TheRealJubJubBird Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 I think the Halo 3 rank system should attribute to ALL the games in the Master Chief collection, because it is a more accurate portrayal of skill, not just accumulated points over time. That way, at a glance, you could tell if your team (or the enemy team) is good or bad. It also means your rank is more important, and personal. What do you guys think? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unease Peanut Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 I didn't really like how 1 game won would give you 1 EXP while you need about 600 to level up at some point. That's where the ranked playlists are forced down your throat. Where you must win 6 games in order to rise one level and just lose one game to lose 2 levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Biggles Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Use the halo 2 ranking system.Prefer that over Halo 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldfreeze Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 H3's ranking system was really bad, it showed no skill, if your team one but you sucke you still get the exp. If you had a great round, but lost you can easily drop 2 levels. It isn't fair at all. I rather see a CSR rating. To me leveling should be removed, sure going up ranks is fun, but unlocking stuff is a niche option. My apologies in advance for sounding too darn old, but in my time we did not unlock stuff with leveling in an online shooter, it was your skill that counted, you had to earn your stripes by playing not leveling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaulting♥Frog Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 I would rather they got rid of ranking systems all together. They caused nothing but e-peen ad e-boob contests within the gaming community. More over they took away the focus from the storyline which is the driving force behind any game. When you do that you loose quality in the game over all. Look at ODST for example. No stand alone multiplayer such as seen in Halo 3 (Firefight was there but it had no ranking system or anything of that sort). Yet, to me personally, its gameplay was far superior than that of Halo 3 and Halo 2. It was far more enjoyable to play than either of those two game. Reach wasn't bad either, but it still went down the same slopes as Halo 2/3 due to the arena and its ranking system. Granted it wasn't as bad as either of those two previous games. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Well if they remodelled the H3 ranking system like this it would be okay. If you lose a game but you are the one of the 3 top players in your Team you go up 1 rank If you win a game and you are one of the top three players you go up twice. This just seems fairer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCPO Mayh3m Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 I would rather they got rid of ranking systems all together. They caused nothing but e-peen ad e-boob contests within the gaming community. More over they took away the focus from the storyline which is the driving force behind any game. When you do that you loose quality in the game over all. Look at ODST for example. No stand alone multiplayer such as seen in Halo 3 (Firefight was there but it had no ranking system or anything of that sort). Yet, to me personally, its gameplay was far superior than that of Halo 3 and Halo 2. It was far more enjoyable to play than either of those two game. Reach wasn't bad either, but it still went down the same slopes as Halo 2/3 due to the arena and its ranking system. Granted it wasn't as bad as either of those two previous games. You really cannot compare the two games play style at all though. ODST is meant for the campaign, it was never built for a multiplayer... besides firefight. The other Halo games were built for campaign AND an online multiplayer experience where one team would win. Kind of like the classic gladiator arenas where the last man standing wins. The ranking system was there to help you get matched with people of a similar skill. ODST was not a typical Halo game... you didn't have strong shields, you were not as fast, and you really couldn't jump that high. You are an ODST... not a spartan. You shouldn't compare the two. Heck, they shouldn't even be in the same category. The ranking system took away from the story line? How? They are two separate monsters themselves. Ranking system is for Matchmaking, not campaign thus should not have any impact on the story line. So... you play a game where no one really wins (ODST) or you play a game where you compete to win (Halo 2, 3, Reach, 4). Two different game styles which should NOT be compared. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanson55 Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 Halo 2 Ranking System and Leveling icon with level number insidee!!!! Just like OLD SCHOOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twinreaper Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 Rank systems as afr as accurately pairing you is your OWN perspective. For every skill assessment system in a Halo that some one flaunts as being the best and most accurate, I can counter each one with a logical fact to the contrary. A skill system and rank system is only as good as the individual using it from his/her point of view in their Halo career. Please don't make threads that rely on your opinion being worded as fact. And that goes for everyone really. Just because you may find that a large pool of players agrees with you, does not mean that is the MAJORITY and that they all agree. Agreements don't equate to facts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldfreeze Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 I think ranking gives some people a purposes in games, I really don't mind. I mean CSR is fun and K/D could sometimes be fun to uphold or give you bragging right, but a bad K/D does not mean a bad player and this also counts for a bad CSR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skills4Kills Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 I think the Halo 3 rank system should attribute to ALL the games in the Master Chief collection, because it is a more accurate portrayal of skill, not just accumulated points over time. That way, at a glance, you could tell if your team (or the enemy team) is good or bad. It also means your rank is more important, and personal. What do you guys think? Obviously you didnt play Halo 2.. Halo 2 had the best ranking system, the only people who didn't like it are the crybabies which is why it was removed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 ^ That is your option on the matter and not fact. Although I agree with you. Halo 2 was damm though. But double the fun. Everyone is entitled to there option though of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rrhuntington Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 Hold up Jabronies. Why is this even in the Halo 5: Guardians section??