CSR is losing its appeal quickly, at least in my opinion, and here’s why:
-Viewing stats on the extremely annoying and slow to load waypoint stats page is much more of a hassle than it should be
-It’s tough to think that ranks are working when you match up with anywhere between level 1 and level 40 on any given match
-Individual CSR encourages COD-like gameplay of just running around and trying to increase your score as opposed to playing to win
I’m going to briefly touch on the last two points in further detail. The first is self-explanatory. Why would a ranking system be considered legitimate if a level 1 can play a level 30, and frequently does so? The second point may not be as clear as the first, but I still believe it is self-explanatory. A scoring system that does not account for K/D ratio or winning encourages aggressive behavior over team play. Not once in a “ranked” match have I heard anyone call out, nor do I want to call out, as every point by a teammate hurts my CSR. Playing conservative and going 10-4, while helpful to your team, is far less effective than rushing constantly and going 17-20.
Solution? H2 or H3 ranking system and playlist structure. Split up social and ranked, and make ranked based on W/L. 343 had four halo titles to build off of, 3 which were extremely successful, one which lost its population quickly and is regarded by many as the rotten egg, yet 343 for some reason built H4 off of the ugly duckling. Still baffles me…
The CSR system so far for me has worked well. It works pretty similar to how it worked in the past, if I beat a team full of noobs my rank doesn’t get much higher but if I beat people higher than me, my rank skyrockets.
I’ve seen no real difference in playstyle, this elusive “COD” style you speak of. Most players are probably casuals and probably don’t notice it anyway. I was just on BLops2 today, after playing Halo the other and people play virtually the same.
No big deal to me, I have no gripes with COD or any other competitive shooter because I like em all.
> The CSR system so far for me has worked well. It works pretty similar to how it worked in the past, if I beat a team full of noobs my rank doesn’t get much higher but if I beat people higher than me, my rank skyrockets.
>
> I’ve seen no real difference in playstyle, this elusive “COD” style you speak of. Most players are probably casuals and probably don’t notice it anyway. I was just on BLops2 today, after playing Halo the other and people play virtually the same.
>
> No big deal to me, I have no gripes with COD or any other competitive shooter because I like em all.
But if you have a higher rank, you shouldn’t play noobs. In H3 you were restricted to within 10 levels. That in itself makes the ranking system infinitely more legitimate. Now you can be a level 30, lose to a level 1 who’s actually really good at the game but it’s his first CSR match, and the game thinks you lost to a 1. If there were restrictions on who you play, this would NEVER happen.
As for the COD statement, I have no gripes with COD, so long as it stays in COD. Keep it out of halo! In H3 ranked playlists you would have people calling out and playing as a team to win. In individually ranked CSR playlists, this is non-existent, because it is all about your individual score, which is solely based on kills, assists, and special kills (aka “score per minute” from COD). It wouldn’t be a big deal if these were social playlists (like action sack), but to put this garbage social ranking system into competitive playlists like snipers and swat is ruining CSR for me.
Problem with strict ranking is the small population. Personally I would prefer a stable, decent connection over close ranking.
If this came out guns a blazing at release, with visible CSR and the huge populations. Maybe it would have changed things and made a difference.
I personally don’t mind if games borrow ideas from each other, as long as they’re the good ideas.
People are always concerned about their individual skill over others, I play Gears, Battlefield, COD, everyone acts the same.
The only way you’re gonna solve this “selfish” problem is if you play with players you know or use Halo’s visible CSR and make it abundantly clear its based on win/loss.
> People are always concerned about their individual skill over others, I play Gears, Battlefield, COD, everyone acts the same.
Battlefield and COD even give you points when you do things other than killing, such as scoring a flag, reviving teammates, giving out ammo, calling in UAVs. And people still are overly concerned with kills. I’ve chased down Support players begging for ammo only having to wait until they die, steal their kit rearm myself.
The games aren’t the problem, people are the problem. People have a hard time delaying gratification and must supplement that with instant gratification.
Developers can try and try to make the game as team orientated as they want, they’re fighting human nature and they’re not gonna win.
> Problem with strict ranking is the small population. Personally I would prefer a stable, decent connection over close ranking.
>
> If this came out guns a blazing at release, with visible CSR and the huge populations. Maybe it would have changed things and made a difference.
>
> I personally don’t mind if games borrow ideas from each other, as long as they’re the good ideas.
>
> People are always concerned about their individual skill over others, I play Gears, Battlefield, COD, everyone acts the same.
>
> The only way you’re gonna solve this “selfish” problem is if you play with players you know or use Halo’s visible CSR and make it abundantly clear its based on win/loss.
It’s unbelievable that the population is this low, but also expected. H4 matchmaking is extremely broken (compared to H2 and H3), and Halo is dying. I still think that a better, visible ranking system with skill restricted matches would make more people play, or at the least make it more enjoyable. There are definitely enough players in certain playlists, and would be if the matchmaking was set up as ranked and social. In any event, 343 needs to open their eyes. A halo title should never be down to 40,000 players this soon. It’s ridiculous. Go back to your roots, make a good Halo game (not any of this awful hybrid modern FPS), and I guarantee the population will be better.
Even as a terrible Halo n00b this stuff is a shame.
I feel I’m contributing more when I’m getting 4k and 8d and making sure the opposing team’s bad players do worse than me, than I am by charging around getting 10k and 25d and almost certainly costing us the game.
CSR encourages the latter, although I find that less fun for everyone concerned.
Also, I still can’t reach CSR2 anyway , 'cos I’m that bad
Also to add, and it may be coincidence, but there’s been a LOT of really one sided matches the last few days, and that was something I’d not really encountered before.
Reach was succesful and didn’t lose its population as quickly as you’d like to believe. Going by that “rule” that means that Halo 4 is worse since its population has gone even faster.
You say it’s the “bad egg” yet many people consider it the best Halo game, many more could say the if given the chance to see what it could truly do.
You then say that 343i built off the “ugly duckly” despite thef act that it didn’t build off Reach at all. Not only that, but if you follow the classic tale then you’re saying that Reach could have become a beautiful swan, which I agree with, but had trouble as many people kept fighting back the urge for it to evolve and tried to make it more like Halo 2 or 3, which they got in a TU create to appease people who didn’t like the game as opposed to people who did like it, and now the true beauty of Reach can’t be achieved because of so many people discouraging 343i from actually make progress and instead trying to get them to revert back to a previous state, a state that wasn’t as praised as you’d like to think. One of those “successful” games even got its own hate site.
Last point, if anything the Arena in Reach was and probably still is the best ranking system. Only broken by people who wanted to abuse the problems from the previous games for their own agenda.
