I saw this before when I was looking through this forum, but this is really, really critical. It keeps players coming back, and it creates a desire to play harder and get better. The great thing about 1-50 is that you could go mess around in social if you don’t feel like trying hard.
EDIT: Please no Join in progress for ranked. Double exp weekends
This also kept players coming back because you could rank up easier. Griffball and Living Dead should NOT be default play-lists because they are so popular that way people will come back on the weekends to play them. Also bring back that 2x exp playlists with VIP, mongooses, and rockets( can’t remember the name but that was soooooo fun)
Bring Back playlists
Some Playlists that were really fun in halo 3 until they were taken out or were not in reach.
Squad Battle (People tried harder and you were less likely to be paired up with guests)
MLG FFA (Fun for warming up and getting bett)
Team Throwback ( Just fun)
Plenty of Classic playlists
This is important just to keep more of a classic feel.
> The great thing about 1-50 is that you could go mess around in social if you don’t feel like trying hard.
That’s not great.
You’re taking away incentive for players who aren’t skilled enough to reach 50 to keep playing. It’s the same thing that was “done” to competitive players in Reach, but it’s okay this time because it’s not you suffering for it?
If anything, you’re just asking 343 to devolve the game.
> > 1-50 Is A MUST
>
> Nope.
>
>
>
> > The great thing about 1-50 is that you could go mess around in social if you don’t feel like trying hard.
>
> That’s not great.
>
> You’re taking away incentive for players who aren’t skilled enough to reach 50 to keep playing. It’s the same thing that was “done” to competitive players in Reach, but it’s okay this time because it’s not you suffering for it?
>
> If anything, you’re just asking 343 to devolve the game.
> That’s not great.
>
> You’re taking away incentive for players who aren’t skilled enough to reach 50 to keep playing. It’s the same thing that was “done” to competitive players in Reach, but it’s okay this time because it’s not you suffering for it?
>
> If anything, you’re just asking 343 to devolve the game.
> > 1-50 Is A MUST
>
> Nope.
>
>
>
> > The great thing about 1-50 is that you could go mess around in social if you don’t feel like trying hard.
>
> That’s not great.
>
> You’re taking away incentive for players who aren’t skilled enough to reach 50 to keep playing. It’s the same thing that was “done” to competitive players in Reach, but it’s okay this time because it’s not you suffering for it?
>
> If anything, you’re just asking 343 to devolve the game.
The point of a game is to progress and get better. Everyone has the opportunity to get a 50 if they have good team-mates, practice, and work to get better. A player should be a high rank because he is better than other players, not by not trying and playing alot.
The incentive of 1-50 is working to get a 50, and if a player is not yet skilled enough then the incentive is always there.
You don’t become a Olympic athlete by being a couch potato, same thing with rankin, you shouldn’t become the highest rank if you aren’t good enough or don’t try.
> > 1-50 Is A MUST
>
> Nope.
>
>
>
> > The great thing about 1-50 is that you could go mess around in social if you don’t feel like trying hard.
>
> That’s not great.
>
> You’re taking away incentive for players who aren’t skilled enough to reach 50 to keep playing. It’s the same thing that was “done” to competitive players in Reach, but it’s okay this time because it’s not you suffering for it?
>
> If anything, you’re just asking 343 to devolve the game.
1-50 is largely liked over arena.
And your second part confuses me a little, are you saying we should reward players for not being good?
Edit: and if anything, 2 separate systems would be best, like credits for playing and rank for winning.
> > Don’t like 1-50 play social.
>
> Gonna quote myself here:
>
>
>
> > That’s not great.
> >
> > You’re taking away incentive for players who aren’t skilled enough to reach 50 to keep playing. It’s the same thing that was “done” to competitive players in Reach, but it’s okay this time because it’s not you suffering for it?
> >
> > If anything, you’re just asking 343 to devolve the game.
> > Don’t like 1-50 play social.
>
> Gonna quote myself here:
>
>
>
> > That’s not great.
> >
> > You’re taking away incentive for players who aren’t skilled enough to reach 50 to keep playing. It’s the same thing that was “done” to competitive players in Reach, but it’s okay this time because it’s not you suffering for it?
> >
> > If anything, you’re just asking 343 to devolve the game.
> The point of a game is to progress and get better.
No. The point of a game is to have fun.
What that is is different for every person. For some it’s to get better at the game. But that is not the goal for everyone and should not be the goal forced onto everyone.
> You don’t become a Olympic athlete by being a couch potato, same thing with rankin, you shouldn’t become the highest rank if you aren’t good enough or don’t try.
> > The point of a game is to progress and get better.
>
> No. The point of a game is to have fun.
>
> What that is is different for every person. For some it’s to get better at the game. But that is not the goal for everyone and should not be the goal forced onto everyone.
