this is a tricky one, rank is one of the main points to a game that keeps the majority playing because it gives them that endless reason to return to the game, its essentially an addiction that drives people to play even if they straight out rage at the game as if they absolutely hate it, how it is done is the key.
rank in halo 3 was based off of skill, instead of allowing players to rank up from doing what ever you had to actually improve at the game to get to a higher rank, in reach, you ranked up no matter what but what you un-locked was pretty pointless, because what you unlocked is pointless it failed to keep people playing because there was no reason for people to rank up instead of looks.
spartan points looks like its going to work, using the base system that popular MMORPG’S use, rank up become more powerfull, to rank up you must play the game, the become more powerfull you have to earn money to purchase the stuff required, this should keep players wanting to play halo 4 because what they are earning is actually worth while, but, it will completely alienate the serious players because they don’t get any reward for being good and improving at the game so i think there should be a skill based rank worked into it.
a system where playing the game just earns you the money to purchase upgrades, maybe even progress through lower-level ranks that unlock practically useless upgrades with higher-ranks only being able to be reached by being good at the game, the upgrades available from reaching these ranks is greater because of the effort that is needed, i hope this is how the system is done.
It’ll work, it’s just that it won’t be the way that we’re used to. I don’t understand why they wouldn’t just bring back 1-50 though. Rewarding people for playtime instead of skill is a terrible idea that obviously doesn’t work (AKA Reach).
> It’ll work, it’s just that it won’t be the way that we’re used to. I don’t understand why they wouldn’t just bring back 1-50 though. Rewarding people for playtime instead of skill is a terrible idea that obviously doesn’t work (AKA Reach).
depends on the reward, reach only gave cosmetic rewards which doesn’t effect anything making them pointless so no-one felt the need to rank up because they didn’t get anything from it.
with MMORP’s, you get rewarded with things that effect the game, you can better spells, be-able to use better weapons and such, this basic but highly addictive system is being pulled into the console gaming world because it’s the most effective way of keeping people playing.
consoles games are becoming dumbed down MMORPG’s …
> It’ll work, it’s just that it won’t be the way that we’re used to. I don’t understand why they wouldn’t just bring back 1-50 though. Rewarding people for playtime instead of skill is a terrible idea that obviously doesn’t work (AKA Reach).
The credit system had no effect to the matchmaking system. Bungie announced that even during the Beta of Halo: Reach that it isn’t nowhere related.
Rewarding playtime is good, so long as it is ACTIVE playtime. To me, BF3 did it right: If you were killing people and helping your team by playing your class correctly, you’ll be rewarded. Reach’s system was to just join a match. You don’t need to actually play to get the rewards.
If they reward active participation, Spartan Points will work. If not, we’ll be dealing with the same stupid AFK crap everyone had to put up with in Reach.
1-50 is a must, These cryptic responses from the developers is ridiculous just say if its the truth or not because they are destroying this community’s hope well at least the true competitive players
> without 1-50 this game franchise will die. thats the reason no one good wanted to play reach
I honestly hated the idea. All it brought was cheating, and gives people a reason to pop alt. accounts just to beat the snot out of players below their skill level.
What they need is to actually make it work, which obviously didn’t happen in Reach.
> without 1-50 this game franchise will die. thats the reason no one good wanted to play reach
not true, 1-50 could actually kill the game because the majority of players can’t rank up and aren’t getting anything out of playing where as in other games they do get something from playing the game which gives them a feeling of satisfaction …
Sure! I look forward to ranking and unlocking in Halo 4. I believe 343i will introduce armor-modifications/plating, custom weapons and [affinity to] armor abilities that will invigorate the Halo sandbox. Exploring the possibilities within sounds fun!
I’m sure they’ll consider the game-balance at all times, yet making ranking worthwhile. [As much I understood from interviews + Frankie@NeoGaf.]
I’ll admit I find Spartan Points a bit of a lame name, but again, it beats the 1-50 system for me personally. And it still sounds better than Credits, imho.
I say it needs to be like it was back in the Halo 2 days. Rank meant alot more then. You also didnt have people buying and selling accounts just to get a high rank either. Plus there was no level lock.
> I say it needs to be like it was back in the Halo 2 days. Rank meant alot more then. You also didnt have people buying and selling accounts just to get a high rank either. Plus there was no level lock.
nope, that will kill the game.
the only playlists being skill based and the only ranking system is based on skill, you get nothing out of it and most players won’t manage to progress through the ranks, boosters will boost accounts to the highest rank and kids will beg their parents to buy those accounts so they can prove they are good player, because most players can’t rank up they won’t even bother playing the game and instead migrate to other games where they can rank up.
i agree there needs to be a part of the ranking should be based on skill but i think the main parts to it, most of it shouldn’t so that population of the game can stay healthy.
The reason I don’t like Credits is the same reason I won’t like Spartan Points, or any kind of unlockable currency system. You see, instead of playing the game to have fun or to have a friendly competition, people play to accumulate more and more -Yoink-. This leads to a “means justifies the ends” mentality, and people will do anything to get more points, such as holding an objective to get more kills and focusing on personal performance in a game rather than teamwork. I think this is extremely harmful to the game and will only further the problems Reach is experiencing with a lack of teamwork and communication.
> The reason I don’t like Credits is the same reason I won’t like Spartan Points, or any kind of unlockable currency system. You see, instead of playing the game to have fun or to have a friendly competition, people play to accumulate more and more Yoink!. This leads to a “means justifies the ends” mentality, and people will do anything to get more points, such as holding an objective to get more kills and focusing on personal performance in a game rather than teamwork. I think this is extremely harmful to the game and will only further the problems Reach is experiencing with a lack of teamwork and communication.
we don’t actually know how many points are earned for what, all we know is that you gain the points by performing actions in the game.
i doubt spartan points will cause players to play selfishly, people play selfishly regardless of a ranking system because its online, they don’t care about other players because there is no consequence for it, if you’re upset about people playing selfishly then take it up with the internets anonymity then the game.
teamwork will be there at the higher level of play anyway because these players are hellbent on winning and the best way to win is to use teamwork, you just have to play at the higher level for it, at the lower level where people generally don’t care is where teamwork is missing.
I’m assuming it’ll be similar to cR in Reach. If coupled with a 1-50, that would be perfect for everyone. They also need to change the name back to cR. (I will say this in every single Spartan Points thread until it gets done.)
> I’m assuming it’ll be similar to cR in Reach. If coupled with a 1-50, that would be perfect for everyone. They also need to change the name back to cR. (I will say this in every single Spartan Points thread until it gets done.)
i said pretty much that in my last paragraph, did anyone actually read my post?
> So whats the difference between smashing pubs or smahing ranked players at lower levels possibly teaching them how to play properly
Social: No one cares
Ranked: A place where similar skilled opponents play against each other. Let that run rampant and you have the issue Reach is dealing with today.
There were many games where I served players on a silver platter, and I was bored to death because they can’t play as good as I can. There were other games where I got served on that same platter and wished they’d get paired up with players of their skill so I can actually enjoy the game. A similar method with Ranked Clan matches in Halo 2 caused Clan matches to disappear because players do NOT want to play in a game where the chances of getting paired with players better than them is pretty damn high.
If higher ranked players are with lower ranked, there isn’t competition. It’s just a mess. It’s like making an NFL football team play against a high school football team. Mix them up and there’s nothing competitive about it if all they are going to do is get trashed. It’s not exciting, it’s not fun, and most likely people will leave because they don’t want to deal with it.
If you want players to stay, keep them playing against similar skilled opponents
