upton889

I'm not sure if it's included but I hope it is! Shotty snipes was always fun!

I agree man. The competitive ranking systems serve as a key source of motivation for players. I also remember the work I put in for Halo 2 and 3 and the ranking system drove me to become better, and that's exactly what happened, I became better and I kept coming back to the game. Definitely will bro. Sorry you can't play Halo 4 on release day. =/

Sova I've agreed with you on previous topics and I agree with this one. We gotta get together and play Halo sometime, no lie. To answer your question about the ranking system, nothing has been cut and dry yet, but Frank O Connor is supposed to clarify more in the upcoming days towards Halo 4. I'm not shunning any casual gamers because they're apart of the fan base too, but Halo matchmaking is the house that competitive players built. In Halo 2 everybody wanted that highest level and to strive towards MLG status or at least play against/with MLG players. Halo 2 started it all for the massive influx of players in matchmaking and Xbox Live in general, in my opinion. Reach was a disaster and statistics show the number of players who wanted to come back to that game. Neither the game itself nor the ranking system was designed for competitive play by any means. The competitive play and ranking systems in Halo 2 and 3 is what kept people coming back. Halo 4 needs that competitive element in their ranking system to become more successful in the long term, and not to just have people pick the game up, beat the campaign, get a few upgrades and quit, like in Reach.

Sova I agree with every word you've said on this thread! Great posts sir!

I'll probably just be building my rank haha. If I had a choice I would rebuild Warlock from Halo 2 first. Doesn't seem that difficult to recreate. Congrats on that 1000th post Ryu!

I like Valhalla but that's not the best map on Halo 3 by far. I don't really know why they chose that map. Maybe to fill a void of big maps? Who knows. I just hope they come out with a DLC pack of some of the great maps from previous Halo's.

I agree with you as well Sova. There will ALWAYS be players who start from the bottom who want a just want a new challenge of ranking up. I never saw derankers much either and I could usually take care of boosters no problem in the game. Halo 2 definitely had the more challenging system, which is why i think it was a better system. It was more indicative of your skill than any other system.

I hardly ever encountered derankers in Halo 3 or any other cheaters, boosters. etc. Bungie did way better of a job detecting game manipulations (not deranking, but standbying, modding, etc.) in Halo 3, which was the biggest problem for me in Halo 2 (nearly impossible to rank up passed my level 43 because of this). Even with that said I still think Halo 2 has had the best ranking system, but I think Halo 3's has had the best idea: combining experience with playlist ranks. I never saw these deranker wars or anything like that and I don't know a lot who did, so I guess we have two very different perspectives. As far as deranking and boosting in Halo 3 go, any system will have its exploitation points. But as I said, I do know that in Halo 2 and 3 the number of online players long after each game's release blows Reach's numbers out of the water. The ranking system keeps players motivated and wanting to come back to the game.

Force 410, I agree with you wholeheartedly on this issue and I've said the same things and more many times on the forums (just in shorter form, lol). Reach's matchmaking and overall gameplay were massive failures. Everybody is thrown in at random on every playlist regardless of skill or time played. Just look at the numbers of the people that played Halo Reach long after its release compared to the numbers of Halo 2 and Halo 3 players long after their releases. Reach pales in comparison and numbers don't lie. The old ranking systems keep everybody motivated to keep playing. Almost anybody that played Halo 2 and/or 3 misses the excitement of the old ranking system. Almost anybody that seldom played Halo 2 and 3, or not at all, could never understand. Even though Frank O Connor may have statistics on boosting I disagree with him as well, based on an abundance of my own personal experience with Halo 2 and 3. I hardly ever saw boosting, and even if I did it wasn't a problem for me during battles.

The most useful asset of killcams is that they show if somebody is camping somewhere. Other than that I don't believe they have too much use. 9 times out of 10 you know how you died unless somebody kills you from a distance, killcam or no killcam. If I need to review mistakes I go to theater.

The map looks good! Thanks for the pictures! I can see my self throwing/banking several nades on the doorways, floors, and windows for this map.

Anything turtle beach is great. I've had my wireless headset for a couple of years. Great battery life and great sound.

If Halo 4 is going to award leveling based on EXP then there should be more emphasis on the performance bonus of the points. Halo Reach didn't hardly give anything for performing well in a game. A higher performance bonus would motivate players more to do well and consequently help the overall skill level of the player base.

I very much agree. I've advocated this improvement for Halo 4 for a long time. Halo 4 needs that skill-based system. Definitely. We've discussed that kind of issue before and I think that would probably be the best idea. The big question is do you seperate both types of players or try to combine them? I think both players are more satisfied with their own playlists. You're probably right about that as far as competition goes. I'm not sure if you can truly combine the two player types to play in the same matchmade games but I think 343 is taking the right steps in accomodating both players.

I hope Halo 4 finds a way to bridge that gap. Halo Reach was a disaster in regards to that goal because gameplay was not balanced. Halo 4 needs to balance gameplay to achieve this and I think they're doing a good job so far by 1. Nearly taking bloom out and 2. Toning down armor abilities.

This is the biggest question for me. Can casual and competitive players efficiently coexist in Halo 4 matchmaking? It's safe to say that Halo Reach failed in hybridizing the two with gameplay geared towards the casual players. Casual and competitive players are paired in all playlists, which makes for a sub-par Halo experience. Me being a competitive player, I would like to see both types of players find common ground and if that could happen, it would be the best thing for Halo 4. I also think 343 is heading in the right direction on this goal. Do you think both types of players can coexist? Do you think 343 is going in the right direction? Any thoughts appreciated.

This may be an obvious answer for some, but in the time I've been on the forums I've yet to acquire any awards for facebook, twitter, and youtube, even though I've tried liking/following/subscribing to all several times. Am I doing something wrong or is this an error? Any help appreciated.

O yes. This is a great idea!

Yes, in the suit you are still human, that is true. But Master Chief with the armor weighs almost 1000 lbs. Do you think that him being human makes any difference in how strong, or fast he is, or how much he can take damage? If 343 was going for realism then I would predict they would make a game like Call Of Duty or Battlefield. When Master Chief runs into something with a Warthog, or runs into a wall head on, of course that would hurt your average human, but it's Halo. It's based in the future and not supposed to be realistic. A tank is not a super soldier who can take unreal amounts of damage. I'm not saying spartans should be able to survive that kind of fall but they shouldn't be affected on reasonable falls of 30-40 feet or so.

I've never had a problem with plasma grenades so I don't think it will be overpowered. I like spawning with 4 grenades personally. I always liked in Halo 2 how everyone spawned with 4 frag grenades instead of 2.

I would like to have equipment, but not on top of armor abilities. If I had to choose between armor abilities and equipment I would choose equipment, but I don't have that choice.

I've said this many times before. If 343 is emphasizing this experience of being this beast mode super soldier then why should a spartan be damaged by a fall? Doesn't make sense.

There are some maps from Halo 3 I would definitely like to see back. The Pit, Guardian, Narrows and Construct were some of my favorites. Simple and mostly symmetrical maps that played very well. 343 needs to continue that simple/symmetrical trend to get the best map play. Not add all these intricate complications with different levels and stories to each map. Keep it simple.

I always enjoyed grifball but it hurt my K/D because I'm always the best carrier, and therefore I get killed the most. I carry it like Ladanian Tomlinson in his prime lol.

If the carbine, BR, and DMR are 1.6 second kills, then the light rifle should be 1.6 seconds. The game needs as much balance as possible.