Title Update Discussion

Games Other Halo
701

I believe you to not understand the difference between a fixed-minded gamer and a growth-minded gamer. I’m not going to lecture you as to why. It is not needed.

As far as CoD not being competitive enough… isn’t it played by MLG Pros? http://pro.majorleaguegaming.com/news/call-of-duty-black-ops-competitive-playlist Sorry, rhetorical. As you can see, the online Black OPS game now has an MLG based playlist specifically to play BO like players use the MLG playlist to play Reach…

I do claim some of you only read what others say and regurgitate it and speak nothing of knowledge or experience.

702

> I believe you to not understand the difference between a fixed-minded gamer and a growth-minded gamer. I’m not going to lecture you as to why. It is not needed.
>
>
> As far as CoD not being competitive enough… isn’t it played by MLG Pros? http://pro.majorleaguegaming.com/news/call-of-duty-black-ops-competitive-playlist Sorry, rhetorical. As you can see, the online Black OPS game now has an MLG based playlist specifically to play BO like players use the MLG playlist to play Reach…
>
> I do claim some of you only read what others say and regurgitate it and speak nothing of knowledge or experience.

“[growth mindset people believe that they] can enhance their skills if they work hard and challenge themselves.”
-except for the DMR, you simply cannot make your skills good enough with the DMR only to be able to overcome spamming 100% of the time.

“Growth Mindset see failures as meaningful, positive experiences that are necessary for self-improvement.”
-except in halo reach, when you ‘fail’ its often times because you tried to play the game as intended by the developers, but got beat because the other person was abusing the DMR.

“People with a Growth Mindset enjoy challenging games because they understand that failure is the path to success. In contrast, people with a Fixed Mindset view failure as a demonstration of ineptitude, something to be avoided at all costs.”
-theres a big difference between ‘challenging’ and IMPOSSIBLE. IMPOSSIBLE is winning 1v1 DMR-only battles in halo reach when you shoot better 100% of the time. ‘challenging’ is out BR’ing someone who is good at halo 3. i dont view myself ‘inept’ when i get killed by someone full auto spamming their DMR, i feel cheated, and betrayed too.

actually, i understand it quite well. the fact of the matter is, in halo reach, you simply cannot ‘grow’ to be someone who is so good that they can use the DMR in 1v1 battles and expect success every time you shoot better. because of this, myself as a growth mindset person have to AVOID 1v1 DMR battles because they are uncontrollable. no amount of shooting prowess, or skill, or time put into getting better at shooting will make you overcome the games horrible DMR algorithm, thats just facts.

to growth mindset people halo reach is a NIGHTMARE. i cant expect to 1v1 DMR someone and come out ahead when i shoot better, so i avoid that situation (avoiding 1v1 DMR battles in a FPS game because they are reliable? WHO MADE THIS TRASH?). so you look at your other options

-throw a mini nuke. ok thats fine and everything, except for the fact that they are SIMPLE to use and IMPOSSIBLE to dodge meaning that all of a sudden all of my ‘pro grenading skills’ are out the window because the game has been massacred in skill gap so every soccer mom gamer can play it.

-melee. this one is especially awful for the growth mindset people. work super hard at getting that person weak enough to smack him when his shields pop? TOO BAD! IT WASNT VIABLE. not only can you not expect to shoot to get ahead, often times it actually HURTS YOU because if you are shooting you cannot melee at the same time! because of this you avoid melee battles like the plague.

-positioning. this one is currently the most important thing to be good at in halo reach. dont stand in places where they can chuck mini nukes, dont stand in places where you might have to get in to 1v1 DMR-only battles. dont stand in places where people can sprint and try to double melee you. where does this leave you? hiding in a -Yoinking!- corner.

sorry, but for growth mindset people, every single one of the games core game mechanics is a SLAP IN THE FACE to all of their hard work and progression of their halo skills.

like i said:

shoot better? TOO BAD! SPAM SPAM
grenade better? TOO BAD! MINI NUKE
better at close combat? TOO BAD! no-bleed
outplay someone? TOO BAD! ARMER LOCKZ
control the map? TOO BAD! JET PACK
outplay someone? TOO BAD! SPRINT LETS THEM RUN AWAY

for competitive power gamer people with the growth mindset, dying is unacceptable. because of this you have to play the game like a coward essentially, so you can avoid situations that would face you against the games terrible core game mechanics. because of this halo reach is a joke.

703

> really though, if bungie added a bloom modifier to make the spread larger and reset faster or something, the only thing that would happen is A LOT more people would come back to check it out, and most of them would stay.

