CSR and why 343 is smarter than forum posters

I’ve made it a point not to read the forums for Halo 4 since forums have become a place where this self entitled generation goes to tell a game company that their game is terrible because it does not meet 100% of the player’s personal preferences. For some reason I was tempted to check after CSR came out to see if the community accepted or rejected CSR. What I have found is about as much complaining as I anticipated.

Why shouldn’t 343 make visible 1-50 ranks? People say that they loved ranking up in Halo 2 and 3, but I think you have all forgotten why the visible ranking system made multiplayer WORSE in those games than Halo Reach and Halo 4.

Boosting, modding, and purchasing of accounts in order to show off a 50 rank made multiplayer terrible after a certain threshold, and it was a nightmare for Bungie. Banning players and dealing with the appeals of those that were banned took up way too many resources for Bungie for Halo 3. Halo 2 did not have a system in place to deal with modders, and a legitimate 40+ player was almost impossible, as every game I played after rank 40 was against an unkillable modded player.

Halo 3 was plagued with boosting and people de-ranking. I played so many games where my teammates were committing suicide, or the other team quit out.

The community complained to Bungie that they wanted the rankings in Halo Reach because the majority of the players were competitive players. Bungie gives players the Arena, which to date is still the best judge of skill in Halo. You couldn’t boost yourself to Onyx. If you were Onyx, you were the best of the best. And guess what? That playlist had 400 players within a month of release. Because despite what the vocal minority on the forums say, people were not interested in super competitive gameplay. We just like seeing numbers next to our name get higher. This was given to us in two ways with Halo 4: A rank that rewards you for simply playing that will always increase, and a rank that goes up or down based on your performance. Since the latter is not viewable in game, there is no market for purchasing accounts, and boosting would be pretty darn pointless.

As it turns out, people who are paid professionally to design a video game knows what is best for us, despite some players’ unrealistic expectations.

343, thanks for making the first Halo that I actually want to play (unlike Reach, got stale pretty quick) that has not yet made me replace a controller that was destroyed out of frustration of some kind directly related to visible rankings and the griefing that occurred from people wanting to show off a 50, regardless of its legitimacy.

I fully expect to be called a fanboy, because these days liking a product and the company that made it is a bad thing. Won’t bother me a bit.

I hate to break it to you but maybe you should see what’s actually going on before rushing to 343’s defense. Yes they are screwing up badly and no it’s not just the community whining. But if it is such a great work of perfection as you claim then why did it have a 90% population drop and fall behind another FPS that’s a year older?

> I’ve made it a point not to read the forums for Halo 4 since forums have become a place where this self entitled generation goes to tell a game company that their game is terrible because it does not meet 100% of the player’s personal preferences. For some reason I was tempted to check after CSR came out to see if the community accepted or rejected CSR. What I have found is about as much complaining as I anticipated.
>
> Why shouldn’t 343 make visible 1-50 ranks? People say that they loved ranking up in Halo 2 and 3, but I think you have all forgotten why the visible ranking system made multiplayer WORSE in those games than Halo Reach and Halo 4.
>
> Boosting, modding, and purchasing of accounts in order to show off a 50 rank made multiplayer terrible after a certain threshold, and it was a nightmare for Bungie. Banning players and dealing with the appeals of those that were banned took up way too many resources for Bungie for Halo 3. Halo 2 did not have a system in place to deal with modders, and a legitimate 40+ player was almost impossible, as every game I played after rank 40 was against an unkillable modded player.
>
> Halo 3 was plagued with boosting and people de-ranking. I played so many games where my teammates were committing suicide, or the other team quit out.
>
> The community complained to Bungie that they wanted the rankings in Halo Reach because the majority of the players were competitive players. Bungie gives players the Arena, which to date is still the best judge of skill in Halo. You couldn’t boost yourself to Onyx. If you were Onyx, you were the best of the best. And guess what? That playlist had 400 players within a month of release. Because despite what the vocal minority on the forums say, people were not interested in super competitive gameplay. We just like seeing numbers next to our name get higher. This was given to us in two ways with Halo 4: A rank that rewards you for simply playing that will always increase, and a rank that goes up or down based on your performance. Since the latter is not viewable in game, there is no market for purchasing accounts, and boosting would be pretty darn pointless.
>
> As it turns out, people who are paid professionally to design a video game knows what is best for us, despite some players’ unrealistic expectations.
>
> 343, thanks for making the first Halo that I actually want to play (unlike Reach, got stale pretty quick) that has not yet made me replace a controller that was destroyed out of frustration of some kind directly related to visible rankings and the griefing that occurred from people wanting to show off a 50, regardless of its legitimacy.
>
> I fully expect to be called a fanboy, because these days liking a product and the company that made it is a bad thing. Won’t bother me a bit.

