What The Halo Community Needs in a Ranking System - Please let me know what you think!

[The Director]

You also left out the part where I said boosting wasn't against the terms & conditions. Nothing states that I can't go and make a new account to level up faster. I have every right to do that.

 

And yet, I would love to see this data that you are so happy to mention. Mentioning data without a link is another way of saying, "they said this and that so it must be true and therefore gives me the right to flame people on their observations."

Actually, boosting is against the terms and conditions the way it was done in Halo 3. That's why most of my booster accounts were banned, and why I recieved a console ban. I believe it's "using known or unknown in-game exploits to influence the results of a game." In this case, the results being the amount of "skill level" earned at the end of the match.

 

Btw, for those of you still saying that there was hardly any boosting/deranking on H3, let me share this with you. AAN2 is my newest account, and it was entirely funded off of 3 months paid to me by those who wanted me to boost them up to 50's. That's roughly 3 years worth of XBL, paid in 3 month increments. Also, I made enough MSP to purchase all of the Halo 3 DLC, all of the Dragon Age DLC, all of the Mass Effect DLC (for 1 and 2, not for 3), and quite a few indie games. And that isn't even considered successful.

 

Mind you, this was all around 3 years ago. I've matured a bit since then. But the fact remains that it was more prevalent than you guys think. And Frankie's data is probably inaccurate, but on the underestimating side, not overestimating. Whenever you see a general that is playing a game of ranked Slayer that's TS is around a 10 or so, and he goes 20-5 or something like that, he deranked. Whenever you see a guy who just doesn't seem to have a grasp on the game, and has over 1000 losses, that's a booster account. Whenever you see dudes betraying each other and not booting, those are derankers.

 

Right now, not very many people even still play H3, so there definitely aren't as many as in it's hayday. But there's probably a couple still hanging around.

[Sova]

Actually, boosting is against the terms and conditions the way it was done in Halo 3. That's why most of my booster accounts were banned, and why I recieved a console ban. I believe it's "using known or unknown in-game exploits to influence the results of a game." In this case, the results being the amount of "skill level" earned at the end of the match.

 

Btw, for those of you still saying that there was hardly any boosting/deranking on H3, let me share this with you. AAN2 is my newest account, and it was entirely funded off of 3 months paid to me by those who wanted me to boost them up to 50's. That's roughly 3 years worth of XBL, paid in 3 month increments. Also, I made enough MSP to purchase all of the Halo 3 DLC, all of the Dragon Age DLC, all of the Mass Effect DLC (for 1 and 2, not for 3), and quite a few indie games. And that isn't even considered successful.

 

The argument being made in this topic is that we need a ranking system based on skill...whether it be Reach, Halo 3, or Halo 2, or something new (starcraft 2's MMR anyone?), there absolutely needs to be one; otherwise, you lose competitive players and there goes the point of creating a multiplayer. Excuses that entail deranking/boosting and the such should not be the first concern to creating a good ranking system. First and foremost you need to make sure you preserve what Halo 2 set out on and that's making every game matter.

 

Mind you, this was all around 3 years ago. I've matured a bit since then. But the fact remains that it was more prevalent than you guys think. And Frankie's data is probably inaccurate, but on the underestimating side, not overestimating. Whenever you see a general that is playing a game of ranked Slayer that's TS is around a 10 or so, and he goes 20-5 or something like that, he deranked. Whenever you see a guy who just doesn't seem to have a grasp on the game, and has over 1000 losses, that's a booster account. Whenever you see dudes betraying each other and not booting, those are derankers.

 

Right now, not very many people even still play H3, so there definitely aren't as many as in it's hayday. But there's probably a couple still hanging around.

