People are treating this "rank system"

like it’s the life or death of them. The Halo franchise will not cease to exist without a rank system. You wonder why, they revealed information at the start that was catering towards casuals by introducing the Infinity gametypes first. This is also why the competitive community is the minority nowadays. It’s why Reach turned into what it turned into. Look st Blizzard for example. The competitive comunity there is just as worse as it is here. Note that I’m not attacking competitive players. I’m stating why this rank system that is in development, (don’t believe me, by the oracle, go to Neogaf) hasn’t been revealed to us yet. About half of the posts in the Q&A for this weeks bulletin are about the ranking system. Halo: CE never had a ranking system of any kind and people never went through the roof about it. If I linked all the rank system threads here, they’d take up about 2 pages worth or maybe even more. I’m not complaining, I’m stating the sole reason why the competitive community is the minority especially on these forums.

There’s no reason to take away some thing that is good, and replace it with something that is pointless. The progression system IS just a numer next to your name, a skill based system that goes up and down actually shows people how good you are.

> like it’s the life or death of them. The Halo franchise will not cease to exist without a rank system. You wonder why, they revealed information at the start that was catering towards casuals by introducing the Infinity gametypes first. This is also why the competitive community is the minority nowadays. It’s why Reach turned into what it turned into. Look st Blizzard for example. The competitive comunity there is just as worse as it is here. Note that I’m not attacking competitive players. I’m stating why this rank system that is in development, (don’t believe me, by the oracle, go to Neogaf) hasn’t been revealed to us yet. About half of the posts in the Q&A for this weeks bulletin are about the ranking system. <mark>Halo: CE never had a ranking system of any kind and people never went through the roof about it.</mark> If I linked all the rank system threads here, they’d take up about 2 pages worth or maybe even more. I’m not complaining, I’m stating the sole reason why the competitive community is the minority especially on these forums.

Halo CE didn’t have online. The only people you would be playing against in multiplayer would be close friends and you would already know everyone’s skill level.

> > like it’s the life or death of them. The Halo franchise will not cease to exist without a rank system. You wonder why, they revealed information at the start that was catering towards casuals by introducing the Infinity gametypes first. This is also why the competitive community is the minority nowadays. It’s why Reach turned into what it turned into. Look st Blizzard for example. The competitive comunity there is just as worse as it is here. Note that I’m not attacking competitive players. I’m stating why this rank system that is in development, (don’t believe me, by the oracle, go to Neogaf) hasn’t been revealed to us yet. About half of the posts in the Q&A for this weeks bulletin are about the ranking system. <mark>Halo: CE never had a ranking system of any kind and people never went through the roof about it.</mark> If I linked all the rank system threads here, they’d take up about 2 pages worth or maybe even more. I’m not complaining, I’m stating the sole reason why the competitive community is the minority especially on these forums.
>
> <mark>Halo CE didn’t have online</mark>. The only people you would be playing against in multiplayer would be close friends and you would already know everyone’s skill level.

Yes it does, and to this day people still play it on PC. Myself included

> > like it’s the life or death of them. The Halo franchise will not cease to exist without a rank system. You wonder why, they revealed information at the start that was catering towards casuals by introducing the Infinity gametypes first. This is also why the competitive community is the minority nowadays. It’s why Reach turned into what it turned into. Look st Blizzard for example. The competitive comunity there is just as worse as it is here. Note that I’m not attacking competitive players. I’m stating why this rank system that is in development, (don’t believe me, by the oracle, go to Neogaf) hasn’t been revealed to us yet. About half of the posts in the Q&A for this weeks bulletin are about the ranking system. <mark>Halo: CE never had a ranking system of any kind and people never went through the roof about it.</mark> If I linked all the rank system threads here, they’d take up about 2 pages worth or maybe even more. I’m not complaining, I’m stating the sole reason why the competitive community is the minority especially on these forums.
>
> Halo CE didn’t have online. The only people you would be playing against in multiplayer would be close friends and you would already know everyone’s skill level.

Halo CE on the PC did.

No 1-50? Pre-order cancelled!

Honestly, a Ranking System is nice, but I agree that we don’t absolutely NEED one. We do need to be match with people close to our own skill level, though.

People are just a little pissed that now they have taken away from the competitive side of the game, not all of it just a chunk, people like to have something to show how good they are and how much work they have put into the game. I think that if they just take out custom challenges than boosting for the most part will be gone.

There is no real point to a ranking system, so it was taken out. Simple. And Halo 4 is not going to suffer for it. Will there be complainers? Yes. But they’ll still be sitting there in matchmaking playing the game.

So you prefer games where new players get destroyed by experienced players on a consistent basis due to the “Pointlessness” of a ranking system?

Technically speaking, there is no real point to a progression system either and it still is being implemented…

so by your ‘logic’ (using that term loosely) there is not 1 single thing that if removed would be detrimental to the franchise.

You know I rememebr when games had no ranking system and were very more intense.

> > > like it’s the life or death of them. The Halo franchise will not cease to exist without a rank system. You wonder why, they revealed information at the start that was catering towards casuals by introducing the Infinity gametypes first. This is also why the competitive community is the minority nowadays. It’s why Reach turned into what it turned into. Look st Blizzard for example. The competitive comunity there is just as worse as it is here. Note that I’m not attacking competitive players. I’m stating why this rank system that is in development, (don’t believe me, by the oracle, go to Neogaf) hasn’t been revealed to us yet. About half of the posts in the Q&A for this weeks bulletin are about the ranking system. <mark>Halo: CE never had a ranking system of any kind and people never went through the roof about it.</mark> If I linked all the rank system threads here, they’d take up about 2 pages worth or maybe even more. I’m not complaining, I’m stating the sole reason why the competitive community is the minority especially on these forums.
> >
> > <mark>Halo CE didn’t have online</mark>. The only people you would be playing against in multiplayer would be close friends and you would already know everyone’s skill level.
>
> Yes it does, and to this day people still play it on PC. Myself included

Halo PC is so different with shot leading and the latency issues that makes it so different with the pistol and sniper which take considerably more lead than the Xbox version.

