New Bungie Game Incoming?


Recommended Posts

The Pieces are Coming Together. Over the past few days, there have been rumors that a new Halo game will be announced at next week's E3 and today we have enough clues to believe the rumors are indeed true. First, Kotaku discovered that in Bungie's latest podcast, Brian Jarrard and Luke Smith teased about something being revealed at E3.

Brian: Isn't there something going on on July 14th or something like that?

Luke: Yeah, around then.

Brian: Somehow that's sticking in my head for some reason. Guess we'll have to see.

Luke: Yep, we'll just have to be patient. Who could say?

Furthermore, the I Love Bees web site has resurfaced today, leading us to believe that there's definitely something going on.

TeamXbox

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/647888-new-bungie-game-incoming/
Share on other sites

Hopefully they will announce a game that will actually hold my interest a little more than Halo 3 did. It wasn't just COD 4 that pulled me away, just the fact that it didn't seem at all like Halo 2's MP that I had grown to love.

:blink:

That's an interesting thing to say. I don't think I could go back to H2's MP very easily, though not to say it isn't great. I love H3's MP much more.

Maybe some other Microsoft hotshot is going to be getting a tattoo ;)

-Spenser

:blink:

That's an interesting thing to say. I don't think I could go back to H2's MP very easily, though not to say it isn't great. I love H3's MP much more.

Maybe some other Microsoft hotshot is going to be getting a tattoo ;)

-Spenser

I guess after spending countless hours with my friends on it, I had high expectations about Halo 3 (along with millions of others). I think some of it had to do with the slow multiplayer action when I compare it to something like COD 4. I wanted something faster paced, but was extremely let down.

I guess after spending countless hours with my friends on it, I had high expectations about Halo 3 (along with millions of others). I think some of it had to do with the slow multiplayer action when I compare it to something like COD 4. I wanted something faster paced, but was extremely let down.

Well I can't speak from experience as I've never played CoD4 online, but most games of Halo 3 I play online are pretty fast paced, in my opinion so I'm not sure what you mean by that. Those millions of others can't be too let down though - there's still 750,000 unique players playing Halo 3 online every day. I had pretty high expectations for Halo 3 and they were pretty well met for me. But that's just me. This is all a bit OT though so I'll let it go.

What I will say is that it probably won't be a Halo game. It might tie in to the Halo Universe (such as how Halo tied into the Marathon Universe), but it's not going to be a Halo 4.

-Spenser

Well I can't speak from experience as I've never played CoD4 online, but most games of Halo 3 I play online are pretty fast paced, in my opinion so I'm not sure what you mean by that. Those millions of others can't be too let down though - there's still 750,000 unique players playing Halo 3 online every day. I had pretty high expectations for Halo 3 and they were pretty well met for me. But that's just me. This is all a bit OT though so I'll let it go.

I would really recommend it then. You will learn quickly what I mean by Halo being slow paced. I guess I just look it as another company figured out how multiplayer should work and that was evident by the fact that COD 4 knocked Halo 3 off the top of the chart for several weeks easily.

magik: You mentioned my favorite word..."campers". The word crops up in any game but is used so loosely practically everybody is a camper (apparently :p). I never find myself using the word because it has no meaning to me. Getting kills in an enemy base is just that, getting kills. If there are too many people in the enemy base, they respawn elsewhere. The fact that you are constantly killed by campers slays me because you could call anybody a camper.

Not sure what you mean by the respawn comment, they are both nearly instantaneous and get you back into the action quick.

I would really recommend it then. You will learn quickly what I mean by Halo being slow paced. I guess I just look it as another company figured out how multiplayer should work and that was evident by the fact that COD 4 knocked Halo 3 off the top of the chart for several weeks easily.

I'll pass. I played with a friend locally once and it was alright. It gave me the feel of CS:S, which I love and have played a lot of. I'm sure it's a great game, but I already own plenty of shooters and like I said, Halo 3 does the trick for me in MP. I'm a Halo/Bungie fanatic - it'd be hard for Bungie to disappoint me with a Halo game.

Also, while CoD4 did knock Halo off the number one spot, the number of people playing Halo every day never decreased by very much.

-Spenser

magik: You mentioned my favorite word..."campers". The word crops up in any game but is used so loosely practically everybody is a camper (apparently :p). I never find myself using the word because it has no meaning to me. Getting kills in an enemy base is just that, getting kills. If there are too many people in the enemy base, they respawn elsewhere. The fact that you are constantly killed by campers slays me because you could call anybody a camper.

