Force 410

HEY EVERYONE! SUBSCIRBE TO BRAVO'S CHANNEL FOR ALL HALO RELATED INFO AND JUST TO SEE HOW AWESOME HE IS! HE'S GOT A BUNCH OF HALO 4 VIDS AND INFO COMING SOON! LOOK OUT FOR NOV 1ST! http://www.youtube.com/user/BravoMLG?feature=g-user-u

Yeah, but the problem is that you don't have a trackable skill that is visible and constant - not just game to game (and it really isn't even that because the points you get reflect how well you did in the game and they really don't mean anything anyway). Again, we need a ranking system to highlights a player's skill COUPLED with whether they won or lost the game - but nonetheless, highlighting the individual player's skill. Let's hope and pray for an update or patch or something or keep on saying, "There's always the next game... [for the desired ranking system]"

Point taken. But we're saying that we'd like to see it go back (at least to some degree) to the way it was in H2, as it was the most successful of the Halo franchise's multiplayer experiences. And I did read your post previous to replying to the person saying "don't pick on people because of age!" I read all the posts I haven't read before replying to things. And if you read my post, I point out that you did show a great sense of maturity when replying to Sova. First off... whoa whoa whoa! All of a sudden you're coming out that you actually played H2 after all this time on this forum???? A little late don't ya think? So you can't rag on Sova or myself for commenting on you not playing because to our knowledge (from a very credible source speaking on your behalf - oh yes... YOU!) you had never played it. Second, if you're arguing that 343/Bungie "beat the majority [of boosters]" then you're wrong. IMO, you have more people doing that with Reach because they can exploit the system. And if you're not calling that boosting, then yeah, you're right. I don't see boosting that much anymore because there's no incentive to do so in Reach. But as far as "beating the majority" goes, even if they did, that doesn't mean that they are putting out a quality product. That's like saying that because baseball players use/used steroids, we should take away the bats (I know, it's a REALLY bad analogy - sorry, can't think of a good one right now). The game wouldn't be the same; and for people who played Halo multiplayer in its hayday, that's essentially what has/is happened/happening. My best friend always says when looking back at Halo 2 vs Halo 3, ODST and Reach, "They took the crack out of Halo!" And that's what happened. They took out incentive to play by catering to the casual players (which if you need me to I'll go into the endless ways they did so) and made the game less addictive. I understand that they have a business to take care of, but like I've stated many times, I think there are ways that they can do both. I apologize for being interpreted as rude if that is the case. I am not trying to be and am simply attempting to make logical and valid points both counter to and for what people may be saying. I appreciate any input on the matter of the ranking system, and I hope I haven't offended anyone. If so, please let me know and I'll be more careful and thoughtful. Sometimes, I can get very passionate about the topic at hand, and if I'm out of line, please let me know - this goes for anyone! Couldn't say it better myself! Thank you for the input! I think Halo 3 had it right in the sense that you had a social playlist and a ranked playlist. Made sense. I just chose to call it ranked and unranked instead and have the social/unranked playlist include a bunch more than in H3. To me, this just makes sense from a marketing standpoint because you can cater to both types of players - casual and competitive. Yeah, you're going to have trolls and boosters and derankers, etc., because that's just how human beings are (at least nowadays). MAIN POINT: So instead of eliminating aspects of the game that were fun for a lot of people, 343 needs to stop being lazy and deal with them in appropriate ways - keeping track of the people who abuse the system/use illegal means. To me, it comes down to effort, and I think the competitive community has put in quite a deal of effort in letting 343 know how they feel regarding Halo's multiplayer matchmaking; and I think it's time that 343 gave that effort back in the appropriate way (not just by saying, "Hey, look how hard we worked/are working on the next Halo trilogy," but rather by openly addressing the issues brought up by these players/fans of the franchise).