Ironic, the 343i fan-boy comes riding in on his cyber pony and makes a thread about people complaining which is nothing more than a rant and complaint by himself!

Anyone say…hypocrisy?

So… you complain about complainers complaining.GG.

Anyways, beside the worthless number i would rather have Halo:CE gameplay back.No ranks,no dressup(just colors),and no stats.Funny part is, it was the most fun i’ve ever had in any Halo game multiplayer haha… go figure.

With all that said and whatever, i wonder if you can rebuke the complaint of horrifying netcode and constant lag/black screens.Can you?

Side note:The Grunt Overlord know’s all and i am his loyal servant.Are you?

> So… you complain about complainers complaining.GG.
>
> Anyways, beside the worthless number i would rather have Halo:CE gameplay back.No ranks,no dressup(just colors),and no stats.Funny part is, it was the most fun i’ve ever had in any Halo game multiplayer haha… go figure.
>
>
> With all that said and whatever, i wonder if you can rebuke the complaint of horrifying netcode and constant lag/black screens.Can you?
>
>
> Side note:The Grunt Overlord know’s all and i am his loyal servant.Are you?

Ah, but I never claimed that there was anything about complaining, did I.It is legit to complain. But what OP did was contradict him/herself. I did not.

> So… you complain about complainers complaining.GG.
>
> Anyways, beside the worthless number i would rather have Halo:CE gameplay back.No ranks,no dressup(just colors),and no stats.Funny part is, it was the most fun i’ve ever had in any Halo game multiplayer haha… go figure.
>
>
> With all that said and whatever, i wonder if you can rebuke the complaint of horrifying netcode and constant lag/black screens.Can you?
>
>
> Side note:The Grunt Overlord know’s all and i am his loyal servant.Are you?

Ah, but I never claimed that there was anything about complaining, did I.It is legit to complain. But what OP did was contradict him/herself. I did not.

BTW, you just complained about me complaining about the complaining OP complaining about complainers!

> Why shouldn’t 343 make visible 1-50 ranks? People say that they loved ranking up in Halo 2 and 3, but I think you have all forgotten why the visible ranking system made multiplayer WORSE in those games than Halo Reach and Halo 4.

Ummmmm, are you trolling or serious??? I remember a couple of hundred thousand people online a year after release on H2 and 3, this game usually has 40k and it’s only been 5 months.

There’s not even an option to search based on connection, this is the most disappointing multiplayer I’ve ever experienced, and I was playing xblive the day it came out. I was even playing CE over xbconnect before Live launched, this game was a huge leap backwards.

CSR has no in game effect and therefore should not be called a competitive skill ranking because that is not what it is. What I mean by this is that the csr does not filter the players you oppose depending on your rank, it matches you with pretty much anyone. And in regards to the reach arena before season 5 it was based on individual stats, not rewarding players to work with each other and win together which is what competitive halo is all about. And the only reasons you would see more cheaters in previous halo titles is for two reasons. The first reason is that some people don’t believe they can be a 50 or at least are not willing to put the time in to get it in a legitimate fashion resulting in them cheating. The second reason cheating was more seen in previous titles is because the population was bigger which in turn increased the amount of cheaters. For example there are still cheaters on h4, although most of them play gb or other online tournaments because there is nothing in matchmaking that they apparently view as worth cheating and that’s the sad truth there is nothing addicting or appealing or even progression after you reach 130. And also to add about reach arena there were cheaters in low % onyx in the later seasons there just wasn’t that many of them because that playlist pulled a population of 900 and that was considered high.

i think the point is that the only people that have a positive stance on displaying skill based ranking are the competitive people who rank up higher. this is a minority by definition. the majority has a neutral or negative stance towards displaying a skill based ranking system. so why bother wasting time?