 

Okay it really depends on the type of boosting you are talking about. Achievement boosting is not against the rules. Exp boosting IS but that can easily be solved by refining the matchmaking settings so that its near impossible to find friends on the opposite team. Also, double exp should never have been put in place to make exp boosting more popular. And thirdly, my response to Trueskill boosting is to get rid of Trueskill entirely. You'll solve the Trueskill boosting by reverting back to the Halo 2 matchmaking system. But making a new account to level up...is not against the rules. If i spend the money to buy a one month then i should be able to level that up as much as i want. If Frankie is that upset about new accounts then talk to microsoft about limiting xboxs to a certain amount of accounts. Like you can only keep a maximum of 3-5 accounts at one time and if you want to make more then you have to delete one forever. There's a lot that can be done if you simply reform the way xbox live is given to the players.

 

I've laid out my solutions to deranking. And your own experience with boosting is also exploiting the blackmarket demand for it. Like I said before, microsoft needs to make significant strides to curb it. But I also reaffirm that you DON'T punish the majority of players who DON'T partake in this. That's not a smart business move. Removing a skill based ranking system isn't the solution because it will just motivate people to exp boost. Using a system like Reach doesn't work because it doesn't create competition. And H3's system won't work because of the susceptibility to deranking/boosting.

 

What I have been saying all this time is that 343i should just build off of Halo 2. Bungie did this with Halo 3 but opted for the TrueSkill formula which you have already shown has major flaws. But you don't go the way of Call of Duty and totally scratch out skill-based ranking system because then what's the point in playing?

 

And you'll be surprised to find that there are still thousands who play Halo 3 up to now. I know this because I also have been playing Halo 3 until about July of this year. Yes I came across boosters and derankers but not to the point that it ruins my experience. Halo 2 we ran into derankers all of the time but we all dealt with it. Point is,

[fpstactic]

it seems like the only problem to halo ranking systems is deranking, and deranking only works if one player in your party has a weak looking record... it seems like an easy fix, remove the influence of the weaker players account if that player is in a party, assume all players in a party are as good as the best player in the party. done.

 

"selling accounts", how is that a problem? it might make players constantly farm noobs when buying a new account, but as someone who was a noob once, I never noticed.

it gives people an income? so. what are the producers of the game, the mafia? they gotta have a piece of any action on their block?

 

@the director, was boosting really that profitable? I would get so pissed at boosters saying "get over it, halo 3 is so old now, and you still boost, ride a bike dude".. but now i hear of some potentialy lucrative profits in it I'm taken back,

what kind of consumer base is there? what kind of charge were you giving people? was there a competitive market?

could you boost me in mlg? theres next to none players in mlg now, except at the highest levels, how much we looking at?

when boosting players you still had to win the game, what type of pregame lesson did you give players so they wouldn't lose the game?

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

This is sad.

 

The bottom line is, would you rather have a crappy Halo with a TS system, or a great Halo worthy of song that has a Halo 4 system? (Note, Halo 4's system is not exactly like Reach's, it is a bit different.)

[Sova]

I much rather have a Halo 2 remake than what they are trying to do.

[Zuko 'Zarhamee]

I much rather have a Halo 2 remake than what they are trying to do.

Perhaps you would. But I am certain that most people want Halo 4, not Halo 2.

[killerdude1635]

A TrueSkill system would get boring IMO, always facing the same people(practically) never any actual challenge since they're all equally skilled. The thing i loved about reach was the fact that every game i got into was going to be different everytime, sometimes your faced with noobs, sometimes with pros.

 

[Sova]

A TrueSkill system would get boring IMO, always facing the same people(practically) never any actual challenge since they're all equally skilled. The thing i loved about reach was the fact that every game i got into was going to be different everytime, sometimes your faced with noobs, sometimes with pros.

 

But then you aren't gaining anything from playing noobs, just self-confidence. I always prefer to have a challenge over destroying straight noobs every other game. But that's how I see it. Trueskill is a stupid system which is why I think Halo 2 system had it best.

 

Perhaps you would. But I am certain that most people want Halo 4, not Halo 2.