Campers as in people will stay in one spot and wait for people to cross their scope. It happens frequently in CoD4 and it is extremely rare in Halo 3. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with 'camping', no matter your definition, what I'm saying is that due to the existence and abundance of 'campers' in CoD4, I find it surprising that you feel it is a faster paced game.

I'll pass. I played with a friend locally once and it was alright. It gave me the feel of CS:S, which I love and have played a lot of. I'm sure it's a great game, but I already own plenty of shooters and like I said, Halo 3 does the trick for me in MP. I'm a Halo/Bungie fanatic - it'd be hard for Bungie to disappoint me with a Halo game.

Also, while CoD4 did knock Halo off the number one spot, the number of people playing Halo every day never decreased by very much.

-Spenser

Are you serious? I'd pass too if I only had the option of playing locally. That is just a plain joke and it pains me to hear you had to suffer through that. If you ever want to play a real match, give me a call and we can get you online. :p

I'll see if I can find those numbers, but I think COD 4 numbers have been pretty consistent as well. I mean from the first week to now, its not like it has dropped in and out of the top 5, it has been right there with Halo 3 when its not beating it.

As you said, if you like Bungie that is fine. I am no way trying to convince you to play another game, just trying to give you impressions that you might otherwise would have never heard.

magik: Ah, you mentioned the other thing I forgot to say. People complain about campers not moving and that is the key. If they don't move and stay scoped on one tiny spot then you are in a perfect position to kill them. People complain about "campers" because they don't know how to kill them or don't bother to and try to go on with the game.

If you are trying to look it as Halo 3 barely has it, I disagree. Teams force the enemy to spawn in certain locations by pushing them across the map, thus making them easier to kill. Many people's definition of camping right there.

I just see COD 4 as faster paced because there is much more going on, more kills, and more communication needed for a successful victory.

By the way, may I ask what modes you frequented?

My biggest complaint about Halo 3 is the same as Halo 2: Matchmaking

I know that lots of people like it, however, I absolutely despise it! I am a traditionalist as I love server browsers. The lack of such feature in Halo 2 and 3 has really soured my experience. I don't want to play what Bungie thinks I should play, I want to make that decision!

And don't give me the "keep an up to date friends list" BS! That is not a good solution to the problem, and most people don't join your customs anyway.

It also disappoints me greatly that they did promise to add this feature into Halo 3 with XBL Public. Of course, that was scrapped. I also don't want to hear the excuse of it being too difficult to implement. SQL is more than capable of providing the solution, and MS makes the software for it!

To make matters (for me) even worse, I find that the maps in Halo 3 are very much so inferior to those in Halo 2 (with the exception of the re-made maps). Then, in some maps, they spawn you with an Assault Rifle, a short range weapon, in maps such as Sandtrap, which is a long range map. And they do this without providing you with a sidearm. So basically, it's the same balancing issue that plagued Halo 2: everyone just looks for the best weapons, and the people who obtain them usually win.

I also completely agree with Mystic that the gameplay is very slow. It almost puts me to sleep.

Unfortunately (for me), Bungie's matchmaking-only/no server browser (nazimatch) system has spread like a disease to many great games on the 360. It's also that reason why I have not, nor will I, purchase COD4 (360 version).

It's because of matchmaking why I have become more of a PC gamer now. PC's have free online, server browsers, dedicated servers, and mods. It's also because of matchmaking why I downgraded my XBL account from Gold to Silver.

Although, I am curious to see what new material Bungie can come up with, as Halo has pretty much consumed their development for the last few years.

Mikee I didn't want to quote you because that would just be huge and unnecessary but here's my point. Consoles are generally geared more towards less hardcore gaming which can be found on the PC. With a more casual base, simpler systems had to be implemented in many multiplayer games so that players could easily get into games without having to select from a million different servers with many choices. I think in that way Bungie, Infinity Ward, etc. have found success and will continue to make multiplayer in a matchmaking way.

I am not saying one way is better than another, but look what it has done to the console market. :p

magik: Ah, you mentioned the other thing I forgot to say. People complain about campers not moving and that is the key. If they don't move and stay scoped on one tiny spot then you are in a perfect position to kill them. People complain about "campers" because they don't know how to kill them or don't bother to and try to go on with the game.

If you are trying to look it as Halo 3 barely has it, I disagree. Teams force the enemy to spawn in certain locations by pushing them across the map, thus making them easier to kill. Many people's definition of camping right there.

