Herodanny

I would say they should re-vamp the graphics for the campaign (keep it 2 player) just add CO-OP and also add the option to go back to the original graphics (like in CEA) instantly with just the back button. As for the online. I think they should leave the OLD graphics. Also I think they should leave EVERYTHING EXACTLY THE SAME. Example, Super bounces, button glitches, sword canceling, butterflying, ways to get out of the map, etc.etc. I actually DON'T want a forge mode, Theater would be nice, but I honestly don't care too much for it at all.

Anybody else really like halo 2's story line? I mean the civil war with the heretics, the betrayal of the prophets. Prophet of Truth going mad for power. The new alliance being formed with the arbiter/elites and humans. Gravemind going around actually face-to-face with the two main characters. The explosion of the halo ring. The Epic Tartarus fight at the end. Let's face it.... halo 2 was so amazing, the voice acting was spectacular. When the arbiter at the end of the great journey level before the Tartarus fight finds out what halo was designed to do he says "Tartarus..... the prophet's have betrayed us....." It showed so much character in the Arbiter, true disappointment and realization of the Prophet's plan. I will argue with anybody that halo 2, out of all the other halo's. Had the most plot and was simply the best of all halo's.

Fair enough.

Firstly, I just wanted to say, don't age discriminate around here. Just because you are 14 years older than me, means nothing. My opinions matter just as much as yours do. Secondly, I wanted to talk over XBL not to cuss you out, or get a bunch of people to gang up on you. I simply wanted to be in an environment that doesn't have a bunch of people constantly butting in and are clearly not even reading half of either of our posts and just posting the way they feel towards the matter, without keeping an open mind. I guess if you don't feel comfortable talking over XBL (For whatever reason) then fine. But I think you should reconsider because it would actually be a good debate. Thirdly, I like your idea of a ranking system, I think that maybe if you took what you have said and made a side page (kind of like a service record page that records all of that stuff and possibly turns it into a "true skill" so you are matched up against people similar to you, thus making a K/D mean more). However I believe a # rank that is represented by win/lose would be more plausible because it would mean that you have to work as a team to achieve higher ranks, PLUS it would allow for a more simple and easy way to understand the ranking system (win go up, lose go down) that you could track on 343's website to see how far you are to your next rank. Btw, I like how most people on here were agreeing with me from the start, and now have swayed their views just because someone with more experience on this forum is opposing me. Be a little more open minded viewers. P.S- I didn't start this flame war on my thread, but it ends here, no more calling people "idiots" or randomly jabbing at people, let's keep it civilized. (I am sorry Ms.Mystic)

Why do you continue to talk? No one even takes you seriously.

Nice gamer picture. Don't talk.

You? The kid who is calling people Idiots and going around advocating that halo reach has the best ranking system. Okay, let's talk over XBL party chats. Make my night.

Wow, First off let's not call people idiot's, especially when you, yourself, don't know what you are talking about. A rank means more than your K/D because if you have a high H/D all that means is that you kill more people than you die, (i.e camp, steal kills, etc) Also, if everyone is at ground level with each other (like in reach) then you have people who play the game all the time (inheritors) fighting against a punch of recruits. OBVIOUSLY that means nothing if you can kill more noobs than the next guy. I got you figured out, you are a COD player, and you want halo to continue going down the broken path to be more like COD. Well it isn't going to work, because the reason why so many people like HALO is because it is NOT COD and it actually shows REAL SKILL (excluding halo reach).

Lol, I had to read this a second time to figure out that you were serious. Okay, So what you are saying is that halo 3's "true skill" was better than halo 2's ranking system. Alright, let me address first that you are mistaken when you say that it is all about your win to loss ratio. This is entirely false and I will explain why. There are other factors that come into play. (i.e your team mate's EXP level) I will show you an example. (this really did happen btw) My friend made a new account and my friend's friend had an account with -1000 EXP (or something like that) they played and won 18 games of doubles. My friend's new account was a level 50 in just 3 hours. Now I made a new account and attempted to replicate what my friend did, I went into match making and I played with my friend who was a 50 in team doubles, we won 23 games in a row and I ranked up to level 42. Well, wait, what happened? I won 5 MORE games than my friend, and we both lost NONE, so why didn't I get my 50? Reason being, his friend was -1,000 EXP, my friend was positive 2,500 EXP Like you said, no one respects people with a 50 with only 20 EXP, however this shows that the way the ranking system works, your team mates EXP affects how well YOU level up... How does that make sense? I guess they did it that way so it would reward you for playing with garbage teammates. Well, a ranking system with all of these loop holes and ways to "cheat" (Yes, that is what you are doing when you boost, you are cheating...) is obviously a flawed ranking system. In halo 2, there were NO ways to manipulate the ranking system, you either leveled or didn't, no confusion, no bull, just win go up loose go down. AND You know what? It worked.... Everybody at a high level was GOOD in halo 2, everybody in a high level in halo 3? well.... okay now it's not just there level, let's check there EXP, there bungie.net, etc,etc. It is over complicating the whole thing and it is taking away the meaning of the "50" next to your name.