 

I'm pretty sure most people who played Halo 2 would much rather play Halo 2 multiplayer than a revamped halo 4 multiplayer that gets a lot of influence from Reach. Maybe most people who played halo 2 have moved on because of how crappy halo 3 and reach were. But whatever. I'll buying Halo 4 for the campaign.

[Force 410]

You were very, very lucky then. In the first week I got H3 I encountered boosters and derankers. I encountered them in such abundance that it put me off of H3 for a while. Then my friend informed me of how much MSP he had made off of deranking and boosting other players, and so I created a couple of other accounts and joined him in it.

 

And my friend and I weren't the only ones who did this as well, and we by far weren't the most successful. Every other couple of games that we were deranking we would run into other derankers and have what was called "Deranker wars", where we could see who could go the most negative to gain the loss. We even had a couple different deranking/boosting clans with 30+ members ask us to join. There was even a pretty well known "derankers code".

 

Point is, quite a few people profited off of Halo 3's broken ranking system, which turned it into a joke. Halo 2's ranking system had it's problems as well, but it was by far better than H3's.

 

I agree with you that H2's ranking system was better

 

You know, from my own experiences in H3, the deranking/boosting/cheating wasn't nearly as bad as Frank says it was. I've played halo 3 since its release up to now. Yes you experience derankers every once in awhile but it wasn't EVERY other game that frank gives the impression of. Boosting? Well that's something that people need to get over. Think about it this way. If I wanted to go and make a new account with a new name every month I have my right to make a new account so long as I spend the money. What says in the terms and conditions that I cannot do this and level that account up?

 

The way it's coming across to me is that Frank is just too bad of a player to deal with boosters. Yeah it's annoying sometimes to play someone who isn't a legit 50 because he got "boosted" up with his friends, but if he isn't supposed to be that level he'll get creamed. The other side of that is that the person who is a 50 who wants level up a new account should have every right to do that.

 

The main instigator for boosting in my opinion was adding in experience from the start! The main reason people made new accounts to level them up was because they wanted to have a better win/loss ratio which was visible to everyone else. Makes you look cool because eveyrone will say, OH YOU ONLY HAVE 1 LOSS ON THAT ACCOUNt yOU MUST BE REALLY GOOD (i never cared about that). People wanted to have the best record for a 50. Easiest way to do that was to level up as fast as you could on a new account. Should never made win/loss visible.

 

Another problem with H3 was that it made it easier to level up to a new level than h2. I remember in H2 it took forever to get to the next level because if you lost one game it would bring you down 2-3 wins. Something like that I believe. It wasn't based on Trueskill. Once Microsoft implemented Trueskill everything went down the tube. Boosters as Frank complains started popping up. Especially with the new MSP which gave easier monetary incentive than using ebay or some crap like that.

 

Point is. H2 was by far the best system and although it had its problems (network manipulation, deranking, modding) it wasn't nearly as bad as H3 and Halo Reach. The other thing is that Frank is going about this the wrong way. He's putting personal experience and opinion into the mix without really listening to the devout community that's played the game since H2. Instead he's listening to the people who've only played H3 and Reach. People who don't know what a true game is. My prediction is that Halo 4 won't have anything like H2 or H3 OR reach. It'll probably just be the boring zombie leveling that has taken hold of every game out there... I crave for something fresh and new. Not something that's following mainstream gaming...

 

I literally agree with every word!

[Shokyr]

I liked Halo 3s system where it was based off EXP AND an actual rank - but I want a ranking system where no numbers are present. Only YOU can see the numbers. Something that would put you with people of the same or near skill level, but no visible level to anybody but yourself. This would help the player have an all-around better experience while also almost completely elimanting any account trafficking.

[Force 410]

Frank O'Connor has data to back up what he says. You have nothing. And to say that he was "too bad of a player to deal with boosters" is just a way of dismissing his opinion, because you can't argue with it. He has data. You don't.

 

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....