TOTALLY! if you could tweak bloom, im sure bungie would have done it by now (no idea why they didnt put this in the game), and people would actually want to play the game more than they do currently.

not being able to 1v1 DMR-only battle someone and have the person who shoots better win 100% of the time is a big put off for me. its the primary reason why i dont play halo reach.

704

I sincerely hope that 343i will continue to listen to its community, and make some adjustments in the game. As for seeing bloom and armor lock changes, I highly doubt it. If changes are made, I suspect they will be more subtle than simply wiping them out.

705

The bloom is soft coded in the game as a variable so all they have to do is change the variable in a given gametype to make it tighter or looser; and no it’s not hard, it’s as easy as changing a 1 to a 3 because thats what it is. Bungie announced that Playlist support will be all 343, so my guess is Bungie doesn’t want to mess anything else up for 343 to fix. This my opinion but I’m glad cause I think Jeremiah doesn’t have his head right.

706

> I sincerely hope that 343i will continue to listen to its community, and make some adjustments in the game. As for seeing bloom and armor lock changes, I highly doubt it. If changes are made, I suspect they will be more subtle than simply wiping them out.

all we really need is small changes. i’d much prefer they kept bloom in, and only made it so spamming NEVER WINS, NOT EVEN ONCE out of 100 times. that, and take off 3 seconds of the duration of armor lock and the game would be 10x better IMO.

> The bloom is soft coded in the game as a variable so all they have to do is change the variable in a given gametype to make it tighter or looser; and no it’s not hard, it’s as easy as changing a 1 to a 3 because thats what it is. Bungie announced that Playlist support will be all 343, so my guess is Bungie doesn’t want to mess anything else up for 343 to fix. This my opinion but I’m glad cause I think Jeremiah doesn’t have his head right.

you sure its that easy? how do you know this is true?

707

I find the following from the article to be very relevant.

> In contrast, people with a Fixed Mindset fundamentally believe that personal attributes are fixed values. They believe that people are like characters in fighting games: They have specific positive and negative qualities that define them and that do not change. This worldview is not totally misinformed; genetic factors contribute heavily to traits such as intelligence, attractiveness, and height. No amount of practice can make someone who is short become tall, or someone born with a very low IQ become a genius. The problem with having a Fixed Mindset is that it reduces your motivation to overcome obstacles and it changes how you interpret failures. For example, if a person with a Fixed Mindset believes themselves to be a skillful gamer, then they expect to be good at most video games. They may not be motivated to enhance their gaming skills because they believe that they are already accomplished gamers. Furthermore, encountering a difficult game forces them to either admit that they are not skilled or create a response that preserves their ego, such as suggesting that the game is simply too hard for anyone. The result of this kind of thinking is that a Fixed Mindset gamer will avoid games that test their limitations, and they will rarely improve their skills or enjoy a challenging game. Does this sound familiar?

Your statements of superior player vs inferior player and comparisons of BR-gameplay vs DMR-gameplay fits very nicely into the concept described above. You see limits and boundaries and feel things must fall into those boundaries. You see outcomes as either 100% accurate or 100% random and not consequences of metagaming. And it’s not that you prefer gameplay to be a certain way, it’s that you compare it to the previous systems and how it should be more like it, rather than different from either system as an alternative to change. All of these are giant neon signs.

You cannot claim you fit right in with the Growth-minded players and then claim failure is unacceptable either. Saying

> for competitive power gamer people with the growth mindset, dying is unacceptable.

Is what we call “not doing one’s research.” It’s also missing the point of a Growth-gamer feeling death is an indicator of a need to increase skill further. From the article

> People with a Growth Mindset enjoy challenging games because they understand that failure is the path to success. In contrast, people with a Fixed Mindset view failure as a demonstration of ineptitude, something to be avoided at all costs.

You claiming death is unacceptable and its reasoning of the game being broken does not give your Growth-points.

A Growth-minded person is likely to look at their death as either:
A) A result of an improperly executed move and so the enemy capitalised.
B) A result of being caught out of position and there was a failure to counter the enemy.
C) A result of not being prepared for a viable counter and so the enemy capitalised.
D) A result of walking into a trap.
E) A lucky WTF moment due to network latency doing what id does.
F) Improper team communication.
G) The enemy was more skilled.

A Fixed-minded person is like to look at their death as either:
A) The enemy was more skilled.
B) A result of the game being broken.
C) A lucky WTF moment due to network latency doing what id does.
D) It was the rest of the team’s fault.
I consider this a correction :wink:
To conclude, “There’s no such thing as a failure who keeps trying.”

708

The next Halo simply needs to remember its roots, and add something truly innovative that doesn’t break core gameplay.
Think what Forge did in Halo 3.

