Halo 4 needs incentive to win - Long Read

Games Other Halo
1

Dear 343 - From an avid gamer,

If there is one thing that I have learned in my many years of playing Halo, nothing has deprived Halo Reach gameplay more than the lack of incentive to win. If there was only one thing fixed with Reach, for me, it wouldn’t be bloom, armor lock, revenant sniping, file share viewing, living dead betrayal booting, 2’s trick in Arena, or even Invasion map control.

The only thing I would want fixed is the incentive to win games.

Don’t get me wrong, during Bungie’s last few months of Halo Reach, Jeremiah switch Arena’s ranking system over to win/loss instead of daily rating. That was a HUGE plus in the right direction. In Arena, players actually have to win games in order to rank up. This creates a competitive atmosphere that everyone loves and has the most fun with.

I have spent many hours into Halo Reach. Nothing annoys me more than seeing that you don’t even have to win games to rank up. Many players complain about teamkilling, camping in their own bases the entire game, not rushing the objective, stat -Yoink!-, and camo sniping. If there was a simple fix to end all of this, it would be to add incentive to win. Players in Reach aren’t forced to win games, so they do all of this other stuff to deteriorate from other players’ experience.

This adds another level of frustration to many players and forces them to quit. Then you have an uneven 1 sided game. This forces more players to either quit or stay and get spawn killed or badly beaten in a game that they don’t enjoy. You see, with the incentive to win games, players try to work together as a team. Players try to get that Bomb or Flag into the scoring zone. There is a level of trust that players establish with their random teammates. They trust that their teammates can pick up the guy with the flag in the Warthog, protect the bomb guy with the Banshee, hold down a crucial location of map control. Players need to trust each other.

How can this level of trust be established when there is nothing to achieve?

Let me ask you this: How can a group of players paired together in an online matchmaking service, trust each other enough to win a game, when winning doesn’t even matter?

In Halo 3, you were FORCED to win a game to rank up. It’s that simple. You wanted to get an awesome rank in Halo 3? Win games. It didn’t matter if you were in Ranked or Social playlists. You had to win. Everyone knows this. Teams were working together, trying to out slay or capture that flag. Every map had a niche that players used at the start of the game.

> - Anyone remember Sand-trap? It was a RACE to the Banshee!
> - What about Valhalla? Get that Laser!
> - Guardian? What about Sniper? Shotgun? Over-shield?
[/quote]

>
> You see, after playing these maps enough times, it become common knowledge on strategies used on how to win that map. In Reach, players LITERALLY do whatever they want. Part of the reason for this is simple - commendations. Commendations are the reason many players stay back and rack up on that KD to get those massive sprees game after game. They don’t need to win the game, they just need to get a high KD. Players who do this don’t even care if they lose the game. They have no reason to care, because winning doesn’t matter. This is sad that Halo has degraded to this level. Winning should be the most important thing when it comes to competitive online gaming.
>
> There are also many different players who have incentive to win games. It’s a personal incentive though. Maybe they’re on HaloTracker or HaloCharts (I know it’s ended) and they need to maintain a certain win percentage. But the difference is that 3rd party website has provided that service to them, not the game itself.
>
> Just because a team of players has the incentive to win games for a win percentage, doesn’t mean their opponents do. This is a major problem that should be addressed. This deteriorates from the competitive spirit of the Halo.
>
>
>
>
> > You’re working on that Flag and your heart is racing with 30 seconds left, seeing if you guys are going to “Ruff-Gonja” that flag all the way back to the base. Many opponents are stacked against you!
> >
> > You’re so close in winning and it’s almost there you can feel it! Your teammate gets sniped and you’re the only one left to grab that flag! You don’t even care if you die as long as you touch that flag! Time runs out and Jeff Stietzer says “SUDDEN DEATH”. A Warthog races by you only to get lasered by the enemy team. It’s almost game over and you capture it! You’ve won the game!
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> You see, I have only had that feeling maybe 3-4 times in Reach. It’s mainly because I placed in TOP of last Summers HaloCharts BTB Tournament with the team “Dood Nailerz!”. That was a great time! We we’re competing against other teams that had incentive to win and do whatever it took to get that win.
>
> So… Halo 4
>
> 343, all I ask is that you have an incentive to win. Give the winning team/player something that others cannot have. Give them a REASON to go for that flag, arm that bomb, capture that territory. Bring back that competitive spirit that existed back in Halo 2 and Halo 3 matchmaking. Players will quit less, work as a team more and learn those different tactics to try and get the upper hand on their opponent at the start of the match.
>
> However you’re developing a ranking system for Multiplayer in Halo 4, go with it. Just make sure there is a reason to actually WIN the game.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Spawnling