But the problem there is that this does not measure skill - it just "measures" your ability to complete tasks. The reason I say "measures" is because I don't know how they would measure it exactly... would you have to do it in a certain number of games? Before dying x amount of times? etc... It's too helter skelter to really work. I mean, yeah, they could set those parameters for it, but again, that doesn't measure how good you are overall, but rather that you can complete specific tasks. It's a very similar thought process that goes along with the daily/weekly challenges in Reach. I appreciate the thought, but I'm just fairly certain that it's not what the competitive community is looking for. And if you are, that's why you have Halo: Reach - do go complete some challenges to earn credits that signify nothing. This latter part about how people will be matched up sounds very similar to H3. Good idea, but it's been done and stated it seems. Please define it a little more maybe. And your point about rank vs skill is just semantics. I stated that concept in my original post. I do appreciate the input and hopefully you can explain in a bit more detail

ARE YOU SERIOUS RIGHT NOW? Okay, here's the point that somehow you're missing.... It's not about his age but about what it reflects. It shows that he doesn't have the same experience as us regarding Halo 2 and maybe even 3, but definitely 2. He can't validate his arguments because of that; or if he wants to validate his arguments, then he needs to sacrifice a little bit by stating that he can't make judgments when comparing to or speaking about Halo 2 because he has not played in in multiplayer matchmaking. And if he is as mature as you say (because God knows that I don't actually know the kid IRL and can't make that call either way - that is whether he's really mature for his age or not), then he should be able to realize this on his own after it's been brought to his attention... oh wait! It has! And personally, yes, I think he was quite mature about it in submitting to Sova's argument regarding his experience because of his age. So don't come on here and say that we're attacking a kid about his age... because it's about the experience and using that experience (or trying to with the lack-there-of) to support your arguments. And I agree, anyone who attacks a person's opinion SOLELY based on age is in the wrong. Trust me, I've known plenty of people who were mature for their age. Lmao. Trust me. As mature as you think you are as a teenager, you're actually not. Take it from someone who has been there, done that. I'm 23 now. I'm not saying that I or anyone else hits an age and becomes fully mature, but I'm CERTAINLY more mature than I was then. And like I said before, JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE MATURE DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN SPEAK TO SOMETHING YOU NEVER EXPERIENCED! (A.K.A. HALO 2 MULTIPLAYER). You can't just assume, because we all know what that means. And I hate to pick on you here, but you're making points that have no foundation.

Ember, what do you not understand about utilizing this ranking system for future games? Do you not know there will be sequels? Because I clearly stated multiple times that it can be used in future games (pending this one's ranking system is another, yet slightly better, flop - which is what most people are anticipating). Only casuals or really dumb people (usually they go hand in hand) would think that they could implement this in Halo 4. And if I stated it should be done in Halo 4, that's because it SHOULD be. That doesn't mean I'm saying that it is possible at this point. And learn to spell....