I just see COD 4 as faster paced because there is much more going on, more kills, and more communication needed for a successful victory.

By the way, may I ask what modes you frequented?

I never mentioned any complaints about camping, nor did I complain about campers myself. I was just saying that, due to the existence and abundance of campers in CoD4, it is inherently a slower paced game. I don't see how you can say Halo 3 has campers as it's very very rare to find the same person in the same spot more than once throughout a game. People are constantly moving and the speed of player movement and the existence of the motion sensor ensures that people won't be able to camp one spot for too long.

What modes I frequent in CoD4? I'll frequently play them all, but I guess I would say the majority is Team Deathmatch, Assault and Headquarters (I think those are the names, can't recall exactly).

I never mentioned any complaints about camping, nor did I complain about campers myself. I was just saying that, due to the existence and abundance of campers in CoD4, it is inherently a slower paced game. I don't see how you can say Halo 3 has campers as it's very very rare to find the same person in the same spot more than once throughout a game. People are constantly moving and the speed of player movement and the existence of the motion sensor ensures that people won't be able to camp one spot for too long.

What modes I frequent in CoD4? I'll frequently play them all, but I guess I would say the majority is Team Deathmatch, Assault and Headquarters (I think those are the names, can't recall exactly).

Maybe you missed what I posted before

If you are trying to look it as Halo 3 barely has it, I disagree. Teams force the enemy to spawn in certain locations by pushing them across the map, thus making them easier to kill. Many people's definition of camping right there.

If you don't see it that way, I guess I think back to many matches on the small Jungle stage in which one teams stays on the same side of the map for the whole game.

I'm confused though when you said somebody won't be able to camp that long with motion sensing. COD 4 one ups that with a map that shows where fire is coming from, adds a kill cam to see where somebody is firing from, or just plain shows you where a person is if they are "camping". If they are moving and you know where they are but don't bother killing them, I don't see how one can comment.

Did you mean Domination instead of Assault? If you ever played that game type, camping is very hard to come by. The battlefield is always changing as the enemy captures different points so its hard to camp in an area where there once was people, but aren't anymore because the landscape changed so to say.

Mikee I didn't want to quote you because that would just be huge and unnecessary but here's my point. Consoles are generally geared more towards less hardcore gaming which can be found on the PC. With a more casual base, simpler systems had to be implemented in many multiplayer games so that players could easily get into games without having to select from a million different servers with many choices. I think in that way Bungie, Infinity Ward, etc. have found success and will continue to make multiplayer in a matchmaking way.

I am not saying one way is better than another, but look what it has done to the console market. :p

I understand that, but they should still provide an option for those who don't want it.

Really, that would be ideal: A dual-system approach (like COD 3), where you have matchmaking (both ranked and non-ranked) as well as a non-ranked server browser that allows players to join in-progress games.

With that, you can have your cake and eat it too!

I understand that, but they should still provide an option for those who don't want it.

Really, that would be ideal: A dual-system approach (like COD 3), where you have matchmaking (both ranked and non-ranked) as well as a non-ranked server browser that allows players to join in-progress games.

That would split the population up and potentially destroy the point of MM - getting people into a game with those their skill level, and doing it in a short amount of time. To do that, you need a ton of people playing through MM.

MM is popular in consoles now because the system that builds your skill based on how you play is built into Xbox Live itself and into your Gamertag. It's called TruSkill and was created at Microsoft Research and takes into account a combination of a lot of things. As it's built into XBL, it's easy to implement for the developers if they just do MM.

@Slane - you're one of few who think that, as witnessed by the fact that Halo is the flagship franchise for the Xbox division because most people do like it. There will be more Halo games, whether developed by Bungie or not.

-Spenser

So basically, it's the same balancing issue that plagued Halo 2: everyone just looks for the best weapons, and the people who obtain them usually win.

I disagree, no single weapon can dominate that easily without the player being very good. And that's what I love about Halo: the balancing is near perfect, from my experience.

I also completely agree with Mystic that the gameplay is very slow. It almost puts me to sleep.

I'd agree that Halo is generally a slower game than COD4, but I certainly wouldn't call it a "slow game". And I can't imagine you'd fall asleep from it, are you sure everyone else didn't just leave? :pinch:

Unfortunately (for me), Bungie's matchmaking-only/no server browser (nazimatch) system has spread like a disease to many great games on the 360. It's also that reason why I have not, nor will I, purchase COD4 (360 version).