2

I agree ranking up without earning it isn’t a good idea.

3

I completely agree. It annoys the HECK out of me to see people camping with snipers while there’s a flag to be caught. Or in BTB when the other team have stolen all your vehicles and power weapons and spawn kill and don’t even bother taking the flag…?

I don’t think it should be entirely up to whether you win or loose though. I think you should get something way smaller for doing well in a game and then if you win, you get the big thing whether it be EXP or cR or whatever 343 use but make sure everyone wants to win :slight_smile:

4

> I don’t think it should be entirely up to whether you win or loose though. I think you should get something way smaller for doing well in a game and then if you win, you get the big thing whether it be EXP or cR or whatever 343 use but make sure everyone wants to win :slight_smile:

If I were in charge of Reach, I would make it so:

  • Completing 7 games in a row without quitting will earn you double credits for 1 game.
  • Losing a game earns you HALF of the credits you would have normally gained.
  • Quitting a game deducts credits from your overall total and counts as a loss - also resets your 7 game completion streak
5

> > I don’t think it should be entirely up to whether you win or loose though. I think you should get something way smaller for doing well in a game and then if you win, you get the big thing whether it be EXP or cR or whatever 343 use but make sure everyone wants to win :slight_smile:
>
> If I were in charge of Reach, I would make it so:
>
> - Completing 7 games in a row without quitting will earn you double credits for 1 game.
> - Losing a game earns you HALF of the credits you would have normally gained.
> - Quitting a game deducts credits from your overall total and counts as a loss - also resets your 7 game completion streak

Excellent idea. But I think losing should only give you a quarter, some people still wouldn’t care or possibly less if there’s still no team work going on.

6

I think you need to lose rank though for doing poorly not just get half the credits. I enjoyed trying to improve my rank and if I did badly I lost rank it’s part of the fun imo.

7

I typed up a decent sized post and it disappeared so I’ll just say this - Win/Loss works for ranked matches, but is annoying for social. I think that social got it right when you could advance in credits win or lose. I think that winning should provide an advantage, but if you’re getting carrying and not picking up kills, you shouldn’t be getting as much CR as a guy on the losing team who is dominating.

8

Or even a quarter. Problem is, I don’t know what 343i is doing for a ranking system with Halo 4. Nobody knows, so I can’t give a practical way of illustrating this.

Even if it’s lowered to 25% or less of what credits you would normally get, you get the idea. The whole point - is that people who stay in games and WIN rank up MUCH faster than players who lose and quit.

If 343 goes to a straight Win/Loss exp system, I’m all for having the Halo 3 style of losers gaining nothing. I’m just trying to get the point across that winning needs to mean something. Otherwise we will have another train wreck of a game.

9

But you still rank up even if you are bad I want the rank to mean something besides I play a lot and topped out my rank.

10

Ah, Spawn I remember you talking about this awhile back. I’m glad you brought that idea here.

Anyway, I still think the cR system should stay, but for and ONLY for buying armor.

Ranking up should be based on winning and doing well.

11

> Ah, Spawn I remember you talking about this awhile back. I’m glad you brought that idea here.
>
> Anyway, I still think the cR system should stay, but for and ONLY for buying armor.
>
> Ranking up should be based on winning and doing well.

