Why Halo Reach Ranking System Failed/Loss of Online Community Consistency

Hello Forum. I’m pretty sure the majority read my previous post of the Halo 4 Wish List - Community Discussion. I would like to thank EVERY SINGLE PERSON for writing in that thread, negative or positive, because it has now over 35 pages! That blew my mind away because when I last check I saw 15 or so. I hope to get the same amount of feedback here from this thread, because I feel like our community is slowly dying, and I will explain further in detail below. Again, thank you all for taking your time for reading/posting/commenting, for if it wasn’t for you, people who post their idea’s would get tossed under the table.

THIS IS NOT A BASH THREAD (can you read this now POCKETS117?), this is a thread discussing about how Halo 4 can have the same community of players as Halo 2 had. There were regularly 1 million people online every night on Halo 2. Why was that? Would would over 1 million people come online to play a video game, stay online for countless hours, make Clans, do prank calls, lobby warrior for hours? Because there were ranks.

Rankings is the reason why Halo 2 had the most consistent online players. At 4AM, you would have 300,000 people online. When would you ever find 300,000 people online at a peak day on Halo Reach? I haven’t seen that many people on for a while. This is because playing to get to a Inheritor is useless. It’s an impossible task unless you play the system (boost, invasion boost, campaign boost, etc). To show that you are an Inheritor just means you play Halo: Reach way too much. Halo 2 had a system where a 50 was unattainable. This was the best system because you know who cheated by seeing if they were higher than a level 45. Finding cheaters in Halo 2 was not difficult. The main reason why they nerfed the Halo 2 system was because of people stand-by-ing and mod-ing. That was 2004, this will soon be 2012. Is 8 years of technology enough to stop console cheating? Yes. The answer; dedicated servers. (I know this will NEVER happen, but if it did, that would make the game the greatest online console game in the world.)

Now that we discussed Halo 2’s ranking system, I need to discuss Reach’s.

Halo: Reach, it is fully random.

I don’t care if anyone says there is a true skill system, there is none. MLG is my most played playlist in Halo: Reach. I have had teammates that have never even played a game in their life. In one specific scenario, this person had 0 kills, and 22 deaths. It was his very first game playing Halo, I checked, he created the gamertag that day. Is this fair to me? No. Is this fair to him? No. Regardless of what type of playlist he chose, he was put with someone who has played almost 10 days worth on just a specific playlist. Yes, I am a nerd, and proud of it. I don’t want to be playing with some player that have never played the game. I am not insulting their skill level, it isn’t their fault, they should also be playing with random players who have never played the game. I was a random scrub one day, everyone was. Would you like to play against level 30’s in Halo 2 your very first game online?

I believe the ranking system was the best for the community because it split us up in the best way possible. It had scrubs playing with scrubs and pro’s playing with pro’s. This would let people have more fun since they would be playing opponents at their same skill level. Let me break down each leveling group:

Levels 1 - 5: A player who rarely gets on, plays with friends for laughs. No one would be screaming “you suck” for not knowing how to play a game since you are a low level.

Levels 6 - 15: An once or twice a week player who likes to be competitive with friends. Winning isn’t the most important factor, but you don’t like to lose.

Levels 16 - 30: An occasion player who is competitive with online friends. They won’t be afraid to say you suck, so you should bring your A game, but don’t be too afraid, for they aren’t the best.

Levels 31 - 40: A 4-5 day a week player who treats this game like a small child. You love Halo from the beginning and you never plan on stopping anytime soon. These people are usually the ones who love Halo for the game, say good games after each game, and have a great time just hanging about with people. Talking trash in game is all fun, but in the end these guys just want to keep the community strong/keep Halo going.

Levels 41 - 45: Intense gamer who never plans on losing. You play to win, not play to have fun. If your teammate sucks, you’ll tell them, but they better take it as constructive criticism.

Levels 46 - 50: You’re a god. No seriously, why do you play this game? You must have magical powers. This is an unattainable level unless you literally are the best player in the game. You would have to win 25 games in a row without losing to rank higher, and every time you lose you reset. If you lose three games in a row, you derank.

You might say “what does ranking have to do with a community?”. Everything. If you have a rank that determines the level that shows their dedication towards the game, then you wouldn’t have people yelling “YOU **** SUCK WHY DO YOU PLAY THIS GAME”. Frankly, I’ve done that too my teammates out of frustration of playing MLG. The player who had 0 kills and died 22 times. Does he suck, yes. Is he at my level of skill, no. Should I be yelling at him for a Broken system? No. This is a very short form of what I was trying to say;

TL/DR

The reason why Halo: Reach’s online community is falling apart is because of no legitimate ranking/true skill system. Halo 2 had the best community because a ranking system divides the community into their respectable categories by the amount of passion they have for this game, being none to loving this game like their child. Halo 3 ruined that system by lowering the difficulty to getting a 50 making the groups clash. Reach destroyed the system by removing it completely. Fix Halo 4 by bringing back the exact same ranking system as Halo 2 had.