I respectfully disagree and here's why: just because he has data doesn't mean the community agrees and especially the Halo fans who remember how fun it was in Halo 2 because of the ranking system; and those are the fans that should be rewarded, not casuals and players that are new to the game. I'm not saying the newer players should be punished by any means, but 343i should be fan/player loyal, ya know? I'm normally a stickler when it comes to having backup data, but I have to disagree here. And to Sova's point, you're not going to ever really eliminate boosting because people will always find ways and it's within their rights as long as they do it legally. Yes, you can try and minimize it, but at what cost? Ruling out something that kept your player count so high is not a good strategy for sales and repeat play. Let's put it this way, 343i (Frankie and company) said in their latest sparkcast that the majority of Halo players play for campaign. If that's the case, then I can see why they cater more to the story building and such. But it's plain rude to ignore the large part of the community screaming for a ranking system that brings true competition back to Halo and keeps it going throughout the game's life until the sequel! If you want numbers, look at the players online between Halo 2, 3 and Reach... guess which game wins.... SOVA FTW!!!! Holy hell man! I need your gt like right now so we can play together. Your opinions are pretty much the exact same as mine, lol. I agree with the muting thing. Microsoft needs to focus on real issues and not ones that end up making their playing experience worse (if only they had the hindsight, haha). Take clans for example. Clans, to my knowledge so correct me if I'm wrong, were eliminated from H2 because Microsoft announced they were going to implement a clan system that would be cross-games. This never happened and Bungie and 343 has NEVER addressed it since... Dude, that's because 1. You're 13. Sadly, that's what happens to kids on XBL - I'm sometimes guilty myself, not that that makes it right. 2. That's what LIVE always was and has further become BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION and the BARRIERS PUT UP BY MICROSOFT. Let's put it this way, one of my friends works at Best Buy, and when parents buy a game for their child that is not M rated but can be played online, he says to them, "As soon as you go on XBL, the rating goes up to M." Either parents shouldn't be letting their kids on XBL cuz of this, or they should accept it and let them. Point is, Microsoft trying to alleviate the problem is only worsening it by not allowing people to make friends on games like Halo because of such barriers. In my exprience before all this - more like the way XBL was on Halo 2, I made plenty of friends quite often and generally when you have ppl on your side going into a new game and others talk trash to you, your buddies jump in and support you and your team. These barriers have taken the team element out of the game and it's sad. I'm not saying fight trash with trash, but generally, if someone's trying to talk trash, they're going to back down with more people to oppose and less ppl supporting them. This is already in place for Halo 4 supposedly, but it's not defined. And read my original post as to why that doesn't necessarily help things. One last thing for tonight: I love it how at every panel so far and every interview it would seem at least in the closing months leading up to the release (over the last 3-4 months that is) there has not been one question directed at 343 in a panel or an interview asking about the multiplayer matchmaking ranking system and how it will be implemented. Yet I saw two voice actor questions in subsequent panels (one of which bs angel said beforehand, "alright, last question... better be a good one!"

I agree with you that H2's ranking system was better I literally agree with every word!

So as far as stats reflecting playing as a team goes, I think, as I said in my post, it's important to incorporate it, but don't make it what the entirely what the rank takes into consideration. I have played objective games on Reach where teams just tool on our team to pad their kdr, regardless of the win and carrying out the objective. I think for objective games, there should be a greater emphasis on completing the objective to affect your rank, and a slightly diminished one on kdr. They could integrate this into gametypes I feel pretty easily. That way, objective based players (like myself to be quite honest! - ask any of my long time xbl friends) get rewarded for playing the game the way it's meant to be in those gametypes. I appreciate the input though because I didn't make it clear enough in my mini-essay there, And just to make it clear and not sound so complicated: In summary I believe the ranking system should incorporate KDR and the gametype being played, and thus, reflect the contributions made to that gametype. I'm not going to breakdown percentages or numbers here because that's something I'd want to leave to the discretion of 343i; I just believe the basis for these ranks can appease the entire community in a satisfying way quite simply and without much compication - at least in concept.

DUDE! Thank you! I appreciate the reply and feedback! I hear ya man! And especially that people who haven't played 2 & 3 don't get it. Especially 2 IMO. I feel like H2 multiplayer revolutionized FPS multiplayer and most of my fondest Halo memories come from it. Just to address objective gametypes real quick and to prevent kdr padding in these (and cuz I didn't make it clear in my mini-essay there) here's what I think: "So as far as stats reflecting playing as a team goes, I think, as I said in my post, it's important to incorporate it, but don't make it what the entirely of the rank takes into consideration and reflects though. I have played objective games on Reach where teams just tool on our team to pad their kdr, regardless of the win and carrying out the objective. I think for objective games, there should be a greater emphasis on completing the objective to affect your rank, and a slightly diminished one on kdr. They could integrate this into gametypes I feel pretty easily. That way, objective based players (like myself to be quite honest! - ask any of my long time xbl friends) get rewarded for playing the game the way it's meant to be in those gametypes. I appreciate the input though because I didn't make it clear enough in my mini-essay there, " <----- This was taken from another post I replied on; I was to lazy to edit it, haha - sorry. And just to make it clear and not sound so complicated: In summary I believe the ranking system should incorporate KDR and the gametype being played, and thus, reflect the contributions made to that gametype. I'm not going to breakdown percentages or numbers here because that's something I'd want to leave to the discretion of 343i; I just believe the basis for these ranks can appease the entire community in a satisfying way quite simply and without much compication - at least in concept.