Leading only gets you so far. The key is to trick the server into believing that you are aimed directly onto your opponent while in reality you are leading well beyond him/her. How? Aim onto the person first, pause, then lead and shoot. The way to think about it is “aiming twice.” It makes Halo PC much more difficult than other online games.

When latency gets crazy, then much of it comes down to this initial tricking of the server, and favorable hit prediction since to some extent you just end up guessing.

So yeah, Halo 1 PC is soooo different from the Xbox version that it is no surprise more Xbox H1 players didnt migrate over or want to even consider switching over when the game is mechanically different. The first game I played on PC I thought I was just missing shots or getting out-strafed but then I realized after a while that a certain amount of lead was needed most of the time varying on my crazy ping levels =)

Its still Halo though and after you get the lead down you will start owning kids.

343i would have to be fools to not implement some sort of a ranking system into halo 4, given the success of halo 3`s 1-50 plus the insane amount of people for it I really cant see the reason for them to not have one.

a ranking system is an effective way of increasing longevity within a game, there`s a reason even games such as cod are starting to implement them.

btw progression systems arent pointless, theres a reason why nearly every single game on the market has one, it creates longevity.

> Halo CE didn’t have online.

Is this guy fo’ realz?

Hey, you know what? Counter Strike didn’t have rank either. And neither did Crimson Skies, Mechassault, Unreal Tournament, Quake 3, Unreal Championship 2, or Timesplitters. None of them had a problem though. Funny that.

Theres also reason why nearly every game on the market has some sort of a ranking system and yet a progression system is of more relative importance than something that has been around before a progression system was constructed.

> like it’s the life or death of them. The Halo franchise will not cease to exist without a rank system. You wonder why, they revealed information at the start that was catering towards casuals by introducing the Infinity gametypes first. This is also why the competitive community is the minority nowadays. <mark>It’s why Reach turned into what it turned into</mark>. Look st Blizzard for example. The competitive comunity there is just as worse as it is here. Note that I’m not attacking competitive players. I’m stating why this rank system that is in development, (don’t believe me, by the oracle, go to Neogaf) hasn’t been revealed to us yet. About half of the posts in the Q&A for this weeks bulletin are about the ranking system. Halo: CE never had a ranking system of any kind and people never went through the roof about it. If I linked all the rank system threads here, they’d take up about 2 pages worth or maybe even more. I’m not complaining, I’m stating the sole reason why the competitive community is the minority especially on these forums.

I don’t understand what you mean by that? Reach’s population isn’t that high.

I think the competitive community is bigger than people think. It’s not just MLG like everyone makes it sound. I don’t even play MLG and I’m very completive. I don’t play in tournaments or anything like that. I just play online for fun but I want to win.

Before games could be played online people would play splitscreen against their friends (I’m thinking Goldeneye and Halo 1, heck even super smash bros) and everyone knew how good each other was so teams were usually pretty even. When you beat your friends you had a sense of satisfaction knowing you were better than them and you might even brag about it. That’s what a ranking system is. The sense of satisfaction knowing you are better than other players and the added satisfaction you get beating someone better than you. That’s what makes games fun. Its called being competitive. Casual players are competitive too. Nobody plays by themselves shooting at walls. That’s not fun. People want a challenge, and the closer skill level that challenger is to you the more fun it is.

Ranking structures and systems are just as much a necessity for competitive players as is the gun your holding in the campaign.

Do not banter or make a thread that is about complaining when others have made legitimate claims to why a ranking system AND structure is needed in Halo games. As I recall correctly, it was the primary reason competitive gamers can say they exist. Sure, stats show skillful gameplay and your overall win ratio is part of that, but without a defining structure that shows where someone stands, how skillful they are in the grand scheme of things, THOUSANDS of gamers would not play Halo, but any other AAA title that has a good one.

Make no mistake, I’m not saying 1-50 was good, it wasn’t.

Arena? Wasn’t good either.

The new progression and potential hidden 1-50 system? Probably not going to be good.

But that is the nature of the beast and since Halo 2, there has always been a single unifying complaint in the Halo Community: the ranking system and structure. I do not expect that to change with Halo 4.

> > Halo CE didn’t have online. The only people you would be playing against in multiplayer would be close friends and you would already know everyone’s skill level.

> Ranking structures and systems are just as much a necessity for competitive players as is the gun your holding in the campaign.
>
> Do not banter or make a thread that is about complaining when others have made legitimate claims to why a ranking system AND structure is needed in Halo games. As I recall correctly, it was the primary reason competitive gamers can say they exist. Sure, stats show skillful gameplay and your overall win ratio is part of that, but without a defining structure that shows where someone stands, how skillful they are in the grand scheme of things, THOUSANDS of gamers would not play Halo, but any other AAA title.

This is completely spot on. With so many games featuring skill-based ranks these days and Halo being known for ranked MM and innovating console MM in general, it seems silly not to include one even if its not on the scale of 1-50. I dont know why 343 is so vague about this issue, it just causes more turmoil and speculation when we should be focusing on the game and know more about these issues by now.

[deleted]