Why does it offend you that the competitive community wants a Ranking system like 3 again?
Why did it offend you in the first place?
No on is forcing you to play and get ranked so why does it matter if you have social playlists?
I see the idea thrown out there and people are just like “no that’s a terrible idea!”
Can someone please give me some insight here?
dont know, dont care
There’s no “casuals” on this forum, so I don’t know who you’re trying to address.
Casuals do not exist in Halo, nor do they exist in any First-Person Shooter.
^^^
Yeah they do.
> dont know, dont care
Don’t post then
> There’s no “casuals” on this forum, so I don’t know who you’re trying to address.
> Casuals do not exist in Halo, nor do they exist in any First-Person Shooter.
Ok I apologize, well to the people that dont want one then? IS that better?
> ^^^
> Yeah they do.
What he/she is saying is that “casual” means nothing. It’s usually just used to abuse gamers who don’t agree with the players who laughably call themselves competitive (not referring to all competitive players, just the ones that insult and are negative towards other players).
I’m a competitive player and I don’t want to see Halo 3’s ranking system return, nor do I want a skill rating system to be used as a ranking system ever again.
Why not though?
> > ^^^
> > Yeah they do.
>
> What he/she is saying is that “casual” means nothing. It’s usually just used to abuse gamers who don’t agree with the players who laughably call themselves competitive (not referring to all competitive players, just the ones that insult and are negative towards other players).
Casual players play the game but dont know much about it. Thats why people dont care about their opinion.
> There’s no “casuals” on this forum, so I don’t know who you’re trying to address.
> Casuals do not exist in Halo, nor do they exist in any First-Person Shooter.
Firstly, they do. They may not care about details regarding this game and play just to play another Halo game, but they are around.
> Why does it offend you that the competitive community wants a Ranking system like 3 again?
They are offended not so much about having a 1-50 system back, but more so that many of the competitive mindsets and people say the game is terrible without one when they disagree and don’t see the merit of having a competitive rank system in place.
That and they are tired of listening to complaints about the game developers with whom they can appreciate because they like the game as it stands currently.
> Why did it offend you in the first place?
Because Frankie flat out admitted it was a cheat system to utilize and the competitive scene still refuses to acknowledge that.
> No on is forcing you to play and get ranked so why does it matter if you have social playlists?
Again, it isn’t about the concept beyond the fact it has been identified to promote cheating. That the hard earned 50 was made meaningless by a modder, booster, etc.
> I see the idea thrown out there and people are just like “no that’s a terrible idea!”
> Can someone please give me some insight here?
The competitive community has had members all across the board flame and spew hate towards the game development process and each piece of news has been met not with positive and negative feedback, but purely negative. If a balanced scheme along with proper maturity was given, then their wouldn’t be a problem besides the concept of 1-50 promoting cheat, boosting, and modding.
on a more serious note,
i think players dont care about a trueskill ranking behind the scenes if it pairs them up with similarly skilled competition
however a halo 3 kind of implementation that ties in with the sr-ranking would be a bad idea
in halo 3 you had to have a trueskill of 50 to become general
so people who werent that skilled couldnt rank up anymore after a certain point
even though they paid the same amount of money as the lvl 50 guys
I’m a casual, and by casual I assume you mean someone that doesn’t care about K/D. It doesn’t offend me at all. You want a rank system to make yourself sleep at night fine go ahead. I play the game for fun, which is was what games are for. Im not the type of casual that plasma pistols you or betrays you. I don’t take your vehicles or weapons. I use only what I get from my ordinance drops. I don’t Boltshot unless I’m on Exile because I can’t go outside because DMRs own me. I don’t camp either I am always moving I move through the tunnels away from sights. I play Halo because I love the story. You want ranks that’s fine have them maybe that’ll stop putting me in matches where I’m overwhelmed by DMR’s and “pros”.
TL;DR I don’t care. I play for fun and fun only. I try to win or help my team win. But I’m just a casual and you guys/girls here hate me.
> > ^^^
> > Yeah they do.
>
> What he/she is saying is that “casual” means nothing. It’s usually just used to abuse gamers who don’t agree with the players who laughably call themselves competitive (not referring to all competitive players, just the ones that insult and are negative towards other players).
