> > > > Personally, I find game being balanced a lot more important compared to visible ranking system.
> > > >
> > > > Competitive gamers can always organize custom games to test out who’s the best and improve, that can be done without ranking system, but with luck factors like bloom and brainfarts like Armor Lock, it’s not possible.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Skill based ranking would be great, but it’s not essential. I’d rather Halo series get rid of matchmaking, and get dedicated servers, instead of bring out the 1-50 back.
> > >
> > > Meh, for me i never really cared for the visible part. The reason i loved 1-50 was it let me know if i was improving, where i stood in the community. (which is actually why i like reachs percentage rank better)
> > >
> > > But in reach and h4 it will be almost impossible to tell.
> > >
> > > Am i doing well because im facing bad people?
> > > Am i doing bad because im improving as a player, putting me against skilled people?
> > > Is this the noob playlist, where not very many good players are?
> > >
> > > Itll be impossible to tell where i stack in the community.
> >
> > Why won’t you just enjoy the game, if you won a 50 in Halo 3, was it purchased or did the 50 just have a bad day, or was he carried by his friends to 50?
> >
> > You got whooped by sergeant, did he get lucky? Second account? Or did you just have a bad day?
> >
> > There is no ranking system that measures your exact skill in the game, only way to tell how good someone is at the game is playing against them, in-game. I don’t know why some of you people are obsessed with seeing how good you are compared to rest of the community, it’s a game, just enjoy it and don’t stress out if you happen to fall on few game losing streak.
> >
> > But I could mention, there should be some sort of ranked playlists for competitive people to test out their skill against other people who play for win, BUT it shouldn’t be global, some people don’t care for that kind of thing, which is why Reach failed on catering both competitive and casual crowd.
>
> Well no Yoink! it had problems, but a bad ranking system > no ranking system
Indeed it had problems, I really hate it when someone says that it promoted boosting, it makes me laugh, with that mind set everything in the game should be made invisible to prevent “boosting” because everything can and is boosted/sold, or can be used to tease. I will prove a list of things that can be Sold/Boosted/cheated, used to tease ect.
Progressive style ranks
Armour customizations
File share
Achievements
Any form of leaderboard tracking
Medals
K/D
Wins/losses
The list goes on.
I guess everyone forgets how many people were banned during the Reach era for network manipulation to reset the challenges to gain more credits. <mark>A HECK OF A LOT.</mark> I think some people pretend it never happened just to defend the rubbishy “progressive style” only ranks, I actually would really enjoy seeing a visual Ranking system, AND a progressive system.
Okay, so as it was stated earlier in this topic, the ranking system is still in development and will most likely be finished before, or slightly after, halo 4 comes out.
And while i don’t give a grunts backside for a visible ranking system, I do want a ranking system so i can get matched with similarly skilled players, which is what we will be getting (hopefully) and not like reach’s (supposed) system.
If you (and not directed at OP) are so shallow that you can’t enjoy a game because you don’t have a #rank next to your name, then please, go play something else.
> If you (and not directed at OP) are so shallow that you can’t enjoy a game because you don’t have a #rank next to your name, then please, go play something else.
i feel sorry for people who are this narrow minded, it must truly suck trying to go through life with this small of a mental capacity
> > > The 1-50 has its pros and cons, i personaly think it has more cons. Guess CoD players will find out what those cons are. The series is already plagued with exp rank boosters, lets see how long the 1-50 ranking lasts.
> >
> > The cons are, boosters and account selling(thats all), CoD already had way more boosting and selling prestige lobbys than Halo ever had without the ranking system.
> >
> > The pro’s were, Making matches more competitive and intense, winning means more, losing means more, less quitters and betraying, an addicting system that makes you strive to get better, equal balanced matches, it encourages teamwork and rethinking strategies if you lose.
> >
> > Unfortunately I might have to get BO2 for my competitive fix, and play Halo 4 more casually while I get matched up with slumber parties and guests. Getting team killed for power weapons and mechs.
> >
> > I always loved getting in intense 50-49 matches that a loss could mean a downrank and a win could move you closer to the next rank. <mark>Instead of the 50-12 Roflstops because a team of noobs is being matched against a team of pros.</mark>
> >
> > If i’m on the winning team it’s not fun for me because it’s not challenging, and if i’m on the losing team its not fun getting betrayed for a power weapon and playing with a team of guests.
>
> Posts like these are annoying me so much now!
>
> You guys act like just becuae there is no 1-50 that there is no skill based system AT ALL!
>
> <mark>They have a skill based system going on in the background, so basically they are putting you up against people in your skill level without specifically telling you what your skill level is. that’s the difference.</mark>
>
> You are not going up against noobs if your a pro, you’re going against other pros. YOU JUST DON’T HAVE A 50 NEXT TO YOUR GT!
