In the less than a year I have been playing reach and frequenting the forums a subject has come up frequently that I was curious about.That subject being if a player is good or bad but most importantly to my point,how many good players are there?Im not interested in how you come to your own personel number,just the number of good players you beleive there are.To clarify,for the sake of simplicity lets keep this reach specific.
> In the less than a year I have been playing reach and frequenting the forums a subject has come up frequently that I was curious about.That subject being if a player is good or bad but most importantly to my point,how many good players are there?Im not interested in how you come to your own personel number,just the number of good players you beleive there are.To clarify,for the sake of simplicity lets keep this reach specific.
Even keeping it Reach specific, this is nothing but a speculative opinion-fest. People will judge by K/D or Wins over Losses or amounts of this and that. My K/D suffers from me playing too much of a CQC style and boatloads of Living Dead.
This could range from anything. I am if anything a dedicated player. I play for fun and don’t attempt to ruin the game for fellow players.
> > In the less than a year I have been playing reach and frequenting the forums a subject has come up frequently that I was curious about.That subject being if a player is good or bad but most importantly to my point,how many good players are there?Im not interested in how you come to your own personel number,just the number of good players you beleive there are.To clarify,for the sake of simplicity lets keep this reach specific.
>
> Even keeping it Reach specific, this is nothing but a speculative opinion-fest. People will judge by K/D or Wins over Losses or amounts of this and that. My K/D suffers from me playing too much of a CQC style and boatloads of Living Dead.
>
>
> This could range from anything. I am if anything a dedicated player. I play for fun and don’t attempt to ruin the game for fellow players.
While I appreciate your response I specificly asked that your (or anybodies criteria) not be included in their response as I do not want this to turn into a debate on criteria but rather the “number”.
In order to give a number, you need to define what counts towards being good. Therein lies the problem.
> In order to give a number, you need to define what counts towards being good. Therein lies the problem.
Your opinion is the criteria,you dont need to explain or defend your criteria mearly give a number.
> > In order to give a number, you need to define what counts towards being good. Therein lies the problem.
>
> Your opinion is the criteria,you dont need to explain or defend your criteria mearly give a number.
But it’s PURELY opinion. You’re not going to get a straight or definitive answer. Just more inquiries as to what the criteria is/may be.
This thread is just a debate-spark in itself. Nobody can define what “good” is.
What someone may consider good, another may consider an entirely different thing.
This is like asking “Which is better? A or B?” You’re obviously going to get mixed results.
> > > In order to give a number, you need to define what counts towards being good. Therein lies the problem.
> >
> > Your opinion is the criteria,you dont need to explain or defend your criteria mearly give a number.
>
> But it’s PURELY opinion. You’re not going to get a straight or definitive answer. Just more inquiries as to what the criteria is/may be.
>
> This thread is just a debate-spark in itself. Nobody can define what “good” is.
>
> What someone may consider good, another may consider an entirely different thing.
>
>
> This is like asking “Which is better? A or B?” You’re obviously going to get mixed results.
You are correct,it is opinion,an opinion that is thrown around alot on forums and I am mearly asking for a simple number,if you cant respond according to that criteria please dont fill my thread with arguments about what the criteria is,please make your own thread for a debate about the criteria.(have fun with that)
My team always loses, IDK why. They just camp camp camp while the other team actually tries.
> 42.
funnyz happened here. X)
> 42.
This is true. It is the Answer to Life, the Universe and Everything (the thread question posed would be in the “Everything” section).
> You are correct,it is opinion,an opinion that is thrown around alot on forums and I am mearly asking for a simple number,if you cant respond according to that criteria please dont fill my thread with arguments about what the criteria is,please make your own thread for a debate about the criteria.(have fun with that)
This thread is a troll trap and seems to falter on the lines of productive. It’s GOING to be debated whether you like it or not. If you wanted it to be more open in terms of criteria, then you shouldn’t have labeled it as a thread only wanting a specific answer to something that can’t be answered specifically.