709

Please bring some of the maps from CE- 3 to reach. thats what this game really needs

710

I suggest trying the Team Classic playlist. It needs supporters to stay alive.
http://postgamecarnagereport.com/2011/04/halo-reach-team-classic-review/

711

> I suggest trying the Team Classic playlist. It needs supporters to stay alive.
> http://postgamecarnagereport.com/2011/04/halo-reach-team-classic-review/

I only play the classic playlist, but the maps they give are good. i just wish they would give better remakes.

712

I don’t think 343 is going to be making CE maps for reach with Halo CE remake coming out November 10. WELL… maybe. What would be REALLY cool is if you buy the Halo CE remake you get a code to redeem on Reach for ALL the maps.

713

>

its fine if you dont think im a growth mindset person. i could really care less what some misguided person on the internet thinks about me. especially considering you disagree with me constantly, but are always unable to answer the questions that destroy you fundamentally.

one thing, however:

> for competitive power gamer people with the growth mindset, dying is unacceptable.

notice how i defined myself with 3 describing words and not just one? if you had read that sentence and actually comprehended it, it would have became very clear to you why i look at dying as unacceptable.

riddle me this:

would a growth mindset person prefer a game that the person who shoots better wins 100% of the time, or a game that lets the person who flails around and mashes his R trigger win?

clearly the former. growth mindset people DO NOT like it when they try their efforts that they have been practicing, only to see someone COMPLETELY ignore bloom, making absolutely NO ATTEMPT to play the game correctly, beat them; ESPECIALLY after they use their practiced cadence and have had flawless accuracy up until their death, AND THE FIRST SHOT. it doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize that growth mindset people view this as a DOWNGRADE as far as mechanics go.

how about this one:

would a growth mindset person prefer a game that grenades actually take some semblance of skill to use, and are dodge-able, or a game that grenades take almost no skill to use, and are not dodge-able? again, it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that a growth mindset person would look at this as YET ANOTHER downgrade as far as mechanics go. it USED to be you had to be EVEN A LITTLE BIT good at throwing grenades to be able to use them properly, and even if they were used properly, players could still dodge them (unless they were incredible). currently, grenades are MINI NUKES that dont take even the slightest bit of skill to use because they have a HUGE radius, have INCREDIBLE damage, have a super fast fuze time, and actually STICK TO THE GROUND.

or this one:

would a growth mindset person prefer a game that rewards the person who plays the game better in battles involving 1 melee, or a game that not only can you not shoot to get ahead 100% of the time, sometimes its actually DETRIMENTAL to you getting the kill? sorry, but YET AGAIN, it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that this is YET ANOTHER DOWNGRADE. it used to be the person who played the game better (by doing more damage thru aiming better, or using grenades, etc) won battles where both players melee. currently we have a system that you have to know the exact distance that shooting becomes un-viable so you dont get owned by the terrible mechanic.

or this one:

would a growth mindset person prefer a game that, when he outplays someone he gets a kill, or a game that when he outplays someone they can press a single button for a +80% survival rate (provided that his teammates are working with the correct number of chromosomes, and he is staying in the general vicinity of his team)? and, wow, thats 4 for 4.

sorry, but growth mindset people view this game as a complete JOKE compared to any other halo game.

my statements about skill are very relevant
shoot better? TOO BAD! SPAM SPAM
grenade better? TOO BAD! MINI NUKE
better at close combat? TOO BAD! no-bleed
outplay someone? TOO BAD! ARMER LOCKZ
control the map? TOO BAD! JET PACK
outplay someone? TOO BAD! SPRINT LETS THEM RUN AWAY

714

> its fine if you dont think im a growth mindset person. i could really care less what some misguided person on the internet thinks about me. especially considering you disagree with me constantly, but are always unable to answer the questions that destroy you fundamentally.
>
> one thing, however:

Are you a politician in training?

> would a growth mindset person prefer a game that the person who shoots better wins 100% of the time, or a game that lets the person who flails around and mashes his R trigger win?

A growth minded person would choose option C or D. A game that allows players to avoid either circumstance through gameplay or a game that allows the players the options to create the circumstances given above, where both can and will occur depending on gameplay.

> would a growth mindset person prefer a game that grenades actually take some semblance of skill to use, and are dodge-able, or a game that grenades take almost no skill to use, and are not dodge-able?

A growth minded person wouldn’t care how much skill something took, only that they try and learn to do what they do not know. But the question is loaded like a tacked-on amendment in Congress.

> would a growth mindset person prefer a game that rewards the person who plays the game better in battles involving 1 melee, or a game that not only can you not shoot to get ahead 100% of the time, sometimes its actually DETRIMENTAL to you getting the kill?

