moracca

As a Halo fan since the realease of Halo 1 I applaud 343 for its work on Halo 4. 343 has made a balanced, fun, and authentic Halo mutliplayer experience, but it feels too "balanced". And by balanced I mean it has COD-esque skill nerfing features. I will attribute the COD to microsoft's substantial investment in this game and their hope for a return on that investment in a market that features that other first person shooter being released right before the holiday season. There are 3 critical and easy changes to make for multiplayer. 1) Make games turn on kills not points. -Who wants to lose a game of regicide to a guy with less kills than you but who managed to kill the king a few times? This logic makes no sense, why reward the playerwho kills the guy with the giant indicator over his head rather than the player with the most overall kills? In general the point system should not determine the outcome of games, but rather be used into leveling up the meaningless ranks currently in place, much like the *cough* COD system *cough*. The points just make it impossible to determine on the fly what is needed to be done by players to win the game and detracts from the overall competiveness. By the way, what happened to Free-for-all? 2) Ordinace drops are an un-needed feature -Ordinace drops are just a thinly veiled "killstreak reward" system, laughably even ordinance drops are not based on kills but on points. Ordinance drops are just flat out not needed and stand in the way of players using some of the best designed, balanced and thought out weapons in the game. Not to mention making vehicles too dominant in gametypes which feature them. What should be brought back is good ole fashioned weapon spawns on the map, go ahead and put designators and timers on them if that is what it will take to get this feature back into match-making. Weapon spawns on the maps add a whole new level of strategy and teamwork which was erased by ordinance drops. This same concept applies for power ups like speed, power and overshield. So what if players will be able to "camp" weapon spawns, the abuses of the weapon on map system do not overcome its benefits to gameplay. 3) Give players real skill ranks 1-50 -This is probably the most needed feature of multiplayer. The 1-50 rank system, in the actual game, next to your name changes the entire dynamic of the Halo multiplayer experience. When your rank depends of the games you win rather than on the points you get, a remarkable thing happens...teamwork and co-ordination actually awaken from their COD induced slumber and impove gameplay for everyone. Rank XP that goes up when you win and goes down when you lose is such a critical component of the Halo online dynamic it makes me sad to see what the last 2 games have chosen to do with ranks. Once again so what if people will abuse this sytem? The same arguement applies for the American welfare system, just because some people will abuse the system does not mean it should be taken away. Plus grouping players based on ranks is an tried and true way to effectively ensure more balanced and competitive gameplay. As opposed to the prevailing lone wolf "preserve my kill death ratio" mindset that now regins supreme (because as it stands to determine how good someone is, you must look that the kill death ratio of that player rather than a 1-50 skill rank that has weight behind it). In conclusion -Halo has always been and should always be a different animal than COD. COD has perfected the formula of nerfing every player down to relative mediocrity with its features ensuring a very balanced game ideal for players who frankly are not that good at the game itself but can use its balancing features to get kills despite differences in playing skill. Halo on the other hand, originally anyway started players out on an equal playing field letting skill and luck decide the outcomes. There is no place for COD skill nerfing features to be present in a Halo game outside the goal of attempting to cater to a wider base of consumers which is exactly why Reach failed so miserably. The Halo franchise is a living example of "if you build it, they will come". If you give gamers a platform where everyone begins the game at a standardized baseline and let each player set himself apart by their gameplay then that very thing will happen. Not everyone was created equally when it comes to Halo and the franchise should not compensate for that, the weak will die off and move on to easier game will the strong will survive and dominate Halo, while the vast majoirty of people will enjoy a fiercely competive multiplayer experience unlike any other FPS on the market. In conclusion it is the competitve nature of Halo that sets it apart in the market place, players should be able to show their hard earned Halo rank and have that mean something as it did in Halo 2. Ranks and the competition for them were a driving factor behind the quantity and quality of gameplay, a challenging 1-50 ranking system is the ULTIMATE tool for gameplay longevity by presenting the vast majority of people with a never-ending quest for the rank number they want next to their gamertag. The competiveness of the Halo franchise should present players with the unique opportunity in the FPS market to set themselves apart from everyother player online through their own gameplay (wherever that may fall in a 1-50 system), and it should be incumbent on players NOT the game mechanics to adjust for in game balancing. The field of play is here, just change the rules so that players can once again create the Halo multiplayer experience that the franchise has been celebrated for.