But it does mean something. When I debate with people I’ve had people admit they just don’t care what changes happen to the game, they don’t care about the balance or design philosophy.
Casuals just play for fun. If this means picking up a game, getting an incineration cannon from five kills or assists, and wiping everyone off the map, they don’t care as long as they are enjoying it.
Competitive players find fun in winning and playing strategically. Balance and map design are important to them, balance isn’t usually important to a casual. Casuals are there to “casually” play the game, not to dedicate time to it and better themselves.
Being casual isn’t necessarily bad, it’s bad when they oppose changes to make the game more competitive though.
Games often cater to casuals, they purposefully throw off balance in order to make it so people can enjoy the game no matter their skill level. This is fine, but Halo has never been (entirely) this genre of game and it should not be.
This is why competitive players feel animosity towards casuals. Casuals are ruining their competitive games. It is used as an insult even though it isn’t because competitive players tend to view casuals as inferior and lacking in understanding.
> > There’s no “casuals” on this forum, so I don’t know who you’re trying to address.
> > Casuals do not exist in Halo, nor do they exist in any First-Person Shooter.
>
> Firstly, they do. They may not care about details regarding this game and play just to play another Halo game, but they are around.
>
>
>
> > Why does it offend you that the competitive community wants a Ranking system like 3 again?
>
> They are offended not so much about having a 1-50 system back, but more so that many of the competitive mindsets and people say the game is terrible without one when they disagree and don’t see the merit of having a competitive rank system in place.
>
> That and they are tired of listening to complaints about the game developers with whom they can appreciate because they like the game as it stands currently.
>
>
>
> > Why did it offend you in the first place?
>
> Because Frankie flat out admitted it was a cheat system to utilize and the competitive scene still refuses to acknowledge that.
>
>
>
> > No on is forcing you to play and get ranked so why does it matter if you have social playlists?
>
> Again, it isn’t about the concept beyond the fact it has been identified to promote cheating. That the hard earned 50 was made meaningless by a modder, booster, etc.
>
>
>
> > I see the idea thrown out there and people are just like “no that’s a terrible idea!”
> > Can someone please give me some insight here?
>
> The competitive community has had members all across the board flame and spew hate towards the game development process and each piece of news has been met not with positive and negative feedback, but purely negative. If a balanced scheme along with proper maturity was given, then their wouldn’t be a problem besides the concept of 1-50 promoting cheat, boosting, and modding.
I understand your point, but cheating, boosting, and modding have and will always be around… Just some things you wont ever be able to stop
> > > ^^^
> > > Yeah they do.
> >
> > What he/she is saying is that “casual” means nothing. It’s usually just used to abuse gamers who don’t agree with the players who laughably call themselves competitive (not referring to all competitive players, just the ones that insult and are negative towards other players).
>
> But it does mean something. When I debate with people I’ve had people admit they just don’t care what changes happen to the game, they don’t care about the balance or design philosophy.
>
> Casuals just play for fun. If this means picking up a game, getting an incineration cannon from five kills or assists, and wiping everyone off the map, they don’t care as long as they are enjoying it.
>
> Competitive players find fun in winning and playing strategically. Balance and map design are important to them, balance isn’t usually important to a casual. Casuals are there to “casually” play the game, not to dedicate time to it and better themselves.
>
> Being casual isn’t necessarily bad, it’s bad when they oppose changes to make the game more competitive though.
>
> Games often cater to casuals, they purposefully throw off balance in order to make it so people can enjoy the game no matter their skill level. This is fine, but Halo has never been (entirely) this genre of game and it should not be.
>
> This is why competitive players feel animosity towards casuals. Casuals are ruining their competitive games. It is used as an insult even though it isn’t because competitive players tend to view casuals as inferior and lacking in understanding.
this isnt a digital competition my friend, this is a game
and everyone who pays for a game should be able to enjoy it
so adjusting it to snobby “mlg pro’s” who only approve of dmr’s and precision weapons is a slap in te face to paying customers
dont try to make a different casual paylist
make a competitive playlist where the snobs can go suck each other off
> > > > ^^^
> > > > Yeah they do.
