I’ve been a huge fan of the halo universe for many years, and I strongly believe that the factor that made Halo 3 such a successful game in comparison to Halo Reach was the TrueSkill system. I’m not talking about success in terms of gameplay, I love the gameplay in both games and the innovation that was brought forth to Halo Reach was great, it was just the ranking system that I think didnt capture people as well as in Halo 3. Arena was confusing and it seemed like a “Why should I play arena when I can play ‘competetive’?”
The ranking system turned into what every other game was doing, play more games to level up higher. There was no real difference between players that were good or bad. In Halo 3, I took pride in the fact that I was a brigadier. In Halo Reach, when I hit Brigadier, it seemed too empty, the rank was so useless. Just made me feel like I played too much.
To really solidify what I’m trying to say: I really hope they bring in a ranking system in Halo 4 that immerses the players enough so that they really do strive to level up in a way that is not simply ‘the more you play the higher your rank,’ instead, a system that makes you work for your rank and lets people know that you’re better than them ;).
Let’s just say i favor the system that encourages players to improve their proficiency at the game by gauging their progress as they play and adjusts accordingly to how well you improve/how much you lose.
Not how long a player a player can hold a controller and stare at a TV screen while killing AI or smashing fools with gravity hammers. Or commit commit suicide, grief and the worst; afk ing the entire match and getting rewarded for it.
Of course if both can exist at the same time (though the progression system for unlocks is secondary to rank) that would be pretty cool. If that makes sense.
That’s what i felt was missing in Reach after you got most of the unlocks; motivation to play and improve you’re self as a player.
Oh yeah, since you 're new here…welcome to Halo Waypoint =)
> I’ve been a huge fan of the halo universe for many years, and I strongly believe that the factor that made Halo 3 such a successful game in comparison to Halo Reach was the TrueSkill system. I’m not talking about success in terms of gameplay, I love the gameplay in both games and the innovation that was brought forth to Halo Reach was great, it was just the ranking system that I think didnt capture people as well as in Halo 3. Arena was confusing and it seemed like a “Why should I play arena when I can play ‘competitive’?”
You played Arena because you wanted to.
> The ranking system turned into what every other game was doing, play more games to level up higher. There was no real difference between players that were good or bad. In Halo 3, I took pride in the fact that I was a brigadier. In Halo Reach, when I hit Brigadier, it seemed too empty, the rank was so useless. Just made me feel like I played too much.
As a forerunner that hasn’t boosted, when you get to the specialty ranks and start your true journey, you’ll understand. If Halo 3 had these ranks in them, it’d be a COMPLETELY different story.
> To really solidify what I’m trying to say: I really hope they bring in a ranking system in Halo 4 that immerses the players enough so that they really do strive to level up in a way that is not simply ‘the more you play the higher your rank,’ instead, a system that makes you work for your rank and lets people know that you’re better than them ;).
>
> Anyone agree?
I agree. But I also agree the more you play the more you should be rewarded. Lastly, you should introduce yourself here. Welcome to Waypoint