It's because of matchmaking why I have become more of a PC gamer now. PC's have free online, server browsers, dedicated servers, and mods. It's also because of matchmaking why I downgraded my XBL account from Gold to Silver.

Matchmaking is not that bad at all. In fact, I think it's brilliant. If there was server browsing(which would be nice) I'd probably still use matchmaking a majority of the time. Hell, it's defiantly no reason to avoid COD4 on Xbox360.

That would split the population up and potentially destroy the point of MM - getting people into a game with those their skill level, and doing it in a short amount of time. To do that, you need a ton of people playing through MM.

MM is popular in consoles now because the system that builds your skill based on how you play is built into Xbox Live itself and into your Gamertag. It's called TruSkill and was created at Microsoft Research and takes into account a combination of a lot of things. As it's built into XBL, it's easy to implement for the developers if they just do MM.

-Spenser

I agree with you about splitting the population up, that was what I was just about to get to.

I haven't heard about that TruSkill aspect and I'm confused how it would work. In a game like Halo 3, you are matched up with players near your skill levels so that TruSkill thing makes sense. In a game like COD 4, that system is absent as you are matched up randomly.

I agree with you about splitting the population up, that was what I was just about to get to.

I haven't heard about that TruSkill aspect and I'm confused how it would work. In a game like Halo 3, you are matched up with players near your skill levels so that TruSkill thing makes sense. In a game like COD 4, that system is absent as you are matched up randomly.

It might look random, but it's not. You have a 'skill level' when going into MM in CoD4, whether it's displayed or not.

TrueSkill

TrueSkill[23] is a ranking and matchmaking system premiering in the xbox 360 live services. Developed at Microsoft Research Cambridge (England), the TrueSkil ranking system is now used in over 150 titles for the xbox 360. It uses a mathematical model of uncertainty to address weaknesses in existing ranking systems such as ELO. For example, a new player joining million-player leagues can be ranked correctly in fewer than 20 games. It can predict the probability of each game outcome, which enhances competitive matchmaking, making it possible to assemble skill-balanced teams from a group of players with different abilities.

When matchmaking, the system attempts to match individuals based on their estimated skill level. If two individuals are competing head-to-head and have the same estimated skill level with low estimate uncertainty, they should each have roughly a 50% chance of winning a match. In this way, the system attempts to make every match as competitive as possible.

In order to prevent abuse of the system, the majority of ranked games have relatively limited options for matchmaking. By design, players cannot easily play with their friends in ranked games. Instead, the system supports unranked Player Matches, which allow individuals of any skill level to be paired (often including "guests" on an account). Such matches do not contribute to the TrueSkill rating.

Source (I usually wouldn't cite Wiki, but the entry is backed by the Microsoft Research document on TrueSkill)

-Spenser

It might look random, but it's not. You have a 'skill level' when going into MM in CoD4, whether it's displayed or not.

I'm still taking it with a grain of salt for COD 4. It seems to ring a bit more true for Halo 3 though.

I find it hard to believe it is taking place when I (highest level on COD 4) meet several people who have just started playing consistently in just an hour or two.

Even if you have a group of 3-4 high level players, it is still easy to play with people who have just started playing. If COD 4 matched me upon my skill, the matches would seem a little more competitive and would be noticeable.

I'm not doubting the technology, just the implementation into more games than just Halo 3.

The last paragraph of your quote makes it seem extremely geared to games setup with Ranked and Unranked systems, which is absent in COD 4 which just contains Ranked.

^^^If you read any of the research, you find it's not particularly a simple thing it's doing. I haven't read all of it and I don't know a whole lot about how it works, but it's an overall ranking of your skill, not just a per-game ranking, I believe (I could be wrong - you'd have to read the research).

While I didn't know for sure if TrueSkill was used in CoD4 before you kept prodding (I just assumed because TrueSkill is supposed to be one of the best ranking algorithms created and it is built into XBL), a little bit of digging did prove to be useful:

One thing we're still waiting to see is how balanced online play will be with level 1 players squaring off against those who've already attained the highest level and majority of equipment. An Activision representative told us Xbox 360 gamers would be sorted by their TrueSkill ranking, whereas such a feature isn't planned for the PS3 version.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/829/829054p2.html ;)

-Spenser

Edited by stifler6478
^^^If you read any of the research, you find it's not particularly a simple thing it's doing. I haven't read all of it and I don't know a whole lot about how it works, but it's an overall ranking of your skill, not just a per-game ranking, I believe (I could be wrong - you'd have to read the research).