> > >
> > > What he/she is saying is that “casual” means nothing. It’s usually just used to abuse gamers who don’t agree with the players who laughably call themselves competitive (not referring to all competitive players, just the ones that insult and are negative towards other players).
> >
> > But it does mean something. When I debate with people I’ve had people admit they just don’t care what changes happen to the game, they don’t care about the balance or design philosophy.
> >
> > Casuals just play for fun. If this means picking up a game, getting an incineration cannon from five kills or assists, and wiping everyone off the map, they don’t care as long as they are enjoying it.
> >
> > Competitive players find fun in winning and playing strategically. Balance and map design are important to them, balance isn’t usually important to a casual. Casuals are there to “casually” play the game, not to dedicate time to it and better themselves.
> >
> > Being casual isn’t necessarily bad, it’s bad when they oppose changes to make the game more competitive though.
> >
> > Games often cater to casuals, they purposefully throw off balance in order to make it so people can enjoy the game no matter their skill level. This is fine, but Halo has never been (entirely) this genre of game and it should not be.
> >
> > This is why competitive players feel animosity towards casuals. Casuals are ruining their competitive games. It is used as an insult even though it isn’t because competitive players tend to view casuals as inferior and lacking in understanding.
>
> this isnt a digital competition my friend, this is a game
>
> and everyone who pays for a game should be able to enjoy it
>
> so adjusting it to snobby “mlg pro’s” who only approve of dmr’s and precision weapons is a slap in te face to paying customers
>
> dont try to make a different casual paylist
>
> make a competitive playlist where the snobs can go suck each other off
So I make a respectable post and I’m met with hate. Figures. And the people who dislike Halo 4 are the immature ones…
What are games but competitions? Why do you think there is a professional league for almost every sport out there?
Snobby, no. I just want to play my way in my own playlist. Really not that much to ask.
I agree, there needs to be a competitive playlist.
Just FYI guys I dont mean any harm when I label someone a casual, I too consider myself a casual at times, people misunderstand the concept both on the competitive side and off, Casual to me is a term to coin someone who just isnt competitive, like those guys that get on for a couple games and hop off, they aren’t any different then me I just like to play for more serious reasons.
well you did label us as casual
lacking in understanding
inferior
ruining the game
that kinda makes you snobby buddy
> > > There’s no “casuals” on this forum, so I don’t know who you’re trying to address.
> > > Casuals do not exist in Halo, nor do they exist in any First-Person Shooter.
> >
> > Firstly, they do. They may not care about details regarding this game and play just to play another Halo game, but they are around.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Why does it offend you that the competitive community wants a Ranking system like 3 again?
> >
> > They are offended not so much about having a 1-50 system back, but more so that many of the competitive mindsets and people say the game is terrible without one when they disagree and don’t see the merit of having a competitive rank system in place.
> >
> > That and they are tired of listening to complaints about the game developers with whom they can appreciate because they like the game as it stands currently.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Why did it offend you in the first place?
> >
> > Because Frankie flat out admitted it was a cheat system to utilize and the competitive scene still refuses to acknowledge that.
> >
> >
> >
> > > No on is forcing you to play and get ranked so why does it matter if you have social playlists?
> >
> > Again, it isn’t about the concept beyond the fact it has been identified to promote cheating. That the hard earned 50 was made meaningless by a modder, booster, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > > I see the idea thrown out there and people are just like “no that’s a terrible idea!”
> > > Can someone please give me some insight here?
> >
> > The competitive community has had members all across the board flame and spew hate towards the game development process and each piece of news has been met not with positive and negative feedback, but purely negative. If a balanced scheme along with proper maturity was given, then their wouldn’t be a problem besides the concept of 1-50 promoting cheat, boosting, and modding.
>
> I understand your point, but cheating, boosting, and modding have and will always be around… Just some things you wont ever be able to stop
There are ways to reduce cheating, boosting, de-leveling, and modding though.
One compromise solution, is to have the rank displayed on waypoint. This is a potential premise of the CSR that is coming next year.
People are less likely to cheat, boost, and mod to get the rank, since they are no longer able to show it off, which is the incentive.
However, it still provides the rank to compete against others.
It does not have to be “Rank or no rank”. There are possible compromises, that can be implemented.