>
> Gosh, you guys always jump to conclusions. 343 say one thing and you act as if you can predict what’s going to happen for the next 2 years!
>
> /rantover
Ok so when I play Halo 4 I will only play people on my skill level? I won’t play any guests or people team killing for mechs?
All games have some sort of trueskill going on in the background. CoD had it and some people go 38 and 2 while others are going 6 and 20. These players are not being evenly matched.
Halo Reach had it, and I find it rare to finish a match on reach without somebody quitting, or having team kills for power weapons. The “behind the scenes trueskill” that was going on in Reach was about the same as playing a Halo 3 social match.
This is the difference between the 1-50 system and the “behind the scenes” trueskill system. You aren’t being evenly matched! but hey, atleast we will get more montages on youtube.
> > > > The 1-50 has its pros and cons, i personaly think it has more cons. Guess CoD players will find out what those cons are. The series is already plagued with exp rank boosters, lets see how long the 1-50 ranking lasts.
> > >
> > > The cons are, boosters and account selling(thats all), CoD already had way more boosting and selling prestige lobbys than Halo ever had without the ranking system.
> > >
> > > The pro’s were, Making matches more competitive and intense, winning means more, losing means more, less quitters and betraying, an addicting system that makes you strive to get better, equal balanced matches, it encourages teamwork and rethinking strategies if you lose.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately I might have to get BO2 for my competitive fix, and play Halo 4 more casually while I get matched up with slumber parties and guests. Getting team killed for power weapons and mechs.
> > >
> > > I always loved getting in intense 50-49 matches that a loss could mean a downrank and a win could move you closer to the next rank. <mark>Instead of the 50-12 Roflstops because a team of noobs is being matched against a team of pros.</mark>
> > >
> > > If i’m on the winning team it’s not fun for me because it’s not challenging, and if i’m on the losing team its not fun getting betrayed for a power weapon and playing with a team of guests.
> >
> > Posts like these are annoying me so much now!
> >
> > You guys act like just becuae there is no 1-50 that there is no skill based system AT ALL!
> >
> > <mark>They have a skill based system going on in the background, so basically they are putting you up against people in your skill level without specifically telling you what your skill level is. that’s the difference.</mark>
> >
> > You are not going up against noobs if your a pro, you’re going against other pros. YOU JUST DON’T HAVE A 50 NEXT TO YOUR GT!
> >
> > Gosh, you guys always jump to conclusions. 343 say one thing and you act as if you can predict what’s going to happen for the next 2 years!
> >
> > /rantover
>
> Ok so when I play Halo 4 I will only play people on my skill level? I won’t play any guests or people team killing for mechs?
>
> All games have some sort of trueskill going on in the background. CoD had it and some people go 38 and 2 while others are going 6 and 20. These players are not being evenly matched.
>
> Halo Reach had it, and I find it rare to finish a match on reach without somebody quitting, or having team kills for power weapons. The “behind the scenes trueskill” that was going on in Reach was about the same as playing a Halo 3 social match.
>
> This is the difference between the 1-50 system and the “behind the scenes” trueskill system. You aren’t being evenly matched! but hey, atleast we will get more montages on youtube.
It’s more in the way the system is tuned than it is in matching players by a visible numbered rank. That’s why Reach doesn’t match players accurately. If I remember correctly, it uses the same kind of skill-matchmaking that Halo 3’s social did, evaluating a team’s overall skill, and matching them together.
Halo 4 just needs a stricter system more like Halo 3’s ranked, whether the rank itself is visible to players or not, for matchmaking based on skill to work.
> > *face palm
> > -Fletcher
>
> BO2 is using the SCII like ranking system which is very much like the HR Arena ranking system (for competitive playlist rankings).
And the SC2 ranking system is VERY successful, the game is enjoyed by Millions, and the game can be played out of the box for MLG tournaments.
> > > *face palm
> > > -Fletcher
> >
> > BO2 is using the SCII like ranking system which is very much like the HR Arena ranking system (for competitive playlist rankings).
>
> And the SC2 ranking system is VERY successful, the game is enjoyed by Millions, and the game can be played out of the box for MLG tournaments.
That’s besides the point.
The claim is that H2/H3’s ranking system is being used in MMing for BO2, it isn’t.
CoD can have there ranking system, I couldn’t care less. I’ve been playing Halo for eleven years and risen to the top of the playlist(s) and arena ranks in every game. It doesn’t matter to me anymore. What matters is improving as a player, having fun with your friends, and preferably winning.
