is nothing this game is doing that countless other Live games aren't with no lag at all. Hopefully some bad press will encourage a patch. I'd much rather have a bad Games TM review and a version of LOC where everyone can log on in perfect harmony (and blow the **** out of each other) than a good review and things stay as they are.

Even if you can connect fine, some more people to play with from this forum would be good, no?

[Valken]

Marklar,

256k upstream isn't a min requirement for Xbox Live Marklar... you keep saying that but it isn't so.

For hosting where a certain player would run a listen server maybe but as clients it's just not needed.

And if we're being pedantic I actually do have the min required upload speed to join campaign games... It doesn't mean I can.

I'm being stung by the poor way that both Live and SB deem a connection "worthy" and not amount of "it works fine for me" will change that.

[revisedgenocide]

I dont think no ones mentioned the fact that you can have good games, yes and when your in those games theyre excellent. However its impossible to play a 5v5 match. 3 on 3 with all uk players is top notch, even with a couple of US players it runs fine. However the games just too fragile when you want to play it the way its meant to be played. 3 on 3 is simply not what we should be settling for and its not what we should be playing. Goals, levels, missions are designed for 5 on 5 action.

Personally i think games TM should refuse to review it and have a page in their mag devoted to saying why they wont. The game is unreviewable (thats a word right? ). They should lambast Capcom for relesing a gem thats unable to be played and say that while they cant experience the game fully and thus cannot score it, they do not recomend it to anyone.

[Valken]

"refuse to review" is actually a great compromise!

[Commander Marklar]

That's what I said earlier 256k is the recommended upstream for live, I have it on some paper somewhere, thought it was on the site too but I can't find it. No matter, it is only a guideline. In a peer-to-peer situation, I guess it is going to assume everyone has the same bandwidth and passes information as such, which will saturate your connection causing the lag. There is no server, like a game of Wolfie or whatever; if the host goes, the game continues - it must continue, given the way the game plays.

I thought the recommended amount for campaign games was >200k? You said yourself you didn't have the required bandwidth to join campaign, what's changed since then?

Thing is though, I realise no amount of "it works fine for me" will change any of this, that wasn't my point 'cos it's totally meaningless in the grand scheme of things. There are some few thousand players out there were it works fine, they have no affect on you. My point was the potentially poor review from a magazine, having not experienced the game fully [due to connection problems]. It seemed much better to go with not reviewing it than present a review full of half truths and toy throwing.

edit: It's also frustrating to see that owners of the title [with "problems" ] aren't at least giving it some time to play; people keep saying how good a title it is online, when it plays well (apparently ). What if they patch it tomorrow? You've thrown it aside, got rid of it or whatever... there's no excuse then.

I had a few games last night; man, the Garpike is an awesome assault mech. Comes equipped with "Bang Needles" as as standard. This is basically a lance used to shove another VT over and implant an explosive device on or inside the sheel of the attacked VT - boom! Also includes mines, chain gun and assault rifles, mini-pod launchers... very handy

[Brats]

I agree with your point about fickle gamers quickly selling the game. My copy is going nowhere.

I had some 1 vs 1 games on Battle Royale last night and they were superb. When this game works it is the shizniz. I holding out for a patch for smooth 5 vs 5 games.