Wth is the point of Rankings you can't see?

[Cortar]

Seriously, if we will never be able to see the rankings from INSIDE H4, wth is the point? The truth of the matter is that nobody cares about their own rank... they only care that its higher than other people's. If we can't easily see everyone else's ranking from inside H4, you might as well not even bother adding it...

[Jamesw01]

I think it's pretty easy so see other people's ranks what are u talkin about

[Hᴜᴍᴘsᴛʏʟᴇs]

Seriously, if we will never be able to see the rankings from INSIDE H4, wth is the point? The truth of the matter is that nobody cares about their own rank... they only care that its higher than other people's. If we can't easily see everyone else's ranking from inside H4, you might as well not even bother adding it...

 

Google "Halo 4 CSR".

 

It's coming, just be patient.

[Cortar]

Google "Halo 4 CSR".

 

It's coming, just be patient.

 

Please report my post and the announcement about CSR. You will only be able to see this ranking via Waypoint. You can't access waypoint while in H4.

[Hᴜᴍᴘsᴛʏʟᴇs]

Please report my post and the announcement about CSR. You will only be able to see this ranking via Waypoint. You can't access waypoint while in H4.

 

343i has said that they want to do this the right way. If enough people want the ranks in H4, they'll implement them, but boosters and cheaters will have to be very very scarce for them to keep it in the game.

 

I think they're going to keep it in.

[Cortar]

343i has said that they want to do this the right way. If enough people want the ranks in H4, they'll implement them, but boosters and cheaters will have to be very very scarce for them to keep it in the game.

 

I think they're going to keep it in.

 

When the CSR system is fully implemented post-launch, Waypoint will assign each player a visible and detailed Skill Rank, viewable in the player profile section of Halo Waypoint

 

 

The ranking will only be visible through WAYPOINT. You can't access waypoint while in the pregame lobby of H4.

[Funk Shun All]

I really don't care for ranking systems as a whole, but I also don't care for stats as a whole. It promotes a whole new level of playing like a ******. I think ranked/social type should be separated, and social shouldn't even track stats. Not that this would ever happen.

 

Also, +1 for Brand New, Humpstyles.

[Jamesw01]

I really don't care for ranking systems as a whole, but I also don't care for stats as a whole. It promotes a whole new level of playing like a ******. I think ranked/social type should be separated, and social shouldn't even track stats. Not that this would ever happen.

 

Also, +1 for Brand New, Humpstyles.

 

Yes yes yesstats and ranks make people play for themselves, people won't even grab the flag cuz there scared for their k/d to go down. I'm a hardcore gamer and I just don't understand how winning isn't enough for people. It's sad it's like nobody can play basketball at the park with some friends everyone needs to be in the nb

[snqrls]

the point is that you get better matchups?

 

Uhm, I mean, putting it on waypoint ain't that big a deal, it just detracts from the emphasis on it. If you want to improve, and then set a goal for youself, it should work just fine.

[TornadoFlame]

put in on waypoint people wont play it as much as they would if its visable. all my friends and i are waiting for it if its not visable on a 2 game disk then were done with h4 lol and will wait for halo 5. i do not wanna have to leave halo 4 after every game to go check if i leveled up or not that is the most stupidest idea known.

 

this is a fan website so 343 doesn't listen here but https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst131933_Competitive-Halo-4-Ranking-System-1-50.aspx this is the topic on the ranking system by players on the website 343 looks at i'd go vote there.

[Cortar]

the point is that you get better matchups?

 

Uhm, I mean, putting it on waypoint ain't that big a deal, it just detracts from the emphasis on it. If you want to improve, and then set a goal for youself, it should work just fine.

 

There is already an invisible ranking system, there will always be an invisible ranking system. The idea is to make it viewable by others.

[snqrls]

^rd second point...

 

i don't see the problem with every few games, taking a break and checking out your rank. Why is it necessary to have it right there after every bloody game? What does it do. Make it more competitive, nonsense, offer a greater incentive to win, bull. What it does do is lessen the emphasis on game by game performance, to instead emphasise game by game improvement.

[RedStarRocket91]

nobody cares about their own rank

 

Hey, you've managed to answer your own question!

[littletunny]

Look Halo 4 made all of the cardinal mistakes in FPS games:

 

1. No visible rank system. Players dont know from game to game whether they are improving or not - whether the team you just beat was good or bad. It promotes mediocrity.

