Is it fair to make threads about Reach competitiveness?

Is it fair to make a thread about Reach competitiveness when the OP doesn’t have his profile showing or doesn’t play Reach at all? I noticed that some people who say that Reach isn’t good competitive-wise and is a bad game either don’t their Reach profile showing or don’t play Reach matchmaking(Socially and Competitively). Do you find it fair?

Sure they can make good reads but they don’t have any proof that they know how Reach plays in Social and in Arena. They simply say Reach isn’t competitive and just go for the DMR excuse and never provide experience as a player and examples from their experience. Honestly I feel this is unfair to the people who still play the game and don’t have any or have problems with Reach. What do you think? Do you think its fair?

I don’t really find it fair. If they’re going to complain about a game, then they better have proof to back it up. Experience is a perfect for examples when giving proof. And if their tag isn’t linked, then they are most likely just trolling or just made an account to rage. That’s what I’ve gotten from my experience.

Ω

I think people should argue with words and well thought-out arguments, instead of their player statistics.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be about statistics. Usually the people who have the well thought-out arguments are the people that have played and have experience with the game. Then linked their experiences with examples on why the game isn’t as good as it could be.

Ω

So if the benefit of skill is a good argument, why would one need to know the player statistics behind them? In my experience, player statistics are only used as an ad-hominem.

Unless statistics are the center of attention in this “The Benefit of Skill is Good” argument than it doesn’t necessarily need to be. Having a linked gamertag shows that they’ve played and what they’ve played. If someone is typing out a well though-out argument about the topic, they can use the experiences that they’ve had to form examples about why skillfulness would be beneficial in situations where everything was just plain luck or just plain stupid. And then if someone who is reading their argument goes “You know, I don’t think they actually played Arena” (or something like that). Then they can check and be like “Well, (s)he’s played X number of games (s)he must know what (s)he’s talking about.” At least that’s how I look at it.

Ω

The irony in this thread is too much for me to handle.

> The irony in this thread is too much for me to handle.

There is no irony in this thread. It’s irony that you even post since you fit the category I was talking about but I don’t want to attack members…

People should be respectful of others and their preference options. If they have something that has to be exposed then they are invited to share it as long as they respect everyone and implement a fun atmosphere for everyone as well as something to back it up to keep the dicussion going and real.

Remember everyone! [not many people] Pay attention in school to learn about how to debate and what not to use in debates! [sophisms]

Well its fail in the sense that everyone is entitled to their opinion. However some people like you mentioned have read alot of threads people make on why reach is bad. Since they only played a little bit and didnt like it, they use stuff they have previously read and put it on their post so they can sound smart.

I wouldn’t do it if I were you. I made a post today saying Reach was bad and it got deleted. LOL.

> Is it fair to make a thread about Reach competitiveness when the OP doesn’t have his profile showing or doesn’t play Reach at all? I noticed that some people who say that Reach isn’t good competitive-wise and is a bad game either don’t their Reach profile showing or don’t play Reach matchmaking(Socially and Competitively). Do you find it fair?
>
> Sure they can make good reads but they don’t have any proof that they know how Reach plays in Social and in Arena. They simply say Reach isn’t competitive and just go for the DMR excuse and never provide experience as a player and examples from their experience. Honestly I feel this is unfair to the people who still play the game and don’t have any or have problems with Reach. What do you think? Do you think its fair?

Generally, I think you can discern from a person’s post whether they have put time into Halo of it they are just trolling.
I think it is good to have your GT linked to your profile, but there are people who take it the wrong way. Some people get bashed for having a negative opinion of Reach simply because their stats aren’t great. It goes both ways.

It isn’t as big of a deal on here because you can’t just click on a user’s name to see their stats (unless I’m missing something.)

Yes it is fair.

I play Reach frequently despite how much I dislike it’s aspects and can proudly say how competitively dead it is compared to the prior Halo’s. The people you are talking about, who have only played Reach a couple of times, explain it’s competitive flaws better than I probably ever can. You see, you don’t have to play Reach on a daily basis to complain about it. Sadly, it only took players a day or two of gameplay to realize that something is terribly wrong.

Yes its fair. There are people I know who gave up on Reach early after release so they wouldn’t have any real record and their impressions of the game are pretty accurate today. Beyond a few playlist tweaks, nothing has really changed much in Reach. Random people walking in and giving there opinion should be listened to as well, if only for a brief period.

> Generally, I think you can discern from a person’s post whether they have put time into Halo of it they are just trolling.
> I think it is good to have your GT linked to your profile, but there are people who take it the wrong way. Some people get bashed for having a negative opinion of Reach simply because their stats aren’t great. It goes both ways.
>
> It isn’t as big of a deal on here because you can’t just click on a user’s name to see their stats (unless I’m missing something.)

Well, honestly I like to look at peoples GT to see whether they really took the time to play the game istead of just posting on something they picked up from other people’s thought with no experience themselves. I no problem if they have a high or low K/D its just if they took the time to play the game instead of just “not playing after a few games” and “know how everything works”.

No.

What is “competitive” is highly subjective, and threads like that are created purely as flame bait without subsistence, irrelevant to ones position.

> No.
>
> What is “competitive” is highly subjective, and threads like that are created purely as flame bait without subsistence, irrelevant to ones position.

I agree that “competitive” is highly subjective, but why shouldn’t people be allowed to post about it? You’re making the sweeping assumption that it is impossible to have a respectful, intelligent discussion about “what is competitive”.

I say let people post about whatever Halo topic they like, as long as they are polite and respectful of others.

> > No.
> >
> > What is “competitive” is highly subjective, and threads like that are created purely as flame bait without subsistence, irrelevant to ones position.
>
> I agree that “competitive” is highly subjective, but why shouldn’t people be allowed to post about it? You’re making the sweeping assumption that it is impossible to have a respectful, intelligent discussion about “what is competitive”.
>
> I say let people post about whatever Halo topic they like, as long as they are polite and respectful of others.

Agreed.

> > > No.
> > >
> > > What is “competitive” is highly subjective, and threads like that are created purely as flame bait without subsistence, irrelevant to ones position.
> >
> > I agree that “competitive” is highly subjective, but why shouldn’t people be allowed to post about it? You’re making the sweeping assumption that it is impossible to have a respectful, intelligent discussion about “what is competitive”.
> >
> > I say let people post about whatever Halo topic they like, as long as they are polite and respectful of others.
>
> Agreed.

No, the assumption I’m making is that the only reason the topic was created in the first place was to was TO BE disrespectful, and not talk intelligently about the game, but to give the illusion that something from within the game is not working as intended.

It’s CLEAR that the game IS working as intended (with a few MINOR bugs), so this guise of “not competitive enough” is actually just people trying to change the intended character of the game to something they would enjoy more, (no bloom/AA’s).

They refuse to believe that people can and are competitive at something that they don’t understand, so this is how they flame/troll.

There’s a difference in the statements “Bloom is broken” and “Bloom is not competitive”, if it’s broken, then it’s not working as intended.

Since it is working as intended though, the poster needs to just decide if this is a game they want to compete at, and leave it there, NOT disguise and mislead the community by saying the game isn’t competitive because of the broken bloom system.

Because that’s CLEARLY the basis for lying/trolling/flame-baiting, NOT coming here to create intelligent/respectful discussions.