I appreciate the input! Yeah, I know that there will be no chance of this in Halo 4 if its not already in it. Just throwing it out there for teh community and hopefully for future Halo games! I hear ya for sure, but I think it's relevant until they do something to address this large portion of the community - that is implementing SOMETHING that appeases to them (myself included) in the same or a very similar way. Also, I'd like to find out where I could suggest this. I'd obviously revise it and make it more concise... let me know if you'd like, otherwise I'll certainly search around when I have the time!

Halo 4 definitely needs a ranking system that's based on skill rather than experience like reach. Reach was a joke to just about everyone, and this is one of the MAIN reasons why (of course unbalanced AAs, etc.). My point is, unlike reach, H4 or subsequent games need a ranking system that people care about. You can argue, "it's just a number" but then why would so many people care about it? I mean ultimately, you can always say, "it's just a game" or "it's just entertainment." Just like most forms of entertainment, the purpose of it is to be ENTERTAINING, not practical. Now that that moot point (or at least what should be one) is out of the way, the ranking system with a number there is important to indicate your skill level and match you up with others of that skill level - the number allowing you to see each person's rank without necessarily having to go through each of their KDRs. Frank O'Connor states that this can increase boosting. Personally, I never had a MAJOR problem with people boosting in H2, and very little in H3. Granted, I never exceeeded level 40 because my Internet connection was so bad (but I did have a 40!). Regardless, the ranking system gave something for players to PLAY FOR! ...To reach the highest rank and say, "hey look, I did very well at something I enjoy a heckuva lot!" (but not so much in those words, more like "F*** YEAH!"). Anyway, my point is, Reach didn't give the incentive, because experience does not equal skill, and people want to be rewarded for their skill. Reach rewarded players for boosting more so IMO because you could just put the controller down and come back a little later, and hey look! YOU'VE GOT CREDITS! That burst my bubble more than anything else. And what did Bungie do as one of their last acts - HEY! Let's ban/reset those who are doing it in FIREFIGHT! A playlst that doesn't ACTUALLY effect anyone else as far as PVP matchmaking goes.... And TO THIS DAY I still play with people who do it on my team in PVP matchmaking, or constantly betray, or constantly suicide, or just leave the game. So if I'm not with a full team, I am having a poor experience. And let's face it, if 343i cared about this at all, you wouldn't see it nearly as much (which is almost EVERY game for me - no exaggeration). People don't care and can clearly get away with doing this. So Frank O'Connor, I'm respectfully calling you out for flipping your lid on a ranking system and boosting, because if this (Reach) isn't a form of boosting then I don't know what is... unlesss... Unless that is that you actually recognize that Reach doesn't involve ranking players by skill at all, let alone matching them up! Then my friend, then it would not be boosting but rather taking advantage of the system for credits that ultimately represent nothing! I would really love to hear how Reach has any competitive aspect and how it promotes this competition. That is where Reach's philosophy on matchmaking falls drastically short - that credits to buy stupid stuff matters to competitive PVP Halo players. We want a ranking system back - one that keeps track of your skills and not