> I’ve made it a point not to read the forums for Halo 4 since forums have become a place where this self entitled generation goes to tell a game company that their game is terrible because it does not meet 100% of the player’s personal preferences. For some reason I was tempted to check after CSR came out to see if the community accepted or rejected CSR. What I have found is about as much complaining as I anticipated.
>
> Why shouldn’t 343 make visible 1-50 ranks? People say that they loved ranking up in Halo 2 and 3, but I think you have all forgotten why the visible ranking system made multiplayer WORSE in those games than Halo Reach and Halo 4.
>
> <mark>Boosting, modding, and purchasing of accounts in order to show off a 50 rank</mark> made multiplayer terrible after a certain threshold, and it was a nightmare for Bungie. Banning players and dealing with the appeals of those that were banned took up way too many resources for Bungie for Halo 3. Halo 2 did not have a system in place to deal with modders, and a legitimate 40+ player was almost impossible, as every game I played after rank 40 was against an unkillable modded player.
>
> Halo 3 was plagued with boosting and people de-ranking. I played so many games where my teammates were committing suicide, or the other team quit out.
>
> The community complained to Bungie that they wanted the rankings in Halo Reach because the majority of the players were competitive players. Bungie gives players the Arena, which to date is still the best judge of skill in Halo. You couldn’t boost yourself to Onyx. If you were Onyx, you were the best of the best. And guess what? That playlist had 400 players within a month of release. Because despite what the vocal minority on the forums say, people were not interested in super competitive gameplay. We just like seeing numbers next to our name get higher. This was given to us in two ways with Halo 4: A rank that rewards you for simply playing that will always increase, and a rank that goes up or down based on your performance. Since the latter is not viewable in game, there is no market for purchasing accounts, and boosting would be pretty darn pointless.
>
> As it turns out, people who are paid professionally to design a video game knows what is best for us, despite some players’ unrealistic expectations.
>
> 343, thanks for making the first Halo that I actually want to play (unlike Reach, got stale pretty quick) that has not yet made me replace a controller that was destroyed out of frustration of some kind directly related to visible rankings and the griefing that occurred from people wanting to show off a 50, regardless of its legitimacy.
>
> I fully expect to be called a fanboy, because these days liking a product and the company that made it is a bad thing. Won’t bother me a bit.

So your problem is about the boosting that exists in Halo 3? Really? They have a 50 but they play like a 20 this really is a problem…there always be boosting and cheating and that stuff. what you said it´s ruined the multiplyer i said it makes it the best ive played so far

Yes, because taking out the ranking system did so much to dissuade cheaters from altering the game… (sarcasm)

Need I remind you of the Headless Hacks?

My 46 on this account was legit, and my 50 on my second account was legit, but I guess that’s a lie since anything above a 40 is too difficult to achieve. Is this, perhaps why you dislike the ranking system so much, your inability to achieve these ranks yourself? Did your feelings get hurt when someone said something about your skill level? May I suggest counseling, as you may have a slough of psychological problems if you are so upset by the ramblings of someone that you will never meet, about your skill at a video game, in which you have the option to mute this person?

I really can’t figure out why they would not show your halo 4 1-50 rank on the game. There is absolutely no reason to do it the way 343 did, and personally I was so pumped to start getting my rank up and showing it off in game because that’s what I looked forward to doing on the old halos. I got on yesterday to start leveling up and I don’t see my rank anywhere and it totally made me not want to even play the game. My friend and I have been waiting since the release of the game for the 1-50 ranks to come out and now this is just a huge disappointment. I hope 343 realize this is very stupid to not make the ranks show in game.Also for you to say that showing the rank on the game it promotes modding and boosting is very wrong because it may have in halo 2 and halo 3 but there has been a huge change in halo 4 to avoid stuff such as modding and boosting so that isn’t a valid reason.

I agree with a lot of your (Chewbacca0nFire) points in regards to issues involving past titles and their Rank systems, plus I would add that another problem with having blatantly displayed CSRs in-game, such as on Halo 4’s player cards, would be that lots of people might be motivated to back out of lobbies or to quit matches early and often just based on knowing the CSRs of their opponents. Now, the CSR system itself already curbs some of the issues that were present with boosting from past games just in how it was designed to work and modders are less of a problem today in general thanks to Xbox Live’s improved detection and protections, plus there’s the infamous banhammer. However, I do believe there is a more ideal solution going forward, such as this.

> I’ve made it a point not to read the forums for Halo 4 since forums have become a place where this self entitled generation goes to tell a game company that their game is terrible because it does not meet 100% of the player’s personal preferences.[/h]

Stopped reading there.

Actually These <mark>CUSTOMERS</mark> are <mark>COMPLAINING</mark> that their <mark>PURCHASED PRODUCT</mark> is <mark>NOT EVEN AT 60%</mark> of the <mark>QUALITY</mark> we <mark>EXPECT</mark> from our <mark>SUPPLIERS</mark>

In reality this is a business right? and what was that saying…

Was it…

The Customer is ALWAYS right?

> > I’ve made it a point not to read the forums for Halo 4 since forums have become a place where this self entitled generation goes to tell a game company that their game is terrible because it does not meet 100% of the player’s personal preferences.[/h]
>
> Stopped reading there.
>
> Actually These <mark>CUSTOMERS</mark> are <mark>COMPLAINING</mark> that their <mark>PURCHASED PRODUCT</mark> is <mark>NOT EVEN AT 60%</mark> of the <mark>QUALITY</mark> we <mark>EXPECT</mark> from our <mark>SUPPLIERS</mark>
>
> In reality this is a business right? and what was that saying…
>
>
> Was it…
>
>
> The Customer is ALWAYS right?