If you agree with my post, please copy and paste the bold in the top of your message when you give me your feedback so that 343 will be able to understand what we truly want, an amazing community with an amazing game.

reach’s ranking system and gameplay sucks

an online multiplayer game has got to have both to be good

Gameplay = how fun it is
Rank = something to work for and represent how good you are or should represent how good you are

> reach’s ranking system and gameplay sucks
>
> an online multiplayer game has got to have both to be good
>
> Gameplay = how fun it is
> Rank = something to work for and represent how good you are or should represent how good you are

Please re-read the entire thread. You obviously skipped over it due to the fact that the second paragraph I stated was that “This isn’t a bashing thread”.
Gameplay does not mean how fun a game is, how fun a game is is based upon our own opinion. I do not like Reach, but a ranking system would make it a lot more tolerable/more fun.
So please, before you go and start complaining about something, READ!
This is what I mean when the community is falling apart, half of you barely listen.

I played countless hours of Halo 2, and in my honest opinion the only real reason why there were so many people playing and the community was very large and felt all tied together is the difficulty of ranking up.

With a newer generation of consoles, and more innovations, came more intricate leveling systems which might have been appealing to people, but at the same time, those systems made it TOO easy to level up. I could write 8 pages about all the details that have to do with this, but I want to keep it short.

If any game used the same exact ranking system, trusekill system, etc that halo 2 used, every single person would enjoy it just as much as any xp system, credits system, etc and play that game for a very very long time.

Please if you disagree, post and give me a reason.

p.s. please don’t reply if you haven’t witnessed the halo 2 ranking system first hand.

I have to say something about the old ranking system. I DO miss it, but it is too easily manipulated and allowed for people to illegitimately acquire rank via boosting or buying the account. No, seriously… It created havoc amongst true skill and mixed the good people and the bad and created an imbalance amongst those who actually cared enough to play the ranked playlists. If the ranking system were back, it would be just as bad. However, I do think we need a true ranking system that isn’t based of C.O.D or any of those exp/money based systems.

> I have to say something about the old ranking system. I DO miss it, but it is too easily manipulated and allowed for people to illegitimately acquire rank via boosting or buying the account. No, seriously… It created havoc amongst true skill and mixed the good people and the bad and created an imbalance amongst those who actually cared enough to play the ranked playlists. If the ranking system were back, it would be just as bad. However, I do think we need a true ranking system that isn’t based of C.O.D or any of those exp/money based systems.

Halo 2 you would find a bad player every 1/4 games. Halo reach you find bad players every single game. I would rather have halo 2 back.

I certainly agree with this thread. I’ve found that in Halo 2, when I first started out it was casual and fun, and a lot of people were just screwing around - I made a lot of friends that way. When I started getting some major passion for the game it suddenly turned from having fun to having fun AND competition - and that’s certainly something that made me stay. That awesome feeling you get by beating someone in a 1 on 1 duel, for instance.

I play Halo 3 a lot lately due to my Reach disc being stolen and also giving up on the MP temporarily - I’ve found that this trueskill thing doesn’t work too well. I played about 10 Social Big Team games today, and in all of these games I was matched with teams that sort of went like this…
BLUE TEAM - 4 Recruits, 2 Gunneys, 2 Majors
RED TEAM - 3 Generals, 2 Brigadiers, 2 Captains (Me included), 1 Colonel.

Needless to say, Blue team got handed their own -Yoink- on a platter.
And I thought this was just in Social games but I see the same sort of pattern in Ranked Slayer for some reason - just not as drastically. And oftentimes in Team Slayer it’s either one team getting steam rolled or me carrying my team of Recruits to end the game 50 - 30 and I have 24 kills :c

Last part of my rant, I’d have to say that Halo 2 seemed…more epic. I don’t know how to explain the feeling but everything just seemed so much more crazy yet tactical and controlled. -shrug-

> > reach’s ranking system and gameplay sucks
> >
> > an online multiplayer game has got to have both to be good
> >
> > Gameplay = how fun it is
> > Rank = something to work for and represent how good you are or should represent how good you are
>
> Please re-read the entire thread. You obviously skipped over it due to the fact that the second paragraph I stated was that “This isn’t a bashing thread”.
> Gameplay does not mean how fun a game is, how fun a game is is based upon our own opinion. I do not like Reach, but a ranking system would make it a lot more tolerable/more fun.
> So please, before you go and start complaining about something, READ!
> This is what I mean when the community is falling apart, half of you barely listen.

i did read the whole thing i still stand by my opinion

> i did read the whole thing i still stand by my opinion

Opinion isn’t stating it as fact.