 

I called you a troll because this is the second post about rankings you've come into and particularly rip me on my observations without giving a cohesive argument.

 

And I just realized you are 13 years old, why am I arguing with a 13yo kid who's never played halo 2 is beyond me. Which reminds me, you never answered that question i posted the other ranking post about if you played halo 2. Which you clearly didn't because of your age. So thereby, you have no right to argue about a ranking system that I am arguing for if you have never played it. We, the competitive community, like to debate these things because we want what we've been missing for a long time and that's a good reliable ranking system.

 

SOVA FTW!!!!

 

There's a reason they call it a black market. Its underground and tough to crack down on. Its like any black market industry. You aren't ever going to eliminate it, but what you can do is take the steps necessary to go after those who are selling accounts. You sign up for terms & conditions that prohibit selling any account . What I have not seen is Microsoft actually taking significant legal action to stop this. Until they do there will be boosters who sell accounts.

 

What you don't do, however, is punish the majority of players by taking out a skill-based ranking system because of the actions of a few. That's a downright stupid commercial move on their part. Bungie saw that with Reach and its profitability. More and more people don't buy the games because of the actions bungie took to stop boosting and what not. Take for example the auto-mute. How ridiculous is that tool when most people got muted for all the wrong reasons. We play XBL to meet new people and enjoy playing with them or against them. When you put in a system that punishes people wrongly you destroy that experience.

 

Yes, I got mute banned for simply talking to my teammates and its the most frustrating thing to deal with because people won't unmute because they don't care or they think you are muted for the wrong reason..It destroyed the online experience for me and I can't help but to think it did that for many others as well.

 

The same holds true with boosting/deranking/selling accounts.

 

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...

 

I can't really argue with you about the black market stuff because my knowledge of that stuff doesn't cover much. But on the thing about the automute and playing on Xbox Live to meet new people and enjoy playing with them... Have you ever talking to that many people on Xbox Live? I have had very little interactions with people on XBL and most of them fall under the category of them cussing me out because I'm beating.

 

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.

 

I liked Halo 3s system where it was based off EXP AND an actual rank - but I want a ranking system where no numbers are present. Only YOU can see the numbers. Something that would put you with people of the same or near skill level, but no visible level to anybody but yourself. This would help the player have an all-around better experience while also almost completely elimanting any account trafficking.

 

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!"

[Sova]

In the latest interview with Frankie I saw that he said he was going to release more information about a skill-based ranking system once we get closer to the launch date. Hopefully our questions will be answer, but you never know with microsoft.

[upton889]

In the latest interview with Frankie I saw that he said he was going to release more information about a skill-based ranking system once we get closer to the launch date. Hopefully our questions will be answer, but you never know with microsoft.

 

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

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

No one has budged their opinions even a little bit. This argument is going nowhere fast. Perhaps when they actually decide to tell us what the system is...they have been dragging this out too long.

 

And I see how everyone has been arguing mostly with a respectful attitude, but I am appalled at the account of age in this debate. Do you really think being 13 matters? Does it make a difference if you are older? No. The answer is no. Zuko is a well respected member of these forums and I would never have guessed his age until it was mentioned here. Know why? I never checked Zuko's age because I saw how complex and sophisticated he was. I never needed to childishly bring age into a debate because it made no difference. Zuko is just as smart and sophisticated as I am. I am just disgusted you all think otherwise based on age. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[Sova]

No one has budged their opinions even a little bit. This argument is going nowhere fast. Perhaps when they actually decide to tell us what the system is...they have been dragging this out too long.

 

And I see how everyone has been arguing mostly with a respectful attitude, but I am appalled at the account of age in this debate. Do you really think being 13 matters? Does it make a difference if you are older? No. The answer is no. Zuko is a well respected member of these forums and I would never have guessed his age until it was mentioned here. Know why? I never checked Zuko's age because I saw how complex and sophisticated he was. I never needed to childishly bring age into a debate because it made no difference. Zuko is just as smart and sophisticated as I am. I am just disgusted you all think otherwise based on age. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

 

Errr, I will have to disagree with you there. Age does matter when it comes to intellectual arguments because with age comes a certain wisdom. Cliche? Maybe, but I rather debate with someone who is the same age or at least very close to the same age as me as opposed to someone who hasn't even finished middle school. Why? Because they have about the same intellect as me.