And don’t try to limit it to only the answers you want. Maybe I don’t agree with some of the responses and b/c it’s your thread, I can’t put in my two cents about it logically.
> > 42.
>
> funnyz happened here. X)
You know whats even more funny?So far the mean number for this survey is 42.Leaving approx. 99% being “bad”
> > > 42.
> >
> > funnyz happened here. X)
>
> You know whats even more funny?So far the mean number for this survey is 42.Leaving approx. 99% being “bad”
Oh, wait. There’s only good and bad? I thought there would be a range along the lines of Godly/Amazing/Great/Good/Average/Sub Par/Streaky/Poor/Luke Warm/Bad/Horrible/Excruciatingly Painful to Watch/Deceased Upon Respawn.
If that’s the case, I’d like to change my number to 420,000.
But really, who knows? I’d like to think of myself as good, but without a clear definition, these numbers are just numbers.
> > > > 42.
> > >
> > > funnyz happened here. X)
> >
> > You know whats even more funny?So far the mean number for this survey is 42.Leaving approx. 99% being “bad”
>
> Oh, wait. There’s only good and bad? I thought there would be a range along the lines of Godly/Amazing/Great/Good/Average/Sub Par/Streaky/Poor/Luke Warm/Bad/Horrible/Excruciatingly Painful to Watch/Deceased Upon Respawn.
>
> If that’s the case, I’d like to change my number to 420,000.
>
> But really, who knows? I’d like to think of myself as good, but without a clear definition, these numbers are just numbers.
I’ll play along - Eleventeen.
There.
> > You are correct,it is opinion,an opinion that is thrown around alot on forums and I am mearly asking for a simple number,if you cant respond according to that criteria please dont fill my thread with arguments about what the criteria is,please make your own thread for a debate about the criteria.(have fun with that)
>
> This thread is a troll trap and seems to falter on the lines of productive. It’s GOING to be debated whether you like it or not. If you wanted it to be more open in terms of criteria, then you shouldn’t have labeled it as a thread only wanting a specific answer to something that can’t be answered specifically.
>
> And don’t try to limit it to only the answers you want. Maybe I don’t agree with some of the responses and b/c it’s your thread, I can’t put in my two cents about it logically.
Ive allready tried and you seem determined to have that debate so here you go,In my opinion a player can be considered good by the aggregate of the following(order is not formatted by level of importance)K/D +W/L+playlist+amount of games played.This is specific to the game played and does not determin if a player will be good at another game.As in a player that is good at reach may not perform as well in Halo 3 and visa versa.
> > > > 42.
> > >
> > > funnyz happened here. X)
> >
> > You know whats even more funny?So far the mean number for this survey is 42.Leaving approx. 99% being “bad”
>
> Oh, wait. There’s only good and bad? I thought there would be a range along the lines of Godly/Amazing/Great/Good/Average/Sub Par/Streaky/Poor/Luke Warm/Bad/Horrible/Excruciatingly Painful to Watch/Deceased Upon Respawn.
>
> If that’s the case, I’d like to change my number to 420,000.
>
> But really, who knows? I’d like to think of myself as good, but without a clear definition, these numbers are just numbers.
Rarely do I see people call others average,it appears that the general consensus is your good or bad.(not my opinion,only my observance.)
I know exactly what you mean. Even trying to determine a real figure in my head, I can’t seem to get a grasp on what would be considered good or bad. Everyone has their specialties, and get the right group together, and good things will happen.
There are lots of good players out there. Considering how large the population is, there are many good players playing Reach.
> I know exactly what you mean. Even trying to determine a real figure in my head, I can’t seem to get a grasp on what would be considered good or bad. Everyone has their specialties, and get the right group together, and good things will happen.
Exactly,my point is to collect a number based on peoples opinion,more to the point the type of forum poster that likes to toss the “bad” label around often.Curiously there apears to be a very small amount of contributers to this thread,which is contrary to the amount of players who like to determine who is good and who is bad.