>
>
>
> > You don’t become a Olympic athlete by being a couch potato, same thing with rankin, you shouldn’t become the highest rank if you aren’t good enough or don’t try.
>
> Know why there are so few Olympic athletes?
Because if 100000 people could do it, it wouldnt be as special?
If good gameplay is the only incentive that people need, then we don’t need 1-50 either.
> Because if 100000 people could do it, it wouldnt be as special?
Because it’s so difficult to achieve, that the goal is all but impossible for most people. So they don’t bother trying anymore.
Why force everyone into a ranking system that only a few will ever see the end of? I wouldn’t be surprised if 1-50 hasten the “death” of H4 because people can’t rank up anymore.
> > So good gameplay isnt an incentive?
>
> If good gameplay is the only incentive that people need, then we don’t need 1-50 either.
which is why i think we need 2, seperate systems.
Exp and 1-50, exp could be used to buy armor or w/e system they are gonna use.
1-50 would show how good you are.
Also, dont think that incentive to win doesnt go directly into gameplay itself. Theres a reason some people try harder to win than other times, its because something is on the table such as beating your best buddy or playing for onyx.
> which is why i think we need 2, seperate systems.
Yes.
> Exp and 1-50, exp could be used to buy armor or w/e system they are gonna use.
>
> 1-50 would show how good you are.
No.
> Also, dont think that incentive to win doesnt go directly into gameplay itself. Theres a reason some people try harder to win than other times, its because something is on the table such as beating your best buddy or playing for onyx.
> > The point of a game is to progress and get better.
>
> No. The point of a game is to have fun.
>
> What that is is different for every person. For some it’s to get better at the game. But that is not the goal for everyone and should not be the goal forced onto everyone.
>
>
>
> > You don’t become a Olympic athlete by being a couch potato, same thing with rankin, you shouldn’t become the highest rank if you aren’t good enough or don’t try.
>
> Know why there are so few Olympic athletes?
You are right the point of a game is fun but fun to me is being good, trying hard, and trying to get a 50.
No one says you have to play ranked, MM or even Halo in general. There needs to be a ranking system and the highest level is always the goal in MM weather it be a 5 star general or an inheritor. Nobody is forcing you to play, If you can’t get a 50, tough luck.
Plus, there are few olympic athletes because there are few good and determined enough to do it, like getting a 50 in halo 2.
> > which is why i think we need 2, seperate systems.
>
> Yes.
>
>
>
> > Exp and 1-50, exp could be used to buy armor or w/e system they are gonna use.
> >
> > 1-50 would show how good you are.
>
> No.
>
>
>
> > Also, dont think that incentive to win doesnt go directly into gameplay itself. Theres a reason some people try harder to win than other times, its because something is on the table such as beating your best buddy or playing for onyx.
>
> 'kay.
Why on the “no”
So you can get what you want, but if we get what we want, then your upset? Seems selfish at first glance.
> > > So good gameplay isnt an incentive?
> >
> > If good gameplay is the only incentive that people need, then we don’t need 1-50 either.
>
> which is why i think we need 2, seperate systems.
>
> Exp and 1-50, exp could be used to buy armor or w/e system they are gonna use.
>
> 1-50 would show how good you are.
>
>
>
> Also, dont think that incentive to win doesnt go directly into gameplay itself. Theres a reason some people try harder to win than other times, its because something is on the table such as beating your best buddy or playing for onyx.
Winnig does because not everyone plays for onyx or against a friend, and people try harder if It makes them rank up, which creates better gameplay.
> You are right the point of a game is fun but fun to me is being good, trying hard, and trying to get a 50.
So everyone has to play how you want everyone to play.
> No one says you have to play ranked,
And I won’t be.
But give me something to aim for myself.
> There needs to be a ranking system and the highest level is always the goal in MM weather it be a 5 star general or an inheritor. Nobody is forcing you to play, If you can’t get a 50, tough luck.
And you would want to remove that goal from anybody who isn’t skilled enough to reach 50.
> Plus, there are few olympic athletes because there are few good and determined enough to do it, like getting a 50 in halo 2.
The point I’m getting at is that by making a ranking system so difficult to reach the end of you’re going to just push people away from even trying. While population isn’t everything, you can’t do much of anything with only a hundred people playing.
> Why on the “no”
>
> So you can get what you want, but if we get what we want, then your upset? Seems selfish at first glance.
Because I’m not getting what I want. A goal to work towards and equal treatment.
> > No. The point of a game is to have fun.
>
> No Yoink!. That’s the point, but fun is subjective. Working for the high number/rank/win/etc is FUN to some people.
>
> Don’t treat fun with a universal definition.
You should have read the sentence right under that.
That’s where I said that fun is different for different people.
I don’t get any fun out of trying to work for a high rank when the system won’t let me rank up anymore despite how much effort I’m putting forth.