Breaking Down the Necessity of Visible Ranks

Hello friends. It’s not the first time I come around here to discuss this issue, but this time, I’m hoping for it to be the last. At this point, it will either make or break it.

As I’m sure you have heard, Halo 4 War Games will NOT support a visible ranking system upon release. It was confirmed by David Ellis via the pre-launch live stream on Oct. 31 and it caused a massive upset / disappointment among a lot of Halo fans, whether it’s Campaign players, hardcore Matchmaking players, Forgers, Grifballers (I think I made this word up) or even MLG players.

A visible ranking system will help sustaining the online population for a VERY LONG time. Halo 3 is a prime example of it. Halo 2 would be too if Microsoft didn’t pull the plug on Xbox v1 online. It keeps people coming back. Allow me to explain. And please bear with me, for there are multiple reasons and things might get confusing as I attempt to get as much as information out as possible. I’ll do what I can to keep it nice and clean.

HISTORICAL STANDPOINT

Halo has evolved and changed over the years, there is no doubt about it. But it remains, at the core, a COMPETITIVE FPS, because players are pitted against one another and are doing their best to come out of top! At the VERY core, it’s all about winning and doing better than your opponents. Of course, for some, it’s about relaxing and just chilling, and that’s fine! Visible ranks do not force people to ALWAYS give their best at all times and DO NOT exclude casual matches. Look at Halo 3’s Social / Ranked Matchmaking. It allowed the best of both worlds, no complaints.

And we are almost reverting to Halo CE in terms of skill comparison. Like during LAN parties. You get to face a small group of more or less similar skilled people. You win. But how good are you? You’ll never know, because you don’t get to compare with other, stronger groups. And that’s the whole point of being able to face other people online; comparing your skill with the rest of the world. You can’t even do it in the Matchmaking mode of the 5th full installment one of the most competitive console FPSes in the world? This makes little sense.

FAIR MATCHES

People do care about close and accurate matchups, because they want to face (and team with) similar kinds of players. First off, it’s not fun to obliterate a team of players who have never touched the game before. And it’s even worse to be on the receiving end. It’s not all there is to it. One of the main reasons that people care about close matchups, is because PLAYERS WANT TO PROVE THEY ARE BETTER THAN OTHERS. But does that mean that everyone should face every single person in the world to do so? That’s impossible, and therefore, will leave some confusion among players who are seeking to prove their skill. I mean in Halo 3, I did not, as a General, need to face a Staff Captain to prove I was higher-skilled. But I did against another General. But in Halo 4, how do I know that I am a General, and that the other person is a Staff Captain? I don’t. I need to face him in a TS game and go 35 and 2 to prove I belong in a higher tier? There’s no point and no one comes out satisfied.

If you (343) have REALLY made matches fair, as opposed to Reach, then what stops you from just making the levels visible?

INACCURATE MEASURES OF SKILL

On this note, in Halo 2 or 3, if someone asked me to 1v1 them and their skill was nowhere within my range, I wouldn’t bother. Now in Reach (and Halo 4 at this rate), what, I have to look up their K/D? It’s so irrelevant. 8 K/D ratio? Cool, I’m sure you love these Living Dead matches. 1.02 K/D ratio? I’m not even sure what to think, because I know how easy it is to get a high K/D without accurate matchups, but then again, this person could be a 100% MLG player who makes selfless plays for the good of his team and who is VERY GOOD at the game.

If the point was to sugarcoat less skilled players’ true skill, then it doesn’t work either way. Elitism still happens, and always will, because Halo, is, like I said earlier, a COMPETITIVE FPS. People want to come out on top and prove that they are able to. Bad K/D? You’re still getting called out. Bad win percentage? Still are. If you’re going to remove the ranks so that elitism doesn’t happen, might as well remove ANY measure that has to do with players’ skill in-game. But that would be another step backwards and we’re trying to evolve here.

And what is wrong with being less skilled than someone else? It’s OK. It gives people something to go for, a reason to improve. But how can they know they’re improving if there’s no way to measure their skill? It’s impossible. Clear, simple, visible ranks are also needed for this reason.

CHEATING

This said, let’s elaborate a little on the rare event that a “measure of skill” becomes inaccurate. As I’ve explained, no visible ranks force people to fall back on the next measure of skill available in-game (K/D ratio) and it turns out that, as it is, this measure is EASILY manipulated, far more than visible ranks. It gives people a reason NOT to win to boost their stats. It incentivizes grouping up in Rumble Pit or Grifball and feeding kills for hours at a time. Plus it’ll make them level up faster and it’s not fair for others. It’s TWO issues while attempting to fix ONE problem that never really was one to begin with.

Of course, cheating was the main issue that made 343 removed visible ranks. But let’s face it. You did not get rid of cheating itself, you could rid of one of the reasons to cheat for. And it turns out that the said reason was one of the most important features that kept people coming back. On top of that, people don’t cheat less, but just cheat for other reasons, and the methods are a lot more accessible too.

