<<<<WARNING: ESSAY INCOMING>>>>
I want to start off by saying my highest rank in Halo 3 was a TS 35 which is certainly not the best by a LONG shot. I played about 60% of my time in social lists there and similarly in Reach. I do maintain a positive K/D and play the objective. I was annoyed by the derankers in H3, and was adamant about finding a solution to that problem going forward. I watch high level competitive Halo and enjoy following the good players and teams. I watch gameplay videos and montages, but I have no delusions of being extremely good at this game competitively. I just don’t have the chops.
That said, we need SOME type of skill based ranking system.
Everyone talks about what’s fun for them. Winning is fun. Competition is fun. Unlocking armour is fun. Playing socially is fun. Grifball is fun. However, we are missing a key issue. What we should be talking about is engagement not necessarily fun. Because therein lies the core of the competitive gamers’ argument for ranks or a ranked list.
You see, fun is fleeting. It’s mere enjoyment. And on the surface and taken at face value, it’s a big part of why we all play games. But it’s not the only reason. And it’s not the reason you keep playing the same game over and over, year after year, iteration after iteration. The reason we do that is because we are being engaged somehow, and engagement and fun are not always parallel.
Let’s talk about that for a second. You can be engaged and not be necessarily having fun (though in this medium it helps). If you are playing Halo 3 or even Halo: Reach (arena… bear with me) with the purposes of ranking up, you may feel irritation, frustration, anger, elation, relief, or joy at the experience of playing a great game against similarly skilled opponents. But the reason you come back for more is that you care about your progress. You want to achieve something. You want to see how good you are. You have a dream of someday becoming a pro. Whatever your reason is, that is what engages you in the process of playing. Without some measure, whether it’s visible in game or on the forums/websites, of telling you exactly how you are progressing along the path you have decided to partake, you lose that feeling of engagement. The quality of the game in question may dictate how long it takes for you to lose that feeling, but you will lose it. The game will have no purpose beyond whatever happens in the in the moment, in game experience. Let’s look at it this way: if you wanted to go somewhere and had no map, no gps, no road signs, no directions, and had no idea what your destination looked like, how in the world could you be expected to find where you wanted to go? You still may have a nice enjoyable drive going nowhere though, but it’s an ultimately pointless pursuit.
On some level, all competitive gamers understand this, which is why Reach fell off so much, and why there has been so much talk about wanting a ranking system. Competitively geared gamers want or even need a measuring stick to see where they stack up in order to maximize their engagement and experience. The game needs that road map, and ultimately they are frustrated because the game is too good, and has engaged them competitively for so long, that all frustrations and irritations that that map is not there bubble to the surface.
And I, a lowly level 35 TS, pathetic 80% Silver Division Arena, 100% and totally understand.
If there is any way, shape or form that there can be a ranking system patched into this game, whether it be online leaderboards, specific ranked playlists, or even Arena in the exact form it was in Reach (ok… you have to find a way to make objective games measurable too), 343i really should consider it. Because in a year, after all the armour is unlocked, all the levels are reached, all the Spartan Ops and campaign has been played… fun is not enough to keep people playing. There are a lot of other “fun” games out there.
Engage us, please, 343i.