While I didn't know for sure if TrueSkill was used in CoD4 before you kept prodding (I just assumed because TrueSkill is supposed to be one of the best ranking algorithms created and it is built into XBL), a little bit of digging did prove to be useful:

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/829/829054p2.html ;)

-Spenser

That is a great article, but does what I've experience with that being completely the opposite most of the time have any bearing?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Thanks
    • I actually got to use one of those so called "backup codes" once. It was for a customer, I choose the backup code option, and by the grace of god, they actually hade them printed out. Imagine my surprise, when after using the backup code, Google then told use we had to enter a code they just sent to the gmail address we currently did not have access to. I was not amused, Google backup codes should be the end all get out of jail free card, because you had to have access to the account to even get them.
    • On the topic of being locked out of a service. Recently two different friends of mine got locked out of their Google accounts. Both were hack attempts and one of them is waiting 30 days before he can get back in. He had backup codes and MFA but not a passkey. It was a browser token hack. Anyhow he has to wait 30 days for the dispute or whatever to end. The other person only had a password and is screwed losing all of the email, docs and years of photos. Google won’t help her at all. Her fault because she had no backup/recovery setup. Enable passkeys if possible. Also do NOT use browser based password managers. If using a cloud service make sure it is one you can fully sync to one of your devices so you can back it up. Like a PC or Mac with some backup drive plugged into it. Google is the worst to use IMHO. You can’t sync your photos at all. You have to use the “Take Out” service which is manual and takes days. That service strips the meta data from your photos. Also Google Docs synced to a device are useless without a Google accounts. MS Office/Libre Office is not going to open a link to a Google doc to a dead account.
    • Why you need to take back control of your synced passwords and how to go about doing that by Paul Hill Credit: Pixabay Last month, when Google decided to introduce daily and weekly caps for Gemini, it reignited an anxiety of mine, that you can’t really depend on service providers to maintain features forever, and it got me looking into free software (as in freedom) in other areas too. One app I quickly came across was KeePassXC on desktop and KeePassDX on Android as an alternative to password manager lock-in within the Chrome or Firefox ecosystems. I personally like to switch around with browsers, and using either password manager is inconvenient, so something like KeePassXC was interesting to me. The main issue with it now is syncing; I was not sure how to do that. After a bit of research, I came across Syncthing, a tool I was vaguely familiar with but had never used because it seemed complicated. However, I was completely wrong, and honestly, I think everyone should use it if they use multiple devices. It essentially lets you share folders peer to peer across all of your devices, no cloud services that you don’t control necessary! And it was fairly simple to set up, if not a bit clunky. Since setting it up, I’ve also started using Syncthing to back up other apps too, so don’t think it’s limited to just saving password databases. You can use it for pretty much anything you use Dropbox or Google Drive for. Before continuing to talk about those apps a bit more, let’s walk back a bit and talk about browser sync. Ever since the late 2000s and early 2010s, really, since we have been using smartphones, browser sync has been a necessity of life. I don’t know about you, but I have hundreds of passwords saved. For the most part, they’re all unique, so I don’t remember them and rely on software to manage them for me. Until recently, I’ve relied on password managers in Chrome and Firefox, but what I always found annoying was that it can be hard to transfer them between browsers. Sure, on Windows it is simple enough, but on Linux, exporting bookmarks has been temperamental. It works OK nowadays, but not too long ago, Chrome required you to enable exporting passwords in chrome://flags. The situation is even worse on mobile; there is no exporting or importing of passwords of any kind. You literally have to do it on a desktop, which is incredibly annoying in our mobile-first world. Sync also lets us take out bookmarks, history, tabs, and autofill data easily. To enable sync, it’s just a matter of signing into the browser once, and it handles the rest. It’s nice and easy. Obviously, all this has some issues, including those I’ve outlined above about it being hard to transfer data between browsers, but also things such as account suspension, lost account passwords, and other lock-in mechanisms, such as passkeys, being tied to a specific browser. On a sidenote, I have just removed all of my passkeys because they can make it harder to move browsers. I think the biggest threat to your synced passwords, especially if doing this with Google, is having your account suspended. I don’t ever expect mine to be suspended, but you do hear horror stories on Reddit where people lose access to their Google accounts. Imagine if you have hundreds of passwords, then suddenly lose access to them because Google froze your account, what would you do? So yes, it can be nice to use these syncing services for their convenience, but they also have risks. You may have seen me going on about free software quite a bit in my editorials. It’s essentially a concept championed by the Free Software Foundation. It’s software under particular licenses that grant you four freedoms: run the program for any purpose (0), study and change the