Hey!

Yes, I’m not against the cR system as a whole. If they want to keep that for buying armor, more power to them. I just know from a lot of players I play with, social playlists in Reach just aren’t competitive and fun. But ranking up should mean something to the player!

12

to think one thing can make a plethora of major issues. Think of all the added stress to the designers for trying to prevent things like this.

OT: I completely agree with you on that.
I sometimes find myself quitting games, even if I’m doing great, simply because there’s no reward at the end of the road. There’s no point of finishing a dull match, if you aren’t rewarded to do so. At the end of the day, the only reward you get, is virtual money to spend on clothes for a mannequin you can only see in the main menu. Ranks are supposed to symbolize skill and veteran status. The ranks in reach, because they don’t require effort and skill to achieve, symbolize nothing, therefore, are worth nothing.

They really need to properly reward effort, and severely punish foolery (in ranked matches, if they return).

13

> to think one thing can make a plethora of major issues. Think of all the added stress to the designers for trying to prevent things like this.
>
> OT: I completely agree with you on that.
> I sometimes find myself quitting games, even if I’m doing great, simply because there’s no reward at the end of the road. There’s no point of finishing a dull match, if you aren’t rewarded to do so. At the end of the day, the only reward you get, is virtual money to spend on clothes for a mannequin you can only see in the main menu. Ranks are supposed to symbolize skill and veteran status. The ranks in reach, because they don’t require effort and skill to achieve, symbolize nothing, therefore, are worth nothing.
>
> They really need to properly reward effort, and severely punish foolery (in ranked matches, if they return).

YES

14

> Ah, Spawn I remember you talking about this awhile back. I’m glad you brought that idea here.
>
> Anyway, I still think the cR system should stay, but for and ONLY for buying armor.
>
> Ranking up should be based on winning and doing well.

Agreed

15

Even though I’m not that competitive of a Halo player, I easily agree with everything you’ve said. Good work, spawn.

16

Whatever happened to the victory bonus (or whatever it was called) in the Beta? They should put it into Reach and give an extra 2000 - 3000 credits for winning.

17

Ah Spawn you are a god among humans for psoting this! I utterly agree with you. Keep cR for buying armour but keep H2 and H3 ranking system or something similar. In Reach I see someone thats a high rank and I think to myself Man what a no life
Then I see someone in H3 at Gen ranking and think Man this guy must be a BEASTIn Reach I find no pleasure in ranking up its not satisfying enough for me! But in H3 when I went from 41 to 42 in LW I was glowing for the whole day it was the best feeling ever!

I prefered the H2 to H3 system because even though I knew I probably would never see the General or 50 beside my name, I still tryed very hard I might add every day to try and get just one rank closer. It kept me playing and if Reach never came out Ièd still be playing heavily to this day! Please 343 bring back my Classic system, bring back my nostalgia or make an even better system just please bring back that satisfaction for me!

18

> Whatever happened to the victory bonus (or whatever it was called) in the Beta? They should put it into Reach and give an extra 2000 - 3000 credits for winning.

It’s actually 200 - 300 credits. Not nearly enough to make people actually go for the win rather than getting commendations and KD.

19

> I think you need to lose rank though for doing poorly not just get half the credits. I enjoyed trying to improve my rank and if I did badly I lost rank it’s part of the fun imo.

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS… THIS. The thing I loved about halo 3’s rank system and probably would have loved with halo 2’s was the fact that there was a risk to losing. This is extremely crucial in creating a competitive environment. I mean look at Cod for instance sure I get more xp by getting more kills but so what?

A rank to me is like a heavyweight title in boxing. That belt is visible on you when you first walk up to the ring, and then you have to prove that you still deserve to keep it. That to me is the beauty of it, not only do you have it but at the same time you are forced to win to KEEP IT.

20

And this, my friends, is how you use color text to your advantage.