Again, loaded. The riddle/question is a rhetorical statement. But what I can gather out of it is… nothing. I couldn’t make sense of it.

> would a growth mindset person prefer a game that, when he outplays someone he gets a kill, or a game that when he outplays someone they can press a single button for a +80% survival rate (provided that his teammates are working with the correct number of chromosomes, and he is staying in the general vicinity of his team)?

Simple to answer. The growth mindset person would say the first sentence makes no sense in comparison to the second.
If the GMS-player outplayed the other player, then the addition of +80% in favour of the enemy didn’t matter because the GMS-player already accounted for the possibility of said ability and limited its effect before the fight even started. If the GMS-play lost, then they will realise either they didn’t account for other factors or there was a failure in execution.

715

again you show off your incredible ability to fail at answering questions. my question was “would a growth mindset person prefer a game that the person who shoots better wins 100% of the time, or a game that lets the person who flails around and mashes his R trigger win?”

the underlying question was which game would a growth mindset person prefer from my 2 choices. you, then, decided to add on your own alternative answers, effectively ignoring the entire question. again, not surprising. youve done this before. when i ask you a challenging question that quite frankly just DECIMATES your ‘logic’ to the core, you opt out of answering the question then add alternate filler in hopes of answering it without proving me right. you are a silly guy thy reaperMC :D. every time you fail at answering the questions that slap your logic around it makes me look right. you think you are being really clever, but all you really do by dodging questions and failing to answer them even tho they are straight forward, and direct, is prove to everyone that you cant argue when a simple question proves you wrong.

then, you do it again with your next answer to this question “would a growth mindset person prefer a game that grenades actually take some semblance of skill to use, and are dodge-able, or a game that grenades take almost no skill to use, and are not dodge-able?”

again, the underlying question is which game would a growth mindset person prefer. i found it exceptionally hilarious that you say its a ‘loaded’ question. yanno why its loaded? because the OBVIOUS answer slaps reach in the face. i find it hilarious that you dont think growth mindset people would care about how much skill something takes, considering improving their skills is one of the main things that makes a person a growth mindset person. are you really trying to argue that a growth mindset person would rather play a halo game that takes less skill over a halo game that takes more skill? yea, growth mindset people really enjoy playing sequels to games that make any average joe shmo a lot closer to how good they are because the game has been so dumbed down /sarcasm.

> only that they try and learn to do what they do not know.

good luck learning how to dodge mini nukes. basically the only thing you can do to not get killed by mini nukes is hide in the most random, sporadic spots on the map. grenades are not even remotely hard to throw in reach, and if one is thrown at you, GOOD LUCK dodging it.

my next question really wasnt that hard “would a growth mindset person prefer a game that rewards the person who plays the game better in battles involving 1 melee, or a game that not only can you not shoot to get ahead 100% of the time, sometimes its actually DETRIMENTAL to you getting the kill?”

let me break it down for you:
would a growth mindset person prefer a game

-that rewards the person who plays the game better (meaning they do more damage) in battles involving 1 melee (with a kill, and staying alive)
-or a game that not only can you not shoot to get ahead 100% of the time, sometimes its actually DETRIMENTAL to you getting the kill (effectively throwing their effort, and skill out the window some of the time)?

i find it hilarious that in your answer you can define the question as being loaded (again laughable considering its only loaded because it slaps reach in the face because thats how it is in reach, and even you can recognize that).

> Simple to answer. The growth mindset person would say the first sentence makes no sense in comparison to the second.

nice try at taking a shot at me using the growth mindset person as an example, but there was only 1 sentence. sentences have periods at the end of them. there was only 1 period, so it was 1 sentence. both growth mindset people, and fixed mindset people would tell you that.

> If the GMS-player outplayed the other player, then the addition of +80% in favour of the enemy didn’t matter because the GMS-player already accounted for the possibility of said ability and limited its effect before the fight even started.

HILARIOUS! lets look at the growth mindset persons options, provided that the person using armor lock is above average in skill level:
-sniper headshot
-kill every single member of the other team who would help the armor locker (and if even one of them has armor lock you instantly fail, god forbid if 2 of them have armor lock)

and thats it. so, when i dont have a sniper rifle, or if even 1 more person who would save the armor locker has armor lock himself, i literally cannot ‘limit its effect’ before the fight starts provided that im playing against even semi-competent people.

knowing that someone might have spawned with the ability to make them be able to press 1 button to gain a +80% survival rate really adds a LOT to halo. halo is sooo much more fun when you have to straight up turn around and run away every time you see someone use something they can spawn with /sarcasm

ive heard a lot of hilarious things from you thy reaperMC, but defending armor lock has to take the cake.