How many people got a level 50 in H3 for there General, then never played the playlist again? How many people boosted, de-ranked, or sold accounts? How many players bridged host in Hardcore back in H2, booting players out when they started to lose? How many players won 15-20 games on there level 49 but never got there 50?.. The system provides incentive only until it becomes frustrating, is abused, or the progression is over. Put any one of those things in there and the joy ride is over.
Reach’s broad medal category’s & XP based progression was a major step in the right direction, but there are two large flaws in it…
Unlocks took forever (even for the hardcore players) and were ultimately cosmetic only. (All the cool stuff was at Brigadier and above anyways)
No lasting display of your past arena ranks, nobody knows if you’ve made Onyx once or 12 times.
This made progression meaningless, which H4 addresses through loud-out unlocks and specializations. The second one isn’t addressed (AFAIK) at all at this point, but apparently there is something in the works, according to Frank O’Conner at 343i. Hopefully it’s similar to Starcrafts matchmaking leagues, but displays past performances. The other thing people are forgetting is that Reach uses TruSkill or whatever and can quickly gauge a players performance. Play 5 games of reach after taking six months off and the games go from face-roll easy to competitive. I’ve done this several times over Reach’s uneventful lifespan. So there is another sort of ranking, it’s just not visible. It’s also not quite as strict as the old 1-50 system, but neither is it as abused.
> > > *face palm
> > > -Fletcher
> >
> > BO2 is using the SCII like ranking system which is very much like the HR Arena ranking system (for competitive playlist rankings).
>
> And the SC2 ranking system is VERY successful, the game is enjoyed by Millions, and the game can be played out of the box for MLG tournaments.
Blizzard always makes those types of games, making hardcore gaming accessible without resorting to dumbing down their games mechanics. People say hardcore games made for the core gamer are a thing of the past, but Blizzard continues to do it they just make their games in a way that so you gradually learn and are not hit with a insurmountable learning curve wall. I would like to see what they could do with a shooter TBH, even if thats not their expertise.
> > > > *face palm
> > > > -Fletcher
> > >
> > > BO2 is using the SCII like ranking system which is very much like the HR Arena ranking system (for competitive playlist rankings).
> >
> > And the SC2 ranking system is VERY successful, the game is enjoyed by Millions, and the game can be played out of the box for MLG tournaments.
>
> Blizzard always makes those types of games, making hardcore gaming accessible without resorting to dumbing down their games mechanics. People say hardcore games made for the core gamer are a thing of the past, but Blizzard continues to do it they just make their games in a way that so you gradually learn and are not hit with a insurmountable learning curve wall.
Well that can sadly only be said for Starcraft now, have you seen what they’ve done to World of Warcraft? Cataclysm was awful enough, but Mists of Pandaria is just… Ridiculous.
What saddens me is that Halo 1-3 wasn’t intentionally competitive, why? Because they didn’t have a set group in mind, they just kept to simple, fair and balanced gameplay that in turn, resulted in being a very good competitive game, Halo has often been revered for it “skillful” approach to playing the game. 343 have clearly dumbed the game down for the sake of it, if the success of Lan in CE and MM in Halo 2 and 3 isn’t enough to suggest how successful a “competitive” game can be, then I don’t know what is.
> COD gets shoutcasting, live streaming, 2 league plays, spectator mode…
>
> Meanwhile, in the Halo 4 vidoc, we hear “We ensure nobody will get a zero score”
>
> Christ.
> COD gets shoutcasting, live streaming, 2 league plays, spectator mode…
>
> Meanwhile, in the Halo 4 vidoc, we hear “We ensure nobody will get a zero score”
>
> Christ.
Everything you mentioned besides league play will stress COD’s peer to peer netcode beyond belief. Past COD games can be near unplayable due to massive amounts of online lag, and were ruined further by massive amounts of lag compensation. Black Ops II, unless Treyarch works miracles with netcode, will be even worse in this respect due to the massive amount of bandwidth things like livestreaming hog.
They can add all they want, but at this point it seems like it’ll break CoD’s online multiplayer further.
That being said, I’d like to see spectating and streaming in Halo 5 if Microsoft is willing to shell out the money for dedicated multiplayer servers.
> COD gets shout-casting, live streaming, 2 league plays, spectator mode…
>
> Meanwhile, in the Halo 4 vidoc, we hear “We ensure nobody will get a zero score”
>
> Christ.
Who cares? CoD has always been a awful game for competition. That’s why it never reached the same level of success or Prestige as past Halo titles did, despite it being multi-platform with ridiculous sales numbers.
Halo introduced map-making tools on a console title, online file shares, a theater mode, online skill-based matchmaking, and player lobby’s. It’s success & popularity spawned the competitive console FPS scene.
There is a difference between shoehorning a game with little competitive merit into the spotlight than there is improving and refining a game that has always been that.