Hᴜᴍᴘsᴛʏʟᴇs Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 Sorry bout last night...was out way later than I thought and havent even seen the weekly bulletin yet myself No worries...1. I don't think it even came out yet, and 2. We all already know that there isn't a ranking system, which was the only reason I was looking forward to the bulletin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TECH Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 I like how this thread discusses it, everyone has a right to complain, so I am not going to post my usual arguments. I'm happy this isn't some conversation where the "competitive" people are bashing "casual" players, me personally being a casual player I care more for fun and not a visible rank, because all a visible rank spawns is sh** talking, and general bad mouthing over a number that doesn't even matter in the real world. I find it funny most competitive people complain about getting put with noobs then when they get a system put in, they complain about not having a visible number. BUT that's my usual argument. As long as competitive people go about it the right way and dont blame it on other people I don't mind supporting the idea of a visible rank. It truthfully would not affect me in the slightest. So I signed the petition. For future reference I support the idea, but if a "competitive" player comes in and start talking bad about "casual" players. I will quickly put him down, its nothing against the competitive community, because I myself used to be competitive. it's just that whining and being a troll towards people who just want to play, is not the attitude I used to see in the MLG, and I personally want to see people start being more respectful. That's my opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallgeese Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 No worries...1. I don't think it even came out yet, and 2. We all already know that there isn't a ranking system, which was the only reason I was looking forward to the bulletin. Yeah I just went to Waypoint and I didnt see it out yet...they must all be reading the reviews of Halo 4 since the embargo was lifted today. So far some pretty good scores, i bet they dont even care that the majority of the community is upset with no visible ranks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TECH Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 No worries...1. I don't think it even came out yet, and 2. We all already know that there isn't a ranking system, which was the only reason I was looking forward to the bulletin. There is a ranking system, its just not visible. From what I understand they just take your stats and match people up with you compared to those. It's a skill system, it just doesn't affect visible rank. Which works for most competitives, but there is those few that want a number, and they probly wont get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallgeese Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 There is a ranking system, its just not visible. From what I understand they just take your stats and match people up with you compared to those. It's a skill system, it just doesn't affect visible rank. Which works for most competitives, but there is those few that want a number, and they probly wont get it. I like you am a casual player, I understand where competitive players are coming from wanting some sort of representation of how good or bad they are, to me it is more of the issue that 343i knew the competitive players have wanted a visible ranking system since Reach moved away form H3 and 343i did nothing to support that part of the community. Having the game match people based on skill is the same system Reach "supposedly" had...and that didnt turn out well either. It will be interesting to see if 343i responds to this or just fully ignores it 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hᴜᴍᴘsᴛʏʟᴇs Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 There is a ranking system, its just not visible. From what I understand they just take your stats and match people up with you compared to those. It's a skill system, it just doesn't affect visible rank. Which works for most competitives, but there is those few that want a number, and they probly wont get it. Yeah, I understand that, but the people want a visible number to compare themselves to others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallgeese Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 Yeah, I understand that, but the people want a visible number to compare themselves to others. Like I said before, I am more of a casual gamer now, but I am truly surprised that 343i didnt implement a visual representation of rank... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upton889 Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 So let me get this right, skill is placed but there are no numbers whatsoever? Even a number that is only visible to the player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallgeese Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 So let me get this right, skill is placed but there are no numbers whatsoever? Even a number that is only visible to the player? No numbers whatsoever, they wanted to remove numbers to get rid of people boosting...that was their logic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upton889 Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 No numbers whatsoever, they wanted to remove numbers to get rid of people boosting...that was their logic... That changes my opinion completely. I'll stick to my first edited post in saying, why even have ranks if the player themselves cannot see what they are ranked? Players will now have little motivation to play the game after campaign and spartan ops are through. To be blunt, this sounds like Reach Matchmaking 2.0, which didn't motivate players to keep playing whatsoever. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallgeese Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 That changes my opinion completely. I'll stick to my first edited post in saying, why even have ranks if the player themselves cannot see what they are ranked? Players will now have little motivation to play the game after campaign and spartan ops are through. To be blunt, this sounds like Reach Matchmaking 2.0, which didn't motivate players to keep playing whatsoever. Well I think 343i is lloking at Specializations to keep players playing...essentially (and dont flame) the progression system and the logic behind it is similar to the leveling system of CoD. Level to a certain point unlock somethign to use in game rinse and repeat. 343i thinks that by having things to be unlocked, players will continue to play... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 At least Bungie attempted to actually find a solution in Arena, sure it did not work but they tried. Microsoft have just completely sold out. Someone really ought to tell them it is not the Ranking System which makes COD popular, but it was the Ranking System which contributed to a lasting Halo 3 legacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upton889 Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 Well I think 343i is lloking at Specializations to keep players playing...essentially (and dont flame) the progression system and the logic behind it is similar to the leveling system of CoD. Level to a certain point unlock somethign to use in game rinse and repeat. 343i thinks that by having things to be unlocked, players will continue to play... No flaming here but I'm not comprehending why 343 couldn't satisfy both parties of players. Specializations will run out and those incentives will become extinct after a while and most of that is very similar to Halo Reach, which was a massive failure. If I'm ranked I want to know where I stand. Isn't that the whole point of rank as shown in the military, college basketball/football, etc.? That is hardly a ranking system. That visual representation of skill gives something for people to strive for in every playlist and that not only sufficed in previous Halo's, but thrived. The old saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epiccccc Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 I just don't understand why they can't satisfy both casual and competitive players. Its so simple just add a separate playlist and make everybody happy. This is really disappointing I was really hoping this game would be the next big hit since Halo 3. Please sign the petition guys its literally the only chance we have if any at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baeztoberfest Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 I was a fan of Halo 3. But where do people get off saying Reach was a failure? I thoroughly enjoyed it. The campaign was a little weak but I found matchmaking to have a lot of good replay value through armor unlocks and the not knowing what the next match had in store. I suppose I'm a casual gamer. Since Halo 3 I've never run into a problem with a teammate hurling him or herself over a cliff to rank down so they can boost. That was foolish nonsense I still don't get right up there with team killing for power weapons. A number was not even an issue in Halo : Combat Evolved. But it was still considered by most to be the best FPS since Goldeneye. Numbers don't make a game fun. Attention to details and obvious hard work do. The replay value you get is the first killamanjaro you get or your first perfection. The first time you get an extermination or go 47 and 6. Games like those kept me coming back and it was good. If there is a competitive ranking system there why isn't that good enough? I don't understand where that argument has any base. Not to attack anyone's opinion I just don't see why it matters that much when the saga didn't even start off like that. Plus I like Reach. Lol. It was a good game that evolved the same old boring matchmaking. I was glad they at least attempted to take it in a different direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallgeese Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 Meh all we can do now is hope that 343i is listening and will patch/dlc a visible Ranking system Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InFI Moltar Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 Meh all we can do now is hope that 343i is listening and will patch/dlc a visible Ranking system Agreed......."stopping boosting" is a HORRIBLE excuse to not show the rankings. It is apart of xbox live and human nature for there to be cheaters, they will always be there! (there are going to be boosters in this progression system too I guarantee it should they take this system out too?) That is fine by me if a "few" people cheat you can tell if certain people earned their ranks or not when you play them and IMO its not a common occurrence. We all know the ranking systems in the past were not PERFECT by any means but it gave some level of measurement at least to keep us striving to move up in the rankings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallgeese Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 Agreed......."stopping boosting" is a HORRIBLE excuse to not show the rankings. It is apart of xbox live and human nature for there to be cheaters, they will always be there! (there are going to be boosters in this progression system too I guarantee it should they take this system out too?) That is fine by me if a "few" people cheat you can tell if certain people earned their ranks or not when you play them and IMO its not a common occurrence. We all know the ranking systems in the past were not PERFECT by any means but it gave some level of measurement at least to keep us striving to move up in the rankings. Personally no matter what system they implement, nothing will be PERFECT... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onslaught X Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 This is kind of disappointing to me. A lot of the fun derived from the online multiplayer is being able to show off the spoils of your victory, and to have a visual rank to work towards. I don't know why in the hell they would decide to remove such a prominent aspect of the franchise completely. Just seems kind of like a slap in the face to all the people who take enjoyment in the competitive side of the community. How old is this video? Hopefully they will soon realize that taking out visual ranking completely is a bad idea, and maybe patch it in or something. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby Berkeley Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 I was excited for halo 4 until this came out. I'm sure it'll be fun for a while, but I doubt I'll play it much after I run through the campaign and play most of the playlists and maps. What's the best way to make a game more fun? Take away the incentive to try in every game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TECH Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 There is still incentive, just not a ranked number. To me multi-player seemed awesome, way better than Reach's in the least. I'm think they possibly didn't add it in to reduce the bad-mouthery. Truthfully I don't see where the extra incentive comes from, I mean it's a digital number that means nothing to me outside of Halo, and even then I don't think I would care. I do feel sad for the respectful part of the competitive community that wanted it though, but I won't feel sad for ones that make demands. I see too many "MLG" players come in and post hateful rants, and I don't like that. Which is half the reason I don't tend to care anymore about being competitive. My advice, make a public polling petition on Waypoints forums, and try to get something together, but I would advise to keep it peaceful, the more respectful you are, the more likely "343" will listen and try to do something. M$ probly doesn't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby Berkeley Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 Having a sepearation of ranked playlists and social meant that you had one playlist you could go in and know that people on your team would all be trying to win, at least at the higher levels, so as to increase their rank. Losing caused your rank to go down, and people playing in that playlist wanted to win to avoid that. Then you could go in social and just mess around and not really try to win. WIthout the visible ranks, a lot of times your team has people trying to win, and others just messing around (i.e. Reach). If you want a team of people using mics and all trying to work together and win, you have to have your own team and definitely can't depend on randoms. If the skill level is there, but invisible, it seems like there's less incentive to attempt to maintain that level. Sometimes I just want to have fun, other times I want to be on a team and try to use strategy to win. And boosting as being their reason for not having visible ranks is pretty lame. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upton889 Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 I was a fan of Halo 3. But where do people get off saying Reach was a failure? I thoroughly enjoyed it. Look at the numbers of players who played long after Reach's release compared to the number of players who played long after the release of Halo 2 and 3 and you'll find your answer. I do feel sad for the respectful part of the competitive community that wanted it though, but I won't feel sad for ones that make demands. I see too many "MLG" players come in and post hateful rants, and I don't like that. Which is half the reason I don't tend to care anymore about being competitive. I admire your understanding TECH. There are too many from both gaming parties that don't even attempt to understand. Whether somebody is a casual or competitive gamer, everyone can agree that both parties could have been easily satisfied in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay_Magnus Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 Look at the numbers of players who played long after Reach's release compared to the number of players who played long after the release of Halo 2 and 3 and you'll find your answer. Wait a minute. I'm all for a ranking system, but I've heard this argument a billion times and nobody has any substantial evidence to back it up. Reach was unbalanced, and many people disliked the game in general, not just the lack of a ranking system. Also Halo 2 and Halo 3 didn't have as much competition in the Xbox multiplayer category when they came out. The new Halos exist when there's Gears, COD, Battlefield, Minecraft, a ton of sports games, etc. There is no evidence at all to support the claim that a lack of rankings is the sole reason Reach has had a smaller player count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upton889 Posted November 2, 2012 Report Share Posted November 2, 2012 Wait a minute. I'm all for a ranking system, but I've heard this argument a billion times and nobody has any substantial evidence to back it up. Reach was unbalanced, and many people disliked the game in general, not just the lack of a ranking system. Also Halo 2 and Halo 3 didn't have as much competition in the Xbox multiplayer category when they came out. The new Halos exist when there's Gears, COD, Battlefield, Minecraft, a ton of sports games, etc. There is no evidence at all to support the claim that a lack of rankings is the sole reason Reach has had a smaller player count. You're right. That may not be the sole reason but it was one of the main contributors. The combination of a lack of competitiveness in the game itself along with the ranking system ultimately lead to the failures of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.