 

Sure I give the kid credit. He comes across as a smart 13 year old kid. But let me also make this aware to you...that does not warrant that he has the right to argue about someone he wasn't old enough to experience (halo 2 ranking system). My posts were about deranking/boosting and ranking system regards to halo 2 and 3. I was around for all of that whereas others weren't.

 

Let me also point out that 13 is below the legal age of purchasing this game. By all means, he shouldn't be playing a game that requires a certain maturity level. No, im not saying age translates to maturity, but most 13 yo kids aren't mature enough to be on xbox live playing games that are rated M. I'm not saying that he shouldn't be playing, just pointing out that age does matter.

 

But who am I kidding?

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

Age equals not maturity, yes. Which means Zuko is mature enough for Halo. If he can debate in an intellectual manner, he can play the game. Besides, I am WAY above the intellect level for my age. Zuko is about par with me. I think he can debate this as well as anyone else here. You know most kids that are 18-25 are actually below the intellect level for their age? Shocking.

 

I played Halo:CE when it first came out at age 6. I am now 16. I never played Halo 2 online, but I played Halo 3 online. Zuko likely did too. This means he can accurately debate on deranking and boosting. Halo 2's system was before our Xbox LIVE times, but deranking and boosting are and were prevalent no matter if I played and saw it or not. I know that it happened a helluva lot, and that's enough. I didn't have to play to learn of this.

 

His parents/guardians would likely notice if the game was killing his personality. The ESRB/PEGI ratings are an insult to intelligent teens everywhere. Being able to buy a game and being able to play are entirely different.

[Force 410]

No one has budged their opinions even a little bit. This argument is going nowhere fast. Perhaps when they actually decide to tell us what the system is...they have been dragging this out too long.

 

And I see how everyone has been arguing mostly with a respectful attitude, but I am appalled at the account of age in this debate. Do you really think being 13 matters? Does it make a difference if you are older? No. The answer is no. Zuko is a well respected member of these forums and I would never have guessed his age until it was mentioned here. Know why? I never checked Zuko's age because I saw how complex and sophisticated he was. I never needed to childishly bring age into a debate because it made no difference. Zuko is just as smart and sophisticated as I am. I am just disgusted you all think otherwise based on age. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

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.

 

Age equals not maturity, yes. Which means Zuko is mature enough for Halo. If he can debate in an intellectual manner, he can play the game. Besides, I am WAY above the intellect level for my age. Zuko is about par with me. I think he can debate this as well as anyone else here. You know most kids that are 18-25 are actually below the intellect level for their age? Shocking.

 

I played Halo:CE when it first came out at age 6. I am now 16. I never played Halo 2 online, but I played Halo 3 online. Zuko likely did too. This means he can accurately debate on deranking and boosting. Halo 2's system was before our Xbox LIVE times, but deranking and boosting are and were prevalent no matter if I played and saw it or not. I know that it happened a helluva lot, and that's enough. I didn't have to play to learn of this.

 

His parents/guardians would likely notice if the game was killing his personality. The ESRB/PEGI ratings are an insult to intelligent teens everywhere. Being able to buy a game and being able to play are entirely different.

 

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.

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

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.

You must have missed my previous statement.

 

Anyway, Zuko and I both weren't there to see it, but I know good and damn well how Halo 2 was. I watched many people in my family play it. It was no different from halo 3's boosting, etc. The business about Halo 2 on here is irrelevant. Because Halo 4 is a Reach and 3 Hybrid. Not 2. Just to clear that up.

[Sova]

You must have missed my previous statement.