 

2. Punishing players who run out of ammo by killing multiple enemies on one life. Run out of ammo? Good luck finding any nearby. Just jump on your own grenade.

 

3. No friendly fire. Just blast away at teammates and enemies alike.

 

4. Graphics worse than the previous game. This I believe is the fatal flaw of H4. Halo Reach (and Halo 3) graphics are clearly better than H4's. I am not even sure how this is possible. I think 343 spent too much time on the campaign and not enough on multiplayer.

 

5. Lack of map variety.

[Cortar]

^rd second point...

 

i don't see the problem with every few games, taking a break and checking out your rank. Why is it necessary to have it right there after every bloody game? What does it do. Make it more competitive, nonsense, offer a greater incentive to win, bull. What it does do is lessen the emphasis on game by game performance, to instead emphasise game by game improvement.

 

If you can't compare your rank to other people's then its pointless. "Oh look, Im level 50! But wait, all my friends who suck claim they are 50 also....."

[Nick Fuller]

Look Halo 4 made all of the cardinal mistakes in FPS games:

 

1. No visible rank system. Players dont know from game to game whether they are improving or not - whether the team you just beat was good or bad. It promotes mediocrity.

 

2. Punishing players who run out of ammo by killing multiple enemies on one life. Run out of ammo? Good luck finding any nearby. Just jump on your own grenade.

 

3. No friendly fire. Just blast away at teammates and enemies alike.

 

4. Graphics worse than the previous game. This I believe is the fatal flaw of H4. Halo Reach (and Halo 3) graphics are clearly better than H4's. I am not even sure how this is possible. I think 343 spent too much time on the campaign and not enough on multiplayer.

 

5. Lack of map variety.

 

so much trolling in your post. I LAWL at you.

[TornadoFlame]

sadly hes not trolling its logical statement about the game. only the graphics issue might be ehh but rest are spot on.

[Benchimus]

Im fine with it being on waypoint. I dont care if other people can see my lvl. I will set a goal for myself and try my hardest to reach said goal.

[RedStarRocket91]

1. No visible rank system. Players dont know from game to game whether they are improving or not - whether the team you just beat was good or bad. It promotes mediocrity.

 

How does this promote mediocrity? Just because I don't have a little number next to my name doesn't mean I'm going to stop trying in my matches. I'd actually say not knowing exactly how good the teams are helps players to improve, as you're focusing on the game at hand, instead of worrying that they're all five ranks higher than you. You'll know how well you're doing after the game when you look at the carnage report.

 

2. Punishing players who run out of ammo by killing multiple enemies on one life. Run out of ammo? Good luck finding any nearby. Just jump on your own grenade.

 

Yeah, it's a real shame that Halo 4 doesn't have, I don't know, some sort of system whereby players who're getting a lot of kills could, say, get new ones delivered directly to them wherever they are on the map.

 

Or you could try picking up weapons from your opponents' corpses.

 

3. No friendly fire. Just blast away at teammates and enemies alike.

 

I do kind of agree with you here as I think friendly fire makes the game more interesting, but I hardly think it's a 'cardinal sin'. Plenty of modern shooters don't have friendly fire enabled, and that isn't seen as gamebreaking. It's basically a matter of personal preference whether it's turned on or off, and I don't think there's a single person who's been team-killed for their power weapon who hasn't wished it disabled.

 

4. Graphics worse than the previous game. This I believe is the fatal flaw of H4. Halo Reach (and Halo 3) graphics are clearly better than H4's. I am not even sure how this is possible. I think 343 spent too much time on the campaign and not enough on multiplayer.

 

I don't agree at all. Halo 3 is beginning to look very dated, and I actually never liked the graphics in Reach to begin with: between that HORRIBLE motion blur effect (seriously, why couldn't that be turned off!?) and the washed-out colour palette, I thought the whole game looked boring and uninspired. Halo 4 is a combination of the 'realistic' graphics of Reach and the stylised art direction of Halo 3: and while it takes a little getting used to, I think it's probably the best-looking entry so far.

 

5. Lack of map variety.

 

This isn't necessarily a problem, though. All the maps we have are purpose-built for their respective game modes - and I'd personally prefer to have a small number of well-made, well-balanced maps than have a large number of maps that just don't play very well.