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconShelf Posted June 23, 2014 Report Share Posted June 23, 2014 As long as I get a Reach/ H4 style one for unlocking armour, I don't care. I just don't care about a number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Is not JL Posted June 23, 2014 Report Share Posted June 23, 2014 I would rather they got rid of ranking systems all together. They caused nothing but e-peen ad e-boob contests within the gaming community. More over they took away the focus from the storyline which is the driving force behind any game. When you do that you loose quality in the game over all. Look at ODST for example. No stand alone multiplayer such as seen in Halo 3 (Firefight was there but it had no ranking system or anything of that sort). Yet, to me personally, its gameplay was far superior than that of Halo 3 and Halo 2. It was far more enjoyable to play than either of those two game. Reach wasn't bad either, but it still went down the same slopes as Halo 2/3 due to the arena and its ranking system. Granted it wasn't as bad as either of those two previous games. Ranking in HLo 3 which was a virtual umber on the internet that went up as you generally did better created an entire black market for the game. It was so strong of an incentive that people were willing to pay large sums of money to have a high ranked account. That's when you should see how damn good of an incentive a ranking system is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaulting♥Frog Posted June 23, 2014 Report Share Posted June 23, 2014 Ranking in HLo 3 which was a virtual umber on the internet that went up as you generally did better created an entire black market for the game. It was so strong of an incentive that people were willing to pay large sums of money to have a high ranked account. That's when you should see how damn good of an incentive a ranking system is. Tell me champ, of what value did this number have in the real world? How about I make it easy for you and answer it myself. The answer is that it has no value. It is a digital number representing a perceived skill in which no employer will give a damn. No school will care. It doesn't pay the bills. People try to ascribe meaning to it in hopes that their time spent chasing said number might have value in the real world yet when the dust settles and reality sets back in the number is meaningless. The time spent getting it, isnt however. The enjoyment of playing the game isnt. That has value (the money you paid in order to play said game). You state it was an incentive and people paid for ranks. This is true, but only in a sense that they felt they had something to prove with a digital number that when broken down has no value. They tried to ascribe their self worth to the number in an attempt to find value in themselves, while at the same time "bragging" about it. There is nothing I despise more than people who cant value themselves with out needing some trinket or number or "something" to validate themselves. If you cant do it on your own then all you are really trying to do is get into ******** contests to see who has the bigger "e-peen" or "e-boob". Such garbage should stay away from gaming as it rots it to its core. Look at MLG and what it did to gaming. The be-all-end-all of competition is what people claimed it to be. Halo 3 basically ended up sending the message that if its not MLG with its ranks and style then your not really playing the game the way its ment to be played. You are a "noob" and should be shunned. If you cant see this then read some of the posts around here, by many members old and new. Dedicated and rookie alike. That attitude is everywhere in their posts if you would only read it. It is all well and good to give players something to work towards but when it becomes a ******** contest then you have a problem with what you have done. I see that problem with ranking systems in multiplayer all over the gaming community and it saddens me that I find I am the only one who does. You want a ranking system? Fine, go for it but see the soul of gaming rot away in its place. It used to be enjoyable to play games, now it is nothing but frustration, hate and bitterness. I will stick to my old games that are off line and single player since I know this "trend" will continue until it kills the gaming community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Is not JL Posted June 23, 2014 Report Share Posted June 23, 2014 This hate and bitterness you speak of is fun competition for me ^.^ Whether you like it or not, people give meaning to a virtual number and it can affect the person and the community positively. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BATMAN Posted June 23, 2014 Report Share Posted June 23, 2014 I miss HPC's ranking system. I think we should stick with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankenzer Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 No way dude I prefer the new one or Halo 2's. I don't like getting 1 exp per game plus I don't like getting penalized for leaving a laggy game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose The Ace Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 ^ Well Halo 5 will have dedicated servers so you should have a lot less laggy games and a much more seamless muilplayer experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor Kenway Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 yeah, the H3 ranks (naming wise) were good but the way you rank up was dumb as it was based on skill and whether you won or not. 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.