SO You're suggesting that somebody who just got to level 30 (with a new account) deserves to get to a 31 FASTER than somebody who has been playing halo for a year and has more EXP and was level 30. ALSO It is realistic to have over 3000+ EXP (I am a great example) Have you ever played halo 2? Every single person over level 30 was AMAZING at the game. Halo 3? Well just about everyone under level 45 sucked. Obviously there is a problem with the ranking system

Well obviously it is better than Reach. Pacman was better than reach. EXP worked against your level rank. Nobody respected people with 6000 EXP and a 45. They were considered noobs. (OBVIOUSLY if it was in MLG then THAT is a different story.)

I made a thread about this not too long ago, I think anybody with a brain would have to say that halo 2 had the best and most fair ranking system.

Well, halo did have this ranking system, it was called halo 2. I didn't come up with this, I simply am attempting to explain a system that bungie scrapped (for whatever reasons I don't know!). Halo 3 did not have a good ranking system, It was driven by a very complicated formula that made absolutely no sense. Here's a situation that I had personally that explains how the system was broken. I was playing squad battle with my friend and I was a brigadier (around 3000 EXP) my friend was a brigadier also with around (1400 EXP). I had a level 32 in Squad battle and he had a 19. We played all day together, every...single...game.... and by the end of the night I was a 35 and he was a 44!! If that doesn't COMPLETELY prove that halo 3's system was broken, then IDK what will....

Exactly..... It's funny, you and I sound a lot alike. This is HALO not COD you rank up if you are GOOD that is the point... Idk, all these little kids who have this mentality that the world owes them something. (kind of like old people in a way)

The AR I would like would be the one in halo 2, Since there is no AR in h2 then I guess I would not like an AR at all, since it is nooby

How many people do you think would make their assassination them ******* the other guy? lmao

RTS works fine for the xbox, only problem is xbox gamers are more into run around and shoot people than RTS. I like all types of games, (with the exception of sport games) I will play shooters, RPG, RTS,TBS, adventure, etc, etc... I am clearly the minority though...

By the way, when I say halo 3 "Has" I meant "had" as in back in 2008, halo 3 now only "has" like under 10,000 people (lol)

You're right 150,000 people is not dying, HOWEVER reach only has about 80,000 (on a good day) Not to mention, halo 3 has 330,000 people on even in late 2008 (which is nearly 2 years after release) Halo reach is less than a third of that after 1 year.... unbelievably pathetic....

LOL, Have you ever played Halo reach? Because of that pathetic game, "I" almost left halo forever. However, I saw hope when CEA came out, and halo 4 is my make or break point, I was (and to an extent am still) a die hard halo fan (excluding halo reach). Depending on halo 4, I will either begin having more hope for the series and become more active member like I was previously, OR (if it sucks) I will just end up giving up on halo and buy myself a copy of MW3....

I actually, wouldn't have a problem with this, I kind of like it. It would appeal to both sides, and neither really conflicts with the other. Good idea

Umm, I don't completely agree, however you are heading into the right direction. I feel that some people are GREAT at slaying, so they should have a high Slayer level, However some people are good snipers or objective or doubles, etc. I think that the rank you have in each playlist shows what kind of player you are. (objective, sniper, MLG, slayer, etc.)

Yeah, that is my problem with the reach ranking system. "face it not every body is good at playing halo so those player wouldnt have a chance of ranking up." The whole point of a ranking system is to show which players are better than the others. If I am better than you then I SHOULD be a higher rank, it's that simple. Why should someone who is worse than me have a better rank? They shouldn't, it's as simple as that...

problem with that is even though reach is in the past (from halo 3) It is still like 500 years in the future ( I Know I'm off a little bit but you guys get the point) so the armor SHOULD be glossy and futuristic, not "Modern" like in year 2010 (lol) that's like are marines using medieval armor... (almost)