 

Think back to Halo 3. In Team Slayer, in an average day you'd normally be offered Snowbound, The Pit, Guardian, Construct and Narrows. That's not a great number of maps, but nobody complained back then, because they were all so much fun to play.

 

Now think of Reach. You had an enormous number of maps in rotation there: Sword Base, Boardwalk, Reflection, Countdown, Zealot, and however many Forge World maps were in it by the end, which easily doubled the number of maps. And for the most part, they were badly-designed, stale, uninteresting and unbalanced. So while you had variety, the matchmaking was a lot less fun, and I for one vastly prefer the new system.

[Cortar]

How does this promote mediocrity? Just because I don't have a little number next to my name doesn't mean I'm going to stop trying in my matches. I'd actually say not knowing exactly how good the teams are helps players to improve, as you're focusing on the game at hand, instead of worrying that they're all five ranks higher than you. You'll know how well you're doing after the game when you look at the carnage report.

 

Oh please, its extremely obvious that ranked games and unranked games are worlds apart in terms of seriousness and playstyle. Remember back to H3 if you played, you would know.

 

 

Yeah, it's a real shame that Halo 4 doesn't have, I don't know, some sort of system whereby players who're getting a lot of kills could, say, get new ones delivered directly to them wherever they are on the map.

 

Or you could try picking up weapons from your opponents' corpses.

 

You kill 3-4 people, you are probably out of DMR ammo and you don't get THAT many PODs. Also, considering how quickly weapons despawn, and how quickly players respawn, its very difficult to get to where enemies dead bodies are unless you kill them in CQC.

 

 

I do kind of agree with you here as I think friendly fire makes the game more interesting, but I hardly think it's a 'cardinal sin'. Plenty of modern shooters don't have friendly fire enabled, and that isn't seen as gamebreaking. It's basically a matter of personal preference whether it's turned on or off, and I don't think there's a single person who's been team-killed for their power weapon who hasn't wished it disabled.

 

And plenty of modern shooters are stupid [/debate]

 

I don't agree at all. Halo 3 is beginning to look very dated, and I actually never liked the graphics in Reach to begin with: between that HORRIBLE motion blur effect (seriously, why couldn't that be turned off!?) and the washed-out colour palette, I thought the whole game looked boring and uninspired. Halo 4 is a combination of the 'realistic' graphics of Reach and the stylised art direction of Halo 3: and while it takes a little getting used to, I think it's probably the best-looking entry so far.

 

Have you even played H3 lately? Its not really dated at all. H4 is just incredibly shiny and bright in order to make you think it looks a lot better.

 

This isn't necessarily a problem, though. All the maps we have are purpose-built for their respective game modes - and I'd personally prefer to have a small number of well-made, well-balanced maps than have a large number of maps that just don't play very well.

 

Think back to Halo 3. In Team Slayer, in an average day you'd normally be offered Snowbound, The Pit, Guardian, Construct and Narrows. That's not a great number of maps, but nobody complained back then, because they were all so much fun to play.

 

Now think of Reach. You had an enormous number of maps in rotation there: Sword Base, Boardwalk, Reflection, Countdown, Zealot, and however many Forge World maps were in it by the end, which easily doubled the number of maps. And for the most part, they were badly-designed, stale, uninteresting and unbalanced. So while you had variety, the matchmaking was a lot less fun, and I for one vastly prefer the new system.

 

But the problem is that unlike H3, the maps in H4 AREN'T well-made, well-balanced, or fun.

[dr.nasty10]

I think a lot of people are upset by the ranking system but why is everyone blaming 343? did bungie not have the same system in Halo reach? Personally, I like the idea of having a Halo 2 style ranking system where you can de-rank from losing or playing poorly. Of course this would contradict the direction that 343 is trying to go in with Halo 4 with customization and such.

[RedStarRocket91]

Oh please, its extremely obvious that ranked games and unranked games are worlds apart in terms of seriousness and playstyle. Remember back to H3 if you played, you would know.

 

I'd suggest that's more down to the people in those playlists, rather than any effect of the numbers themselves. More competitive players go for the Ranked playlists, more casual players go for the Social ones. Nobody stops trying heir best just because they're in Social, all that changes is that they're probably less interested in winning than they are in having fun.