source code (1), redistribute copies to others (2), and the freedom to distribute modified copies to others (3). For example, if there is an app I use and one day it gets abandoned by the developer, I can keep running it or even clone the software and continue developing it. Look at the myriad of cool services Google has run over the years before killing them. You can’t take the source code for those because they are proprietary, for the most part. Both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so I get the freedoms listed above. In my use case where I’m syncing a database full of my passwords, I also get proper ownership over my data, there is no losing access to the database due to a frozen account, I can access the code of the tools I’m using, and I can get support from real people online if I run into issues, rather than having to consult a vague help page from an opaque company. With the KeePassXC password manager, you create a .kdbx file, which is what will be synced between devices. KeePassXC has cross-platform apps and also has browser extensions so that the browser can fetch passwords from the database once it is unlocked. Meanwhile, Syncthing is a peer-to-peer file sync tool where you can select folders to sync between your devices. Just pop files in the folders you choose, and then they will be available across your other devices whenever they come online. Syncthing is resilient as it works over both LAN and the internet and only ever sends content between your devices, never to a third-party server somewhere else. By combining these two pieces of software, you can essentially replicate the browser sync functionality. I have had a weird, conflicting issue where a new file is appearing, but it doesn’t seem to be impacting my main password database, which is updating between devices just fine. If you want to get a setup similar to what I have, you will need to go here to download KeePassXC for your computer. Once you have that, you will need to download your passwords from your web browser to a CSV file. In Chrome, you can type chrome://password-manager/settings into the URL bar, and you should see an option to download your passwords under Export Passwords. This will give you the CSV file you need for importing into KeePassXC. If you use a different browser, just use a search engine and type “browser-name export passwords” and muddle along. In KeePassXC, you’ll want to press Import File from the home screen, select the CSV file, and create a new database from it. On one of the screens of the wizard, there will be a Title field with a drop-down selected to none. Change this to Title and continue. You’ll select a name for the database, the encryption level (the defaults are fine), and then you will pick a password. I would choose four unrelated words that are easy for you to remember, as you’ll be typing them fairly often to access your passwords. When you have all your passwords in your new database, you will want to set up the browser extension so that your browser can fetch passwords from KeePassXC. Rather than explain how to do that here, refer to KeePassXC’s guide on how to set it up properly. Once you’ve got that set up, you want to install KeePassDX on Android. You can grab it on the F-Droid store and the Google Play Store. For iPhone users, there are other .kdbx-supporting apps, but I haven’t tried any of them, so have a look around and use what suits you. Once you have that done, you will want to install Syncthing on your computer and find a third-party app for your mobile device. On Android, I use an app called BasicSync; there are also options for iOS, but again, I’ve not tried these. Once you’ve got SyncThing, you’ll want to set it up and connect all of your devices together and share a folder between your gadgets. PCWorld has a good tutorial on setting up a synchronized file between your devices using SyncThing. Once you’ve set it up, congrats, you’ll never have to touch that stuff again except for adding or removing devices. I’ll be honest, I didn’t particularly like setting up Syncthing. It didn’t take me a massive amount of time, but I think I had to check online because I found it a bit confusing. That said, I’ve had it running for several weeks now and never need to touch the Syncthing settings, so that’s very nice. I also mentioned a conflicting file. I’m not sure why this is appearing, but the main .kdbx file seems to be updating and syncing just fine. What’s nice is that both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so they won’t just vanish one day; you can take the code and fork the project or use a range of alternative implementations that others have made. It’s also nice that it works over LAN, so even if your ISP is having problems, your passwords will still sync. One area where you will want to be a bit more careful with this setup is if you only have one device. I am OK because I have a computer and two phones, all synced up. If you just have one device, you will probably want to store a backup of your .kdbx file somewhere else. Obviously, you’ll also want to remember your password really well, too. If you get locked out, it's game over. Overall, if you want to take back control of your computing from big tech, taking control of your passwords is an important part of this. You don’t need to immediately clear out your browser’s password manager; try running KeePassXC and the password manager concurrently for a while to see if you run into any problems. If you do try this out, let us know some other creative ways to use Syncthing. I haven’t really come up with a solution about what to do with my bookmarks, for example.
    • If the price was a dollar, someone would complain "Why isn't it free?" If it was free, someone would complain they weren't being paid to play it.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      88
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!