> > i did read the whole thing i still stand by my opinion
>
> Opinion isn’t stating it as fact.

this whole thread is a opinion

i stated my opinion

By the way, found out why the uneven teams happens in Halo 3 Ranked Slayer -
There’s not enough people online to find even matches so it keeps widening the gaps.
It goes from 21-21, to 11-31, and then if I’m unlucky, 1-41.
I just played a game of Team BR’s on Narrows with the above happening.
So I end up with 3 Recruits versus a team of Colonels. Wonderful.
-goes back to BTB-

also, although halo 2 did have its share of cheaters, modders, boosters, etc almost all of that has since been fixed, with the help of newer generation system, software etc.

343 can implement a perfect system to identify boosters (circle boosters, for an non halo 2 kids), it was done perfectly by bungie during halo 2.

Modding has been reduced drastically since the 360 launched. I don’t know much about 360 modding, but I think getting online with a jtag is insta-ban. I’m pretty sure it’s literally impossible to play online on a modded 360.

Account selling has been around for a while. There’s not much anyone can really do about it. It’s still around today, I personally know of 3 people who have sold inheritor accounts.

I honestly can’t see any downfall to just using the halo 2 ranking system :confused: maybe nostalgia is just taking over.

> Hello Forum. I’m pretty sure the majority read my previous post of the Halo 4 Wish List - Community Discussion. I would like to thank EVERY SINGLE PERSON for writing in that thread, negative or positive, because it has now over 35 pages! That blew my mind away because when I last check I saw 15 or so. I hope to get the same amount of feedback here from this thread, because I feel like our community is slowly dying, and I will explain further in detail below. Again, thank you all for taking your time for reading/posting/commenting, for if it wasn’t for you, people who post their idea’s would get tossed under the table.
>
> THIS IS NOT A BASH THREAD (can you read this now POCKETS117?), this is a thread discussing about how Halo 4 can have the same community of players as Halo 2 had. There were regularly 1 million people online every night on Halo 2. Why was that? Would would over 1 million people come online to play a video game, stay online for countless hours, make Clans, do prank calls, lobby warrior for hours? Because there were ranks.
>
> Rankings is the reason why Halo 2 had the most consistent online players. At 4AM, you would have 300,000 people online. When would you ever find 300,000 people online at a peak day on Halo Reach? I haven’t seen that many people on for a while. This is because playing to get to a Inheritor is useless. It’s an impossible task unless you play the system (boost, invasion boost, campaign boost, etc). To show that you are an Inheritor just means you play Halo: Reach way too much. Halo 2 had a system where a 50 was unattainable. This was the best system because you know who cheated by seeing if they were higher than a level 45. Finding cheaters in Halo 2 was not difficult. The main reason why they nerfed the Halo 2 system was because of people stand-by-ing and mod-ing. That was 2004, this will soon be 2012. Is 8 years of technology enough to stop console cheating? Yes. The answer; dedicated servers. (I know this will NEVER happen, but if it did, that would make the game the greatest online console game in the world.)
>
> Now that we discussed Halo 2’s ranking system, I need to discuss Reach’s.
>
> Halo: Reach, it is fully random.
>
> I don’t care if anyone says there is a true skill system, there is none. MLG is my most played playlist in Halo: Reach. I have had teammates that have never even played a game in their life. In one specific scenario, this person had 0 kills, and 22 deaths. It was his very first game playing Halo, I checked, he created the gamertag that day. Is this fair to me? No. Is this fair to him? No. Regardless of what type of playlist he chose, he was put with someone who has played almost 10 days worth on just a specific playlist. Yes, I am a nerd, and proud of it. I don’t want to be playing with some player that have never played the game. I am not insulting their skill level, it isn’t their fault, they should also be playing with random players who have never played the game. I was a random scrub one day, everyone was. Would you like to play against level 30’s in Halo 2 your very first game online?
>
> I believe the ranking system was the best for the community because it split us up in the best way possible. It had scrubs playing with scrubs and pro’s playing with pro’s. This would let people have more fun since they would be playing opponents at their same skill level. Let me break down each leveling group:
>
> Levels 1 - 5: A player who rarely gets on, plays with friends for laughs. No one would be screaming “you suck” for not knowing how to play a game since you are a low level.
>
> Levels 6 - 15: An once or twice a week player who likes to be competitive with friends. Winning isn’t the most important factor, but you don’t like to lose.
>
> Levels 16 - 30: An occasion player who is competitive with online friends. They won’t be afraid to say you suck, so you should bring your A game, but don’t be too afraid, for they aren’t the best.
>
> Levels 31 - 40: A 4-5 day a week player who treats this game like a small child. You love Halo from the beginning and you never plan on stopping anytime soon. These people are usually the ones who love Halo for the game, say good games after each game, and have a great time just hanging about with people. Talking trash in game is all fun, but in the end these guys just want to keep the community strong/keep Halo going.
>
> Levels 41 - 45: Intense gamer who never plans on losing. You play to win, not play to have fun. If your teammate sucks, you’ll tell them, but they better take it as constructive criticism.
>
> Levels 46 - 50: You’re a god. No seriously, why do you play this game? You must have magical powers. This is an unattainable level unless you literally are the best player in the game. You would have to win 25 games in a row without losing to rank higher, and every time you lose you reset. If you lose three games in a row, you derank.
>
> You might say “what does ranking have to do with a community?”. Everything. If you have a rank that determines the level that shows their dedication towards the game, then you wouldn’t have people yelling “YOU **** SUCK WHY DO YOU PLAY THIS GAME”. Frankly, I’ve done that too my teammates out of frustration of playing MLG. The player who had 0 kills and died 22 times. Does he suck, yes. Is he at my level of skill, no. Should I be yelling at him for a Broken system? No. This is a very short form of what I was trying to say;
>
> TL/DR
>
> The reason why Halo: Reach’s online community is falling apart is because of no legitimate ranking/true skill system. Halo 2 had the best community because a ranking system divides the community into their respectable categories by the amount of passion they have for this game, being none to loving this game like their child. Halo 3 ruined that system by lowering the difficulty to getting a 50 making the groups clash. Reach destroyed the system by removing it completely. Fix Halo 4 by bringing back the exact same ranking system as Halo 2 had.
>
> If you agree with my post, please copy and paste the bold in the top of your message when you give me your feedback so that 343 will be able to understand what we truly want, an amazing community with an amazing game.