 

You kill 3-4 people, you are probably out of DMR ammo and you don't get THAT many PODs. Also, considering how quickly weapons despawn, and how quickly players respawn, its very difficult to get to where enemies dead bodies are unless you kill them in CQC.

 

If you're using a DMR, chances are most other people in your games are using it too, so ammo really won't be that hard to come by - and the secondary weapons are all quite capable of beating the primaries if used properly. If it's that much of a problem, you could always try using the Firepower perk to get a backup weapon like the Battle Rifle or Lightrifle, or use the Ammunition perk to get a bigger supply of bullets. At any rate, most players get killed well before their ammo runs outs, so while if you're particularly good I understand your frustration, for the most part it just isn't a problem.

 

And plenty of modern shooters are stupid

 

Plenty of them aren't. Again, if it's your personal preference that friendly fire is turned on then I sympathise, but a lot of people prefer it shut off, and at the end of the day it doesn't really make that much difference.

 

Have you even played H3 lately? Its not really dated at all. H4 is just incredibly shiny and bright in order to make you think it looks a lot better.

 

I actually play Halo 3 more than Reach when I'm not online, as my flatmate who doesn't have XBL dislikes Reach, so when we play over LAN that's what we go on. In terms of raw polygon count and texture detail it IS very dated - again, the reason it's aged so well is because of how stylised the graphics are. Halo 4 has the same sort of style, it just has a really up-to-date graphics engine behind it. Think of Team Fortress 2: the actual graphics on that really aren't very realistic, but it still looks good, and it'll continue to look good for a very long time because of how stylised it is. Same thing with Halos 3 and 4.

 

But the problem is that unlike H3, the maps in H4 AREN'T well-made, well-balanced, or fun.

 

I don't agree. The only map so far that I've found I really don't like is Abandon, but that could be just because I've only really played it in Objective playlists, where its asymmetric nature makes it much less fun. Plus, if you give it a month or so, they'll start bringing out map updates for multiplayer, and hopefully we'll see both maps that play better in terms of weapon and player spawns. I'm also pretty sure we'll see the first few Forge maps before long, and with a bit of luck they'll be better than the garbage we got back in Reach.

[Cortar]

 

I'd suggest that's more down to the people in those playlists, rather than any effect of the numbers themselves. More competitive players go for the Ranked playlists, more casual players go for the Social ones. Nobody stops trying heir best just because they're in Social, all that changes is that they're probably less interested in winning than they are in having fun.

 

??? You just debunked your attempt at countering my point...

 

If you're using a DMR, chances are most other people in your games are using it too, so ammo really won't be that hard to come by - and the secondary weapons are all quite capable of beating the primaries if used properly. If it's that much of a problem, you could always try using the Firepower perk to get a backup weapon like the Battle Rifle or Lightrifle, or use the Ammunition perk to get a bigger supply of bullets. At any rate, most players get killed well before their ammo runs outs, so while if you're particularly good I understand your frustration, for the most part it just isn't a problem.

The problem is that the system in Halos 1-3 was perfectly fine. But then they completely scrapped it for one that sucks and has all of the problems.

 

Also no secondary weapon will beat a primary at anything other than CQC.

 

Plenty of them aren't. Again, if it's your personal preference that friendly fire is turned on then I sympathise, but a lot of people prefer it shut off, and at the end of the day it doesn't really make that much difference.

 

The point is that Halo was perfectly fine as it was, there was no reason to scrap the fun, unique aspects of it to be like every other game on the market that aren't as fun as Halo used to be.

 

I actually play Halo 3 more than Reach when I'm not online, as my flatmate who doesn't have XBL dislikes Reach, so when we play over LAN that's what we go on. In terms of raw polygon count and texture detail it IS very dated - again, the reason it's aged so well is because of how stylised the graphics are. Halo 4 has the same sort of style, it just has a really up-to-date graphics engine behind it. Think of Team Fortress 2: the actual graphics on that really aren't very realistic, but it still looks good, and it'll continue to look good for a very long time because of how stylised it is. Same thing with Halos 3 and 4.