 

Anyway, Zuko and I both weren't there to see it, but I know good and damn well how Halo 2 was. I watched many people in my family play it. It was no different from halo 3's boosting, etc. The business about Halo 2 on here is irrelevant. Because Halo 4 is a Reach and 3 Hybrid. Not 2. Just to clear that up.

 

No, its not JUST a reach and 3 hybrid. If you recall, Frankie stated in a number of interviews, as well as the other members of his team, that Halo 4 was basically a game that was revisiting halo's roots (CE & 2) while also maintaining a forward looking mentality (Reach onward). So to say its just 3 and Reach is pretty ignorant. And yes, halo 2 was way different from Halo 3's boosting. There wasn't this selling accounts on a wide scale or making new accounts and boosting people up. Yeah you could derank to do that, but these people weren't that big of a deal then. Halo 3 gave more incentive to derank and boost but, like i said before, Frankie overestimates the amount of people that were doing it and making seem like it was an epidemic which it wasn't. REGARDLESS of the amount of people who partook in it, you won't ever stop people from abusing the system. You can change a system all you want but there will always be that small group of people who try to beat the system.

 

At least in my experiences, boosting wasn't a problem for me, I could destroy a booster regardless of his level. But I hardly ever had a problem with boosters...maybe its a skill thing? maybe. Frankie is pissed off cause he couldn't beat boosters...end of story.

 

Let me put the maturity thing a different way. point I'm making is the older you get the more aware you become of certain things. You also gain insight on issues that you probably couldn't comprehend. You're views then change on certain things. It's something you'll experience when you get as old as the older gamers one day.

 

Let me ask you this, if you became accustomed to a certain formula and gameplay and then all of a sudden it changes to something very different with a little bit in common to its predecessors, then wouldn't you be a little apprehensive about the new game they are developing? Wouldn't you question their motives and what direction they are taking the game in? That's something I think you really can't speak on because you only really started to play the franchise after is heyday. Its no fault of yours that you didn't play multiplayer till Halo 3, you were TOO YOUNG. Therefore, what gives you the right to come on to a post like this and basically discredit someone who has played online a lot longer than you have and has seen the dramatic shifts of direction the multiplayer has taken? I'm not saying you are wrong in your assessment, but wrong in the way you go about arguing for it.

[Sova]

Hit me up after November 14th Force410. I'll hopefully be on XBL by then! (Currently out of the states).

[DangerousCP]

Bring back halo 2 ranking system !!!

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

Zuko and anyone else in the world can come here and voice opinions if they want. Freedom of speech is all over the internet, and honestly, it's got a presence here too. I never saw either of us claim specifics on Halo 2's gameplay, so all of this is really getting on my nerves. You say we can't talk about it because we never played it ourselves? Nonsense. Boosting is everywhere. Our only point is that it happens, devs hate it, players hate it, and it has to be fought to allow the popular fanbase to enjoy the game. No specifics at all.

 

 

Just because you have the small group who tries to beat it doesn't mean you failed. If you beat the majority, you won.

 

 

Oh, Sova, speaking of maturity, don't say Frankie is pissed because he can't beat boosters. It makes you sound...illegitimate.

 

 

 

Oh, and I lied. I actually did play Halo 2 online, but it was for a short time. I ran across boosters twice.

[Sova]

Zuko and anyone else in the world can come here and voice opinions if they want. Freedom of speech is all over the internet, and honestly, it's got a presence here too. I never saw either of us claim specifics on Halo 2's gameplay, so all of this is really getting on my nerves. You say we can't talk about it because we never played it ourselves? Nonsense. Boosting is everywhere. Our only point is that it happens, devs hate it, players hate it, and it has to be fought to allow the popular fanbase to enjoy the game. No specifics at all.