> If the GMS-play lost, then they will realise either they didn’t account for other factors or there was a failure in execution.

growth mindset people dont die to armor lockers, they just walk away because they know if they try to fight them, they will probably die to the armor lockers teammates (or if he expect the teammates to fight them, the armor locker can come out and get 1 or 2 shots into him, effectively making the teammate win).

716

a lot of the maps in the classic playlist are trash.

why they brought the map that has 2 teleporters as the ONLY ways to get to the top back is BEYOND me. literally one of the worst halo maps ever designed. 2 more teleporters to the top, or 2 more lifts to the top would fix it tho. i mean… you have 4 people to watch 2 teleporters (and spread out so they cant respawn on the top lol).

also, in team classic, you can currently throw a grenade, then shoot someone ONCE in the body with your pistol before it explodes, for a kill.

BAD AT FPS? dont worry! team classic FIRST PERSON GRENADIER!

717

Oh, you two! Always arguing with each other like two school children secretly in love with one another. It’s okay.

718

Well, despite the arguing it’s pretty easy to see that developers are trying to get the fixed mindset crowd into gaming more. Both Reach and Black Ops are prime examples in the first wave of what will most likely be many more games to come. With Reach’s Cr system it can allow a terrible player to at least feel progress (whether or not it’s a fact) and Black Ops does the same with cash to buy weapons. However these are both deturents for the growth mindset because there is no failure, only menial success. Goals are still achieved, just not as quickly.

719

> Oh, you two! Always arguing with each other like two school children secretly in love with one another. It’s okay.

its not really arguing. its more like me asking him questions that destroy him logically, and him flailing trying to answer them. lolz

its aiight tho. im not looking to ‘convert’ him or anything. he likes reach and will defend it to the teeth till the day he dies, never once accepting that its a bad halo game compared to every other halo game, and im ok with that. i dont argue for his sake, i argue so that, just maybe, a game developer at 343 will read my posts (and look past my slightly abrasive way of communicating) and see that there really isnt a single person that bad mechanics benefit.

things like spamming. who benefits from spamming? spammers dont benefit because they lose the vast majority of the time, and people who get beat by spamming certainly dont benefit either!

things like no-bleed melees. who benefits from losing the viability of shooting to come out ahead -some- of the time? how is the no-bleed melee better in any way, shape, or form? losing the viability to shoot to get ahead is a GIGANTIC CON that vastly outweighs any (if any) of the PROS that no-bleed adds to the game.

things like mini nuke grenades too.

bad mechanics like these dont make the game fun for the people who actually have some semblance of an idea whats going on, they just make it frustrating, like its not even worth playing anymore.

i miss the ‘golden’ days of halos 1, and 2, when halo actually took a bit of skill to play. halo 3 was still very good, dont get me wrong now. halo reach, on the other hand, is like the kiddy version of halo. i have absolutely no idea why they made it rated ‘M’ when clearly their target audience was casual children who have no idea how god-awful the game really is.

720

> Well, despite the arguing it’s pretty easy to see that developers are trying to get the fixed mindset crowd into gaming more. Both Reach and Black Ops are prime examples in the first wave of what will most likely be many more games to come. With Reach’s Cr system it can allow a terrible player to at least feel progress (whether or not it’s a fact) and Black Ops does the same with cash to buy weapons. However these are both deturents for the growth mindset because there is no failure, only menial success. Goals are still achieved, just not as quickly.

CoD’s leveling system and Reach’s cRs system has little to do with growth or fixed mindset people. You don’t motivate players who are testing or expanding their skills with promises of pixels. In short, a growth-minded person views failure as a need to continue to learning where a fixed-minded person believes we are already where we deserve to be. Neither 2 has to do with being competitive.

A growth minded player will loose a game or encounter and think of how to better themselves because of it. A fixed minded player will loose a game or encounter and claim because it is because skill levels are different or its the game’s fault (or team’s).

But you are right about 1 thing. Developers don’t want to loose fixed minded players. It’s just difficult to progress a game further without leaving those people feeling left behind. All good things come to an end. If you cannot embrace the cycle, you get lost in it.

I don’t like regurgitating what has already been said so I have but I’ll bring attention to this one

> growth mindset people dont die to armor lockers, they just walk away because they know if they try to fight them, they will probably die to the armor lockers teammates (or if he expect the teammates to fight them, the armor locker can come out and get 1 or 2 shots into him, effectively making the teammate win).

Neither, a growth mindset person would judge the situation according to their experience and choose to engage or disengage from the Armour-Locking enemy.

… Fixed plans have we?