 

 

I don't agree. The only map so far that I've found I really don't like is Abandon, but that could be just because I've only really played it in Objective playlists, where its asymmetric nature makes it much less fun. Plus, if you give it a month or so, they'll start bringing out map updates for multiplayer, and hopefully we'll see both maps that play better in terms of weapon and player spawns. I'm also pretty sure we'll see the first few Forge maps before long, and with a bit of luck they'll be better than the garbage we got back in Reach.

 

I hope to whatever god you believe in that you aren't actually saying you like Haven...

 

And oh yay, I have to pay to maybe get the chance for decent maps, yay!

[RedStarRocket91]

??? You just debunked your attempt at countering my point...

 

How so? We agree they play differently, but our opinions on why are different.

 

The problem is that the system in Halos 1-3 was perfectly fine. But then they completely scrapped it for one that sucks and has all of the problems.

 

Also no secondary weapon will beat a primary at anything other than CQC.

 

It was a good system, but I think the new one is, too. Plus now at least you get your favourite weapon from spawn. which is better than the days where you'd end up fighting a team full of Battle Rifles with nothing but your Assault Rifle. There's no harm in trying something new, and you could always try the 'Slayer Pro' playlist if you want a more classic match.

 

A Magnum will easily beat an Assault Rifle or Storm Rifle at long range, as well. Use that if you don't like getting up close, or kill one person at close range and steal their weapon.

 

The point is that Halo was perfectly fine as it was, there was no reason to scrap the fun, unique aspects of it to be like every other game on the market that aren't as fun as Halo used to be.

 

Would we really have been happy if we just ended up with a Halo 3.5, though? The market is changing, and like it or not Halo has to compete with other modern shooters. Those are what people like to play, so that's what Halo has to borrow from if it wants to stay alive. And while it's less diverse than it used to be, it's hardly fair to say that it's like every other game on the market.

 

I hope to whatever god you believe in that you aren't actually saying you like Haven...

 

And oh yay, I have to pay to maybe get the chance for decent maps, yay!

 

It's actually several, not just one.

 

And I do like Haven. It's not my favourite map by any stretch, but it's well-balanced and has a good mix of open sightlines and close-range areas. As for paying for maps, that's pretty much standard these days, with the exception that you'll also be able to get a regular supply of new Forged maps completely free.

 

If you really don't want to pay full price - and I don't blame you, maps packs are normally way too expensive - then you could always wait until they come out on Deal of the Week on the Marketplace. Until then, you could always try jumping around between playlists, as that way you're much more likely to get a wide selection of maps, rather than just the same three or four. 343i said before launch they wanted people to play more than just Slayer, and this is just their way of trying to encourage you to do that.

[Cortar]

How so? We agree they play differently, but our opinions on why are different.

 

With someone playing to win and someone playing to have fun, the person playing to win will almost always be playing at a higher level, or at least more competitively.

 

It was a good system, but I think the new one is, too. Plus now at least you get your favourite weapon from spawn. which is better than the days where you'd end up fighting a team full of Battle Rifles with nothing but your Assault Rifle. There's no harm in trying something new, and you could always try the 'Slayer Pro' playlist if you want a more classic match.

What? This has nothing to do with anything.

A Magnum will easily beat an Assault Rifle or Storm Rifle at long range, as well. Use that if you don't like getting up close, or kill one person at close range and steal their weapon.

Yes well nobody serious uses the AR or SR as their main weapon when they can have a DMR or BR....

 

Would we really have been happy if we just ended up with a Halo 3.5, though? The market is changing, and like it or not Halo has to compete with other modern shooters. Those are what people like to play, so that's what Halo has to borrow from if it wants to stay alive. And while it's less diverse than it used to be, it's hardly fair to say that it's like every other game on the market.

 

People bought Halo 3 and it has basically Halo 2.5. The thing is, Halo has always been different, thats why people bought it. Yes they reached out to different markets with H4 and reach, but it didn't change anything, for all of the new people they gained, they lost some older, dedicated players. Look at the sales for the first week, H4 made as much as H3.

 

It's actually several, not just one.

 

And I do like Haven. It's not my favourite map by any stretch, but it's well-balanced and has a good mix of open sightlines and close-range areas. As for paying for maps, that's pretty much standard these days, with the exception that you'll also be able to get a regular supply of new Forged maps completely free.

 

Yes, I know its standard, but that doesn't mean that the good maps should be held back in these maps packs while they release the crappy ones. Back in H2 and H3, they released many good maps on disk.