[Just 1 more thread about h4 ranking!]

Yeah I don't think a stat-based ranking system is a good idea because it promotes selfish gameplay. When I play h3, it seems like everyone just wants to win. There's not true in reach. I think that just sticking a win percentage on a player's profile will recreate that team-oriented urge to win AND allows people to see how good a player is.

 

Ya I have never heard of anyone wanting to go into a game and want to win, I just can't believe anyone would actually want to win. Winning is sooooo overrated. lol

 

But seriously isn't the whole point of playing a game to win? Thats why points are kept and at the end of the game it says who won. I guess they could just take out winning and losing and just randomly end the game whenever they felt like it. Its just like any sport, there is always going to be a team that wins and a team that loses and everybody playing the game wants to be the team that wins. This is why Reach never had as many people playing as Halo 3. Stat-based is they only way to go as it forces poeple to actually work together. People become selfish when it isn't stat based because they know at the end of the game they will still "rank up" no matter how good or bad they do (Like COD). This is when people end up leaving for a bit during a game or just messing around because they know there will be no negative effect and they don't care about anyone else on their team who actually want to win. People that don't want to win/lose should just stick to social multiplayer and leave the ranked for those who want to win and work with their team. Wanting to win a game does the complete opposite of promoting selfishness, It takes it away from the game.

[Halo 4 ranking system]

what halo 4 needs is the halo 2 rank system. the halo 2 rank system made sure everybody was trying their hardest every game and it made sure you were getting pared up with kids that were at the same skill level as you were to make the game even more competitive. when i played halo 2, i knew that if i didnt bring my A game then my rank would go down and it would make me try even harder to get that rank back up to where it was and possibily even higher than before. when i play halo reach now, i lay down on the couch with a bag of chips next to me, my phone, and some music playing as well and i know that if i loose, i wouldnt care because you still get rewarded for loosing and that shouldnt happen! you shouldnt get rewarded for loosing this isnt call of duty. Halo became one of the greatest games ever because the rank system was created by people who said, "hey lets make the game competive so we can have players play for hours and truly love our game." when halo reach came out the developers said "lets make a rank system that is similar to call of duty because everbody plays call of duty so they would then want to play our game." look at the ammount of people who actually play reach now, the number of kids who play is about 100,000 less than the people who played halo 3. thats because there is no competitive rank system to keep the players coming back for more. Halo 3 had it perfect, raked and social matches. social matches was a place where you can relax and have fun with friends goofing off and enjoying the game, and for noobs. the ranked matches is where the true gamers would play with their headsets and would play on a little 19 inch monitor to make sure they were at their best and to win as many games as possible to get to the highest rank they possibly can. For the perfect game, halo 4 needs the halo 3 matchmaking system and the halo 2 ranking system for the best possible game and possibly the greatest game since halo 2. its up to 343 to make this happen, and i have faith they would.

 

I couldn't agree with you more, I hate how they made it so similar to COD. I do the exact same thing, lay back and don't really care about the game with social but in competitive I am all in trying my hardest which is what makes the game fun for me. Whether or not they have a ranking system like halo 2/3 will be the deciding factor as to whether I buy the game or just rent it for a weekend

[343: Halo 4 Ranking System?]

I would love to see a mash of Halo 3 MP and Halo reaches MP, I really both enjoyed them, I hope they mix it or create something new, but no losing your rank when you lose, because that never happened in a halo game, and I don't want to find out I lost a rank because some idiot had to go to the bathroom making him the AFK kill target

 

I personally think that not losing a rank when you lose is the worst idea ever. If you have something to lose (your rank) then it will keep people from going to visit the bathroom or anything else during a game because they will know they might lose the game and lose ranking. When there is no ranking system based on if you win/lose thats when people quit out of games more and quit playing for a period of time in between games because they know there is no consequence for it. If you didn't want to lose rank for losing a game in Halo 2/3 then thats what the social games were for, they didn't have a rank.

 

I do think it is sad to for me to say it but it really is true, if halo 4 doesn't have a ranking system like halo 2 or 3 then that will be the difference of me buying the game versus renting it (since all I do is play multiplayer and not single player). I played countless hours of halo 2 and 3 and still go back to halo 3 (and wishing I could go back to halo 2 to play online) because the multiplayer is competitive. I hate games like COD where all it takes to "lvl up" or gain more armour abilities is time playing, not skill. When this happens then you have a bunch of people with no lives that are the highest rank with everything unlocked because they have the time to play not because they are good. This takes all of the competitiveness out of the game because no one works together because in the end it doesn't matter if your team wins or loses just if you personally did well. I believe this is one reason that halo 2/3 was so good, it motivated people to talk and strategize with teamates and try and get a team together to go in and play. I also believe a ranking system helped match people of even skill up better, in other games just because you had a high rank didn't mean you were good so you would get matched up with people that just had time to play and not matched up against people who were of similar skill. I do think they did just fine in halo 3, they had the social matched for the casual gamer and the ranked matched for the competitive gamer. Yes the casual gamer is a big money base for them but I only think they are a money base for a while until the causal gamer moves on to another game, the competitive gamer is what will keep the game around.

 

I believe with halo reach they were trying way to hard to cater to the causal gamer way too much and they were becoming very similar to COD. I want a game that I can go in and play competively against other players with a reward for wining the game and a penalty for losing it. I just really hope that they realize that the ranking system in Halo 2/3 was what kept people around playing it for so long and put it back into halo 4. Overall I think it would be possible for them to do a combination of both systems so they can have the pointless "armour unlocks" and the such but still have a ranking system.