And looking bad, cheating wasn’t ALL THAT BAD. Maybe in Halo 2, back when the detection systems were horrible and bans never happened or so. But things have evolved since then. Cheating won’t be rampant. And if I had to pick, I’d rather get cheated a few games during the lifetime of Halo 4, as opposed to losing interest before its lifetime is over because I have no reason to come back. I’m sure people will agree.

To sum things up, it’s clear. We need visible ranks back. The positives outweigh the negatives in a mind-blowing manner. Just compare Halo 3 to Halo: Reach’s online population over the years. Halo 3 lasted for a year more than Reach did, sold less copies, and had more people online on average. Was Reach bad compared to it? Debatable. But did having visible ranks hurt when it came to people coming back, day after day? It sure did not.

People need a reason. A progression system does not make the cut. I don’t need to compare my hours spent on the game to someone else. It means nothing to most people. But I, among dozens of thousands of others, want to be able to compare my skill to the whole world, without having to face EVERY SINGLE PERSON in the world.

We need a visible ranking system, 343.
We are supporting you and will not let you down.
We will be buying the game on November 6th.
We will make Halo 4 the best-selling game in the entire series.

But is it too much to ask for you guys not to let us down on this one?

Thanks for reading, and please, post or thank this to show support. Let us be heard.

Congratulations! You are the 1000th person to complain about this! Your prize is…a ranking system!
No. Sorry, but there are twenty other threads like this. I understand how much you care about this, but I think all the complaint threads need to stop. But I thank you for not saying “343i suks11!!”

Sorry but no.

There is more to Halo than just the MP game and some visual representation of your TrueSkill rank.

Far more.

Perfect post. You’re the man.

I respectfully disagree. I think what defines Halo would be a multitude of things :slight_smile:
Not saying that you’re wrong because ranks could very well define what Halo is to you but to others it just doesn’t cut it :slight_smile:

> Congratulations! You are the 1000th person to complain about this! Your prize is…a ranking system!
> No. Sorry, but there are twenty other threads like this. I understand how much you care about this, but I think all the complaint threads need to stop. But I thank you for not saying “343i suks11!!”

I’m not complaining, just wanting to make a point. I think this is allowed on a public forum, unless it somehow became a dictatorship while I stopped looking, but so far, it looks like I’m still good.

On this note, complaining about complaints thread will not contribute to stopping them, even less will posting in them help. But I did mention I did not intend to keep on bringing back up this issue (I think it’s the first thing I said in the OP), so I’ve got you covered on this.

I appreciate your concern and I want to apologize for contributing in a negative fashion to your experience on these forums. But I do care a lot about this though and so do A LOT of people. I think if you read the OP, it makes a lot of sense.

NINJA EDIT:

> Sorry but no.
>
> There is more to Halo than just the MP game and some visual representation of your TrueSkill rank.
>
> Far more.

> I respectfully disagree. I think what defines Halo would be a multitude of things :slight_smile:
> Not saying that you’re wrong because ranks could very well define what Halo is to you but to others it just doesn’t cut it :slight_smile:

I’ll change the title for you guys.

> Perfect post. You’re the man.

^

Here I was thinking the sandbox like multiplayer that defines it. Afterall, that is what made Halo: CE so popular, which a lot of us started with. Late night LAN parties with friends, much akin to the feeling Goldeneye gave us years prior. Ce, which featured no ranks whatsoever of course, being that it wasn’t online. Point being, most of us fell in love way before ranks were even introduced. So no, I don’t think the ranks define Halo. The multiplayer in general does. It’s unlike anything else offered. You can do things in Halo you can’t do in any other shooter. That’s what defines it.

This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post inappropriate content.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

Thanks for spreading the cancer. -_-

> Here I was thinking the sandbox like multiplayer that defines it. Afterall, that is what made Halo: CE so popular, which a lot of us started with. Late night LAN parties with friends, much akin to the feeling Goldeneye gave us years prior. Ce, which featured no ranks whatsoever of course, being that it wasn’t online. Point being, most of us fell in love way before ranks were even introduced. So no, I don’t think the ranks define Halo. The multiplayer in general does. It’s unlike anything else offered. You can do things in Halo you can’t do in any other shooter. That’s what defines it.

I started playing Halo in 2001 as well. But CE was not online. Halo 2 and 3 were and included online ranking visible system.

The reason I kept playing Halo 3 was because I enjoyed the game greatly. It had nothing to do with a number.
Having been privileged enough to have played Halo 4 at an expo. I know that it too will be a game I keep going back too.

> > Here I was thinking the sandbox like multiplayer that defines it. Afterall, that is what made Halo: CE so popular, which a lot of us started with. Late night LAN parties with friends, much akin to the feeling Goldeneye gave us years prior. Ce, which featured no ranks whatsoever of course, being that it wasn’t online. Point being, most of us fell in love way before ranks were even introduced. So no, I don’t think the ranks define Halo. The multiplayer in general does. It’s unlike anything else offered. You can do things in Halo you can’t do in any other shooter. That’s what defines it.
>
> I started playing Halo in 2001 as well. But CE was not online. Halo 2 and 3 were and included online ranking visible system.