one that rewards you for simply playing the game. Nowhere is it blatantly stated thus far for Halo 4 that the ranked system will be based on player skill whatsoever. Frank O'Connor pitched around the question by stating that players wlll be able to track their own skill and will be matched up according to their individual skill - claims also made for Reach before its release. So I want to hear it from the mouth of Frankie O'Connor himself, as blatantly as possible, stating what the actual multiplayer matchmaking will be like in H4 with regards to a ranking system and player skill. Because what I am looking for, and what almost all competitive Halo players are looking for, is a ranked system back again that measures your skill while allowing others to see your rank/level in order to determine who they're up against. As far as how the ranking system would work, it would be nice to incorporate teamwork and winning games into it, but I think first and foremost individual skill needs to be a major part. Because silly things can happen such as teammates leaving games, betraying... oh wait, this list is getting similar to my last one. With that rank/level number there to worry about, and seeing that people certainly cared about it in H2-3, people would not be so keen on deranking by committing those acts (acts that should have an automatic level drop IMO if you leave a game intentionally, and have a level drop after 3 intentional suicides/betrayals per game - or something to that harsh nature). And hey, if Bungie can monitor people for not playing in firefight, I don't see why things like these can't be monitored too! To me this is simple to implement as well to please both competitive players and casuals. Just have a ranked playlist and an unranked playlist that everything falls under (i.e. team slayer, team skirmish, team snipers, etc...). The ranked would have only competitive playlists and be very balanced as far as armor abilities, equipment and such (maybe none of it even), whereas the other would have everything in it (as appropriated by 343i per gametype) and could be where 343i determines what could work in competitive ranked play (sort of like testing different things out to see what's balanced enough for ranked play). Both playlists could have, for example, Team Slayer (with ranked being more balanced for competitive play), but only the unranked would have things like Action Sack. So I don't think that's too hard or too much to ask for. So lastly (and I apologize for the long post but I miss ranks too much and am very passionate with this topic and Halo), I am calling for Frank O'Connor to announce or respond to me with what things wlll be like for H4 mulitplayer matchmaking regarding ranks and their basis (skill based vs experience based) in the most blatant manner possible without spoiling everything. For exmaple, just saying how the system works would suffice - like how it determines rank and sorts out players to play with each other. I would like to hear thoughts back, especially from 343i regarding my ideas for playlists and how the ranking system should be. To me it's simple and flexible enough for 343i to do a lot with it! And Frank O'Connor, I respect you as a Halo fan and appreciate the hard work and dedication to the Halo community, I just can't agree with you on a ranking system. Please don't take this as a personal attack, because I'm sure you're a great guy and all, but I'm just very passionate about this topic. So please, I implore you to make these details known and interact with the community here that is screaming for a ranking system that reminds us of the fun we had in H2 and H3....oh and by the way, while you're at it.......... CLANS ~ Force 410