 

Freedom of Speech is allowed, but if you recall, I was aggravated by the fact that Zuko came into this topic as well as my other just to say that its a redundant topic and that we need to stop talking about it. What he failed to realize was that I was making the case that there was no information on skill based ranking systems and that info needs to be given. I was also asking people if they heard anything about this. But when you have someone come in and act sarcastic...I think I have a right to say, "hey, stop it, its annoying, I don't want you to respond to me."

 

Just because you have the small group who tries to beat it doesn't mean you failed. If you beat the majority, you won.

Oh, Sova, speaking of maturity, don't say Frankie is pissed because he can't beat boosters. It makes you sound...illegitimate.

The point I'm making about deranking/boosting is that you can't just eliminate an entire part of the game or reform the system so much that it becomes boring and pointless just because a "small" group of people abuse the system. That's called overreacting. They can tweak the Halo 2 system to prevent deranking (I laid this out before) and boosting (they can reform the Microsoft Points and crack down on illegal transition of accounts). Yes this can be done. If they are serious about it then they should do that, but don't be lazy and just change the ranking system completely.

 

And you deflected my entire premise about maturity and pointed out an opinion that I was simply putting comic relief to what I said right prior to that. That's not sounding illegitimate sir...

 

Oh, and I lied. I actually did play Halo 2 online, but it was for a short time. I ran across boosters twice.

 

Boosters in what aspect? Halo 2 is VERY different from halo 3 in boosting. The only boosting you could do was derank to a lower level and play "easier" competition in order to hopefully help your friends rank up OR circle boost. But what's different from halo 2 and halo 3 is that Halo 3 using TruSkill. In halo 3 you actually get rewarded for beating easy competition in terms of experience- manipulating Truskill Halo 2 you simple gained a win towards the next rank which was weighed by how high the ranks were on the opposing team. Circle boosting was a problem but that is so easy to fix any person who knows how to program can do it.

 

VERY different forms of boosting in my opinion with deranking being the legitimate root. Halo 3 was pure manipulation of the system and when you add in the selling of accounts and making new ones...yeah it was a no brainer it was going to become a big problem. Halo 2 though only had problems with deranking (and this wasn't a big problem). What stained halo 2's ranking system for most of the time was network manipulation, modding, and circle boosting. Circle boosting is an easy fix (Reach fixed it pretty well), modding became nonexistant in matchmaking (you got booted instantly if you modded after the update), and network manipulation continued to reach but became less of problem (they refused to go to dedicated servers but did clean up standbying and ip flooding).

 

If they had cleaned up those three problems, halo 2 would be the reigning system right now. But no, Microsoft had to move to Truskill and implement experience and all that junk.

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

Eh, you used that point twice so far. Not looking like comic relief at all from my perspective.

 

You DO have a right to ignore the member and request a stop, but you can never make anyone do something, sadly. Humans are stubborn creatures. The phrase "Stubborn as a mule" fails when describing mankind.

 

if Zuko offended you, all you had to do was tell him so and request that he simply answer the question. Zuko is like many of us here. Cool, and easy going, but we do get riled up on repeated threads. Zuko's response seemed appropriate enough to me, but ya. Yelling troll usually ruffles feathers. Just yell "Woah!" and it should be fine.

 

But as of yet, as you already know, we have not heard jack squat on any skill systems. They should have told us sooner than this. I think that any ranking system info should be down on the table at least three months prior to release. I think 343 could easily make a nice system that can't be easily boosted. Heck, I even thought one up, but no. They have to have something complicated.

 

You know what Sova, we kinda turned this whole debate around on boosters, age, and maturity when none of this should have been brought up. Now, Zuko is no troll, but we have seen many a ranking thread and it gets tiresome. You must understand that the OP was asking mostly what a billion other threads have asked and it just gets...aggravating. I agree that it should not be harshly dismissed, but no one here is really trying to hurt feelings or troll. How about we all really get back to what is important; The ranking system proposed by the op?

[The Director]

The post after this one had best be polite, or this thread is getting locked and warning points will be issued.