Um, Halo PC is the PC version of Halo, and it was the first Halo game with online, and guess what, it has no rankings. problem?

There. I changed the title from “Visible Ranks DEFINE Halo as an Online FPS” to “Breaking Down the Necessity of Visible Ranks”. Because I don’t want people to somehow perceive that I feel like Halo is LITERALLY NOTHING without visible ranks. I hope it makes more sense now.

Good thread Vetoed.

To bad it falls on deaf ears.

It’s actually pretty awesome to see a post about this that isn’t “Bring this back or I’ll insert baseless threat,” it actually made me understand your position a bit more. :>

But, I always felt like having the TrueSkill rank system made (Halo 3) a little hard to get into? I’m not the best player, I’m pretty crappy to be honest, but I have fun playing around with things and it really sucked in Halo 3 to be stuck as a Captain because I couldn’t get my TrueSkill rank up. (If the two were independent, like the fancy military rank being a representation of games played and EXP earned, I may have a different opinion). It wasn’t so much fun having some areas of the game locked off, as I can be a bit of a completionist.

While I could’ve tried to get better, and did, I simply never really played the Halo games as this super-competitive person who could throw hours upon hours at the game.

But I hear this game will be pairing people up with similar K/D or W/L ratios, which would even out the skill level issue with matchings, no? (Unless that’s not happening?) Plus it wouldn’t give way to people completely obsessing over the number, cheating to get it higher, selling and buying accounts, and so on. It removes those problems, while taking away a visual representation of progress to the player. (Which sucks but you win some, you lose some)

I don’t understand why it would define Halo as a FPS – there’s tons of other things that really set it apart – and I can’t think of another FPS with a similar system off the top of my head? (My game knowledge is limited though, mainly to having some bouts with CoD, BF3 and Homefront – so maybe every other game out there has it and I just don’t know).

Personally, I guess I’m more indifferent. If they toss it in at some point, sure okay, it won’t blow up the planet or anything. And if they decide to keep it out now and forever, well that’s okay too (coming from the above area). As long as it doesn’t interfere my ability to complete things, okay.

> Congratulations! You are the 1000th person to complain about this! Your prize is…a ranking system!
> No. Sorry, but there are twenty other threads like this. I understand how much you care about this, but I think all the complaint threads need to stop. But I thank you for not saying “343i suks11!!”

You’ve opened my eyes. All that complaining in Reach didn’t do anything did it. There was no TU. No Arena fixes. No playlist fixes. I mean what do we think this forum is for? Obviously not a means of coming together to express our feelings about the game and elaborating on what we believe needs improvement. Honestly, I think we all just need to get back to circle jerking over FUD and how perfect Halo is.

> I respectfully disagree. I think what defines Halo would be a multitude of things :slight_smile:
> Not saying that you’re wrong because ranks could very well define what Halo is to you but to others it just doesn’t cut it :slight_smile:

Well it would have been accurately described as “what I and much of the competitive community define Halo as”. Yes, much of the community doesn’t give two yoinks about a ranking system, but there are those of us who without it cannot thoroughly enjoy the game. What is important to us, is different from what is important to many other people. All the millions of dollars put into FUD and Spartan Ops are great and dandy, but to us what truly matters is the competitive matchmaking environment. I, nor Vetoed, are trying to sway you to agree with us, just to simply understand where we are coming from.

> Sorry but no.
>
> There is more to Halo than just the MP game and some visual representation of your TrueSkill rank.
>
> Far more.

Were not asking to take anything away, we’re asking to add to satisfy those who play MP and enjoy having a visual representation on how well they’re doing.

It’s as if people don’t want it because they’ll realise that they’re not as good as they thought the we’re, a completely selfish reason.

> Um, Halo PC is the PC version of Halo, and it was the first Halo game with online, and guess what, it has no rankings. problem?

You can’t use Halo PC as a comparison because Halo PC didn’t actually have matchmaking; instead it relied on dedicated servers and a server browser, where people could pick what they want out of a selection of what was available. If they wanted a competitive match, all they need to do is find a competitive server.

We can’t use a game without matchmaking as a comparison point in a discussion about visible skill rankings in matchmaking, and i’m sure that if Halo CE did have online matchmaking it would have benefited greatly from a visible skill based ranking system.

Fair matches: Visible skill doesn’t do this any better than invisible skill. The reason matches get lop sided is because of low populations.

Inaccurate measures of skill: You really respond to “1v1 bro!”, that right there discredits you in my eyes. But anyways, the amount of alt accounts, the fact you get locked into a skill level while your skill level changes, derankers, sold accounts all factor into inaccurate measures of skill, all of these are signifcantly more prevalent in Halo 3’s 1-50 system.

I dislike Vetoed and even I agree with his assessment.