While I agree that the ranking system in reach blows, the amount of people on halo 2 was a 24 hour average. If reach had a 24 hour average, it would be near around 600 thousand, not a million, but still pretty high. You have to remember that.

Nah man, when it says 138,000 players online in reach, it was 1,000,000 online in halo 2 for like 6 months straight on the weekends.

> Nah man, when it says 138,000 players online in reach, it was 1,000,000 online in halo 2 for like 6 months straight on the weekends.

I know this, but reach is an ACTUAL number, meaning that is how many people are online at that moment in time, halo 2 was a 24 hour average. This was explained when reach first came out.

reach definiatly needs a ranking system in certain gametypes.
MLG for instance, Some kind of Lone Wolves, Double Team, Team Slayer, Team Objective.
They should keep the playlist they have, as they are the Halo3 social aspects, they just need to add a Ranking section with these gametypes.

Bungie was a sellout! But Bungie did one thing incredibly dumb with a sell-out game… They did a BETA… ROFL!

"Here guys this is what you’re going to get pooped on with and what we were fooling you with in the trailer before you actually give us any money. "

You wonder why CoD never does Beta’s? yeah.

You also had to realize though, Halo 2 was the best because it had no competition in the Online Console World at the time. Try to replicate Halo 2 and you will see an influx of players, but (just speculation according to the times) maybe they will grow bored, or find a new game, or just stay with whatever game they are playing. There are a lot of choices now when it comes to Shooters in general, not to mention other platforms. I’m not sure if one million players will ever grace the systems of another Halo MM experience.

I mean Halo 2’s competition was Unreal Tourney and Counter Strike. Not much competition when one is on a mouse and keyboard and the other is purely controller. Two different platforms.

Again, not bashing Halo 2, I personally loved it and hold it as the best FPS ever. But this is my guess with it being 2011.

343i could do a massive Ad-campaign to promote Halo 4 as being Halo 2-esque, but that’s probably the only way. I mean, I hate to say it, but I think we are seeing the death of ‘THE’ Sci-Fi FPS.

I hope not, for our sake.
I’ve played halo for too long, I can’t see it get destroyed because of greedy developers.

It failed? News to me.