Halo 4 definitely needs a ranking system that's based on skill rather than experience like reach. Reach was a joke to just about everyone, and this is one of the MAIN reasons why (of course unbalanced AAs, etc.). My point is, unlike reach, H4 or subsequent games need a ranking system that people care about. You can argue, "it's just a number" but then why would so many people care about it? I mean ultimately, you can always say, "it's just a game" or "it's just entertainment." Just like most forms of entertainment, the purpose of it is to be ENTERTAINING, not practical. Now that that moot point (or at least what should be one) is out of the way, the ranking system with a number there is important to indicate your skill level and match you up with others of that skill level - the number allowing you to see each person's rank without necessarily having to go through each of their KDRs. Frank O'Connor states that this can increase boosting. Personally, I never had a MAJOR problem with people boosting in H2, and very little in H3. Granted, I never exceeeded level 40 because my Internet connection was so bad (but I did have a 40!). Regardless, the ranking system gave something for players to PLAY FOR! ...To reach the highest rank and say, "hey look, I did very well at something I enjoy a heckuva lot!" (but not so much in those words, more like "F*** YEAH!"). Anyway, my point is, Reach didn't give the incentive, because experience does not equal skill, and people want to be rewarded for their skill. Reach rewarded players for boosting more so IMO because you could just put the controller down and come back a little later, and hey look! YOU'VE GOT CREDITS! That burst my bubble more than anything else. And what did Bungie do as one of their last acts - HEY! Let's ban/reset those who are doing it in FIREFIGHT! A playlst that doesn't ACTUALLY effect anyone else as far as PVP matchmaking goes.... And TO THIS DAY I still play with people who do it on my team in PVP matchmaking, or constantly betray, or constantly suicide, or just leave the game. So if I'm not with a full team, I am having a poor experience. And let's face it, if 343i cared about this at all, you wouldn't see it nearly as much (which is almost EVERY game for me - no exaggeration). People don't care and can clearly get away with doing this. So Frank O'Connor, I'm respectfully calling you out for flipping your lid on a ranking system and boosting, because if this (Reach) isn't a form of boosting then I don't know what is... unlesss... Unless that is that you actually recognize that Reach doesn't involve ranking players by skill at all, let alone matching them up! Then my friend, then it would not be boosting but rather taking advantage of the system for credits that ultimately represent nothing! I would really love to hear how Reach has any competitive aspect and how it promotes this competition. That is where Reach's philosophy on matchmaking falls drastically short - that credits to buy stupid stuff matters to competitive PVP Halo players. We want a ranking system back - one that keeps track of your skills and not one that rewards you for simply playing the game. Nowhere is it blatantly stated thus far for Halo 4 that the ranked system will be based on player skill whatsoever. Frank O'Connor pitched around the question by stating that players wlll be able to track their own skill and will be matched up according to their individual skill - claims also made for Reach before its release. So I want to hear it from the mouth of Frankie O'Connor himself, as blatantly as possible, stating what the actual multiplayer matchmaking will be like in H4 with regards to a ranking system and player skill. Because what I am looking for, and what almost all competitive Halo players are looking for, is a ranked system back again that measures your skill while allowing others to see your rank/level in order to determine who they're up against. As far as how the ranking system would work, it would be nice to incorporate teamwork and winning games into it, but I think first and foremost individual skill needs to be a major part. Because silly things can happen such as teammates leaving games, betraying... oh wait, this list is getting similar to my last one. With that rank/level number there to worry about, and seeing that people certainly cared about it in H2-3, people would not be so keen on deranking by committing those acts (acts that should have an automatic level drop IMO if you leave a game intentionally, and have a level drop after 3 intentional suicides/betrayals per game - or something to that harsh nature). And hey, if Bungie can monitor people for not playing in firefight, I don't see why things like these can't be monitored too! To me this is simple to implement as well to please both competitive players and casuals. Just have a ranked playlist and an unranked playlist that everything falls under (i.e. team slayer, team skirmish, team snipers, etc...). The ranked would have only competitive playlists and be very balanced as far as armor abilities, equipment and such (maybe none of it even), whereas the other would have everything in it (as appropriated by 343i per gametype) and could be where 343i determines what could work in competitive ranked play (sort of like testing different things out to see what's balanced enough for ranked play). Both playlists could have, for example, Team Slayer (with ranked being more balanced for competitive play), but only the unranked would have things like Action Sack. So I don't think that's too hard or too much to ask for. So lastly (and I apologize for the long post but I miss ranks too much and am very passionate with this topic and Halo), I am calling for Frank O'Connor to announce or respond to me with what things wlll be like for H4 mulitplayer matchmaking regarding ranks and their basis (skill based vs experience based) in the most blatant manner possible without spoiling everything. For exmaple, just saying how the system works would suffice - like how it determines rank and sorts out players to play with each other. I would like to hear thoughts back, especially from 343i regarding my ideas for playlists and how the ranking system should be. To me it's simple and flexible enough for 343i to do a lot with it! And Frank O'Connor, I respect you as a Halo fan and appreciate the hard work and dedication to the Halo community, I just can't agree with you on a ranking system. Please don't take this as a personal attack, because I'm sure you're a great guy and all, but I'm just very passionate about this topic. So please, I implore you to make these details known and interact with the community here that is screaming for a ranking system that reminds us of the fun we had in H2 and H3....oh and by the way, while you're at it.......... CLANS ~ Force 410