What!?..is that?..NO!.. LOGIC!? GET IT OUT OF HERE!

I would rather have modders, boosters, and account selling that we saw in Halo 2/Halo 3 than what we have now.

I don’t like cheaters, but that system was at least better than what it is now.

> Why shouldn’t 343 make visible 1-50 ranks? People say that they loved ranking up in Halo 2 and 3, but I think you have all forgotten why the visible ranking system made multiplayer WORSE in those games than Halo Reach and Halo 4.

What the actual -Yoink-? Last time I checked, Halo 2 and 3 didn’t have their population counts drop like flies.

> The community complained to Bungie that they wanted the rankings in Halo Reach because the majority of the players were competitive players. Bungie gives players the Arena, <mark>which to date is still the best judge of skill in Halo</mark>. You couldn’t boost yourself to Onyx. If you were Onyx, you were the best of the best.
> As it turns out, people who are paid professionally to design a video game knows what is best for us, despite some players’ unrealistic expectations.

LOL. I may not have been an onyx (since I never played Arena much), but if you went in with a semi-coordinated team, you were pretty much guaranteed onyx.
And no, the developer does not know what is best. This is an industry: customers buy the products, and thus they are always right. No exceptions.

> 343, thanks for making the first Halo that I actually want to play (unlike Reach, got stale pretty quick) that has not yet made me replace a controller that was destroyed out of frustration of some kind directly related to visible rankings and the griefing that occurred from people wanting to show off a 50, regardless of its legitimacy.

If you got so frustrated, then why does it sound like you kept trying to get a 50 in Halo 3?

> I fully expect to be called a fanboy, because these days liking a product and the company that made it is a bad thing. Won’t bother me a bit.

Where did you get that idea? The reason so many people dislike 343 now is because they made a game that purposely strayed farther away from the Halo formula than Reach, and slapped the name “Halo” on the box.

> > > I’ve made it a point not to read the forums for Halo 4 since forums have become a place where this self entitled generation goes to tell a game company that their game is terrible because it does not meet 100% of the player’s personal preferences.[/h]
> >
> > Stopped reading there.
> >
> > Actually These <mark>CUSTOMERS</mark> are <mark>COMPLAINING</mark> that their <mark>PURCHASED PRODUCT</mark> is <mark>NOT EVEN AT 60%</mark> of the <mark>QUALITY</mark> we <mark>EXPECT</mark> from our <mark>SUPPLIERS</mark>
> >
> > In reality this is a business right? and what was that saying…
> >
> >
> > Was it…
> >
> >
> > The Customer is ALWAYS right?
>
> What!?..is that?..NO!.. LOGIC!? GET IT OUT OF HERE!

I have had to deal with many customers and, unfortunately, many have hardly two brain cells to rub together…if you have not met customers or know people who are wrong, which is actually a human inbreed trait, that we are all wrong now and again, including customers, God forbid!

The “the customer is always right” logic is archaic as is Halo 3 MM.

People greatly over exaggerate the amount of boosting that went on in Halo 3. That’s all I have to say.

> > > > I’ve made it a point not to read the forums for Halo 4 since forums have become a place where this self entitled generation goes to tell a game company that their game is terrible because it does not meet 100% of the player’s personal preferences.[/h]
> > >
> > > Stopped reading there.
> > >
> > > Actually These <mark>CUSTOMERS</mark> are <mark>COMPLAINING</mark> that their <mark>PURCHASED PRODUCT</mark> is <mark>NOT EVEN AT 60%</mark> of the <mark>QUALITY</mark> we <mark>EXPECT</mark> from our <mark>SUPPLIERS</mark>
> > >
> > > In reality this is a business right? and what was that saying…
> > >
> > >
> > > Was it…
> > >
> > >
> > > The Customer is ALWAYS right?
> >
> > What!?..is that?..NO!.. LOGIC!? GET IT OUT OF HERE!
>
> I have had to deal with many customers and, unfortunately, many have hardly two brain cells to rub together…if you have not met customers or know people who are wrong, which is actually a human inbreed trait, that we are all wrong now and again, including customers, God forbid!
>
> The “the customer is always right” logic is archaic as is Halo 3 MM.

Well then I suggest you start telling these people tomorrow what idiots they are. Right to their face, see how that works out for you.

Here’s a little tip, when the majority of your customers tell you that you are wrong and quit coming to your store maybe they aren’t the wrong ones. Get it?

Here, I’ll give you an example. You buy a pizza hut franchise. You get it all set up and decide you want to change everything, the sauce, crust, topping amounts, but you still want to slap PIZZA HUT on the box. How many customers will you have in six months? Only the ones who liked your changes, all the people who liked pizza hut are gone. That IS what happened here.