Baby Boo Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Wow, I had a better idea of what the ranking system could be back then even then I do now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoobyLikeABoss Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 In simple words : They should name it 'Reach 2' and thanks for the info Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Boo Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 In simple words : They should name it 'Reach 2' and thanks for the info You're welcome sir, but like I said, this is old and outdated. Stay tuned to our news team for more! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destroyaaa Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Like was stated before in a different thread, a ranking system doesn't make or break the competitiveness of a game. It only shows, visually, how good you are. See, I simply don't care. What does this rank get me in life? Nothing. What does no visual rank take from me? Bragging rights about how much I play a video game? So what? My job and life/family is more important. Get real about this. Your right but unfortunately this meaningless bragging rights is what causes myself and others to compete, and ultimately make Halo 4 successful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustDontBlink Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 I believe that not having 1-50 ranking system would be unfortunate. Halo 4 may be another competitive title that lacks the competitive vibe IMO. I've played Gears, COD and Battlefield all titles with the "Everyone ranks up win or lose" system and I personally never kept playing them for too long. It seemed to me that people were less concerned with winning and working with their team and more concerned with a positive kill to death ratio. Once I got that I kind of felt like "Ok now what?" Getting to the top rank was not going to be based on how well I played but instead how much I wanted to play. Even if I was absolute worst player in the game eventually I would make it to the top as long as I played enough. That system never really appealed to me. If you look at Gears 3 in particular after the game's release there were less and less people playing ranked and more playing causal. Playing ranked was pointless. The EXP was linked through all playlists and there was no penalty for losing so everyone went to the causal play list. There you could find games faster thus gain EXP quicker. I understand why some may not like 1-50 which is fine. I think that 343 should allow all players to reach the top of the UNSC military rank similar to Halo 3 and Reach through EXP gained by through gametypes but leave the 1-50 in the ranked playlists for the hardcore players. Halo has been my favorite FPS franchise because there was nothing like climbing that ladder to a 50. The ups and downs all went with the overall experience. Going in to matchmaking solo and losing your 47 only to get it back with 3 of your friends etc. To me that was all part of the fun. I also think that the 1-50 allowed you to find new players around your same skill level. Those times where you go into a game with randoms and win, stick together and play a few more games ranking up. You think "I may get pretty far playing with this squad". A majority of my friends list was met that way. It made for some fun customs too! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvi i Be Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Why do you even bother putting your input if you don't care? Leave the discussion to people who are for it and people who are against it. My responce to a different thread. >Rankin' System? nobody should complain about that, Its just a game, and you progress, shouldn't matter how. Silvi = Are you kidding me. Did you not see halo reach fail and watch the population plummet? Halo reach's ranking system is horrible! Has no sense Purpose or insentive to win and rather pointless! I know you probrably don't play competativly so i would understand you dont care! LOL Yeah i does matter! Ill explain it! You win you rank up, If you lose you rank down! I don't see how thats so complicated to implament in a game. People complain about how people will make boosters. If they used halo 2 ranking system you can't boost!. Getting a 50 in halo 2 was almost impossible. As for people who complain about people who standby or host boot there is an easy fix, 343 has to have dedicated servers! If they control host nobody can cheat. and if someone tries to host boot there system will notice right away and that person will get banned! So in other words there is no reason why not to have a 1-50 ranking system! Not saying it has to be 1-50 but some type of system that fluctuates passed abone you winning or losing. I <3 competative gameplay! Good luck to anyone trying to win against the 1-50 discussion! LOL 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvi i Be Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 I <3 you! "JustDontBlink" You are definitely my favorite person on this forum! HAHA Finally another person i can see eye to eye with! :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awesome Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Sounds awsome hope 3431 make a great job of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skepticsystem Posted June 20, 2012 Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 I'm okay with this to a degree. They need to implement SOME kind of ranking system based on 'skill'. I'm not sure how they would pull this off, however, seeing as it'd encourage cheaters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvi i Be Posted June 20, 2012 Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 Skill is key! ranking system based of skill. This is what separates halo from other games. this is the only reason why i play it. If not i wouldn't play on XBL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slayerofall442 Posted June 20, 2012 Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! That ranking system is stupid! I hated the Halo 3 one. I liked reach so that when you got in a match with a way better person than you, you actually had to try. The certain amount of credits per rank up was also cool. A set amount of credits per rank up is stupid. Noone likes a SET AMOUNT of anything. They need to change that severely! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ccup-mann Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 This was the ranking system i was hoping for and i hope it works out well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NS Zero709 Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 there can be a place for both noncompetitive players and competitive players. I think they should have 2 separate playlist one with ranks and one without. And who gives a **** if a person brags about there rank, they do that now and it doesn't mean ****. Hell i can waste my life on a video game too but I got other **** to do too. My point is a Hater is going to hate. And don't think that will change. Just cuss them out and mute them. Far as selling 50's who gives a rip, let the kids buy them... ez pickings later on. Plus they do that now. just not in halo. Honestly if they don't address this major problem, i will say good by to halo. I am sorry but this Reach **** isn't good. I like the game, story, firefight, and everything else about it. But the thing is we ALL want something to achieve. To achieve something keeps you going, the harder it gets the bigger the reward. Unless you are a little kid that just wants to run out and jump around then get shot. PLEASE DO THAT WHEN I PLAY YOU. Thank you for your time 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Equinox Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 The system looks to be very organized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomakazi Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 there can be a place for both noncompetitive players and competitive players. I think they should have 2 separate playlist one with ranks and one without. Just like Halo 3. Ranked playlist and then a social one. That's all the competitive gamers want... ranked playlists with a number system like Halo 2 and 3. Not that BS arena crap in Reach, and not any BS credit system. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NS Zero709 Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 Just like Halo 3. Ranked playlist and then a social one. That's all the competitive gamers want... ranked playlists with a number system like Halo 2 and 3. Not that BS arena crap in Reach, and not any BS credit system. This is what I am saying. THANK YOU Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma Bullet Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 The OP is stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Boo Posted June 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 The OP is stupid. You ain't returning anytime soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sova Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 You know what's funny, O'Connor said his main problem with Halo 3 was the boosting because it gave an unfair advantage to people who were playing as 28's 29's and "boosting" their friends to 50's and matching up with low 40's and 30's. He said "Boosters, I can't go there intellectually"...you know what this tells me, O'Connor hates halo 3 ranking system because he got crapped on too much by "boosters" in matchmaking...seriously...how can you say it was that big of a deal. If you were 50 and were playing against illegit 50's you would cream them. If you were a 28 and playing people way above your level, its just one game and hell, it gives you a challenge. 1-50 was broken in halo 2 because of the modders and standbyers. But you know what, it was worth it because of the competitiveness. When they fixed that with Halo 3 it turned more towards boosting and host booting. But no system is perfect. There's always going to be something wrong with every system. Ex. Halo Reach's system is broken because of the visibility of the rank and how it ranked you. There's no motivation for team play or winning a game as there is in a 1-50 system. Plus, Onyx/Gold/Silver/Bronze/Iron...these ranks were meaningless because no one cared for what was by their name. A 50 is more pleasing to someone because it visibly shows that they worked through 50 levels (or less considering jumping a couple levels) to get there. Onyx was calculated after 5 games a month...seriously? This is how you rank people? Also, in Reach, you have to keep playing to maintain that rank...sorry, I'm not going to spend my time constantly playing to keep a spot in a division when in the grand scheme of things it held no weight for me. It was too easy to get put into a division. In halo 3, you had to go through every level or two to get to the next. There's more effort involved, and you play against people with similar skill. Conclusion: 1-50 system works well though it has a number of drawbacks. Going with a Reach system based on Arena is just too darn complicated and too lenient with division placing. Credits is an interesting idea, (Spartan points now correct?)...but that's for casual gamers (people who play CoD), not the core competitive people who want to show how they are the elite gamers of Halo. 1-50 attempts to stratify gamers in this accord, whereas Halo Reach held no relevance to the hardcore community. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvi i Be Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! That ranking system is stupid! I hated the Halo 3 one. I liked reach so that when you got in a match with a way better person than you, you actually had to try. The certain amount of credits per rank up was also cool. A set amount of credits per rank up is stupid. Noone likes a SET AMOUNT of anything. They need to change that severely! You like reach because you match up with way better people? Dude it's the other way around! People don't like reach cause good players get matched up with horrible plays. "SOVA" I LOVE YOU! Finally Another smart person on this forum. we need more! i Only 2-3 people on this forum who openly talk about this topic! After me first month and getting my onyx, I was like thats it? Didn't offer much competitive play or ranked entertainment. You got onyx now what? lol In halo 3 took me about 2 years get all my 50's. Not going to keep going on! "SOVA" did all the work for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chainsaw Samurai Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Just like Halo 3. Ranked playlist and then a social one. That's all the competitive gamers want... ranked playlists with a number system like Halo 2 and 3. Not that BS arena crap in Reach, and not any BS credit system. YES, THIS ^ It's brilliant! Genious! Revolutionary! And..it's not even a new concept, but tried and tested and preservered. It's only common sense to go with the good and out with the bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lolakazi Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 This thread is entirely speculative Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the UPS guy Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 Well, it appears I won't be buying Halo 4, or any future Halo games for that matter. Oh well. Its been fun 1-3.. r.i.p Halo Who cares about rank bro? It's all about the good times we'll all have playing the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvi i Be Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 Apperantly he does! LoL UPS guys I don't know how to explain this but there is a portion of gamers that only care for competitive gameplay! A ranking system is all they care for since Halo is like one of the only games for Xbox that has a ranking system. And I understand him, But I will hoping for the best and hopefully they surprise our community Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GO Enlightenment Posted June 30, 2012 Report Share Posted June 30, 2012 I hope there will be a ranking system which shows you the true skill of a player. Some people play for fun, some for competitve, in Halo 2 and 3 you could do both, in Reach there was no competitve gameplay. I like to play for both, fun and competitve so i hope there will be a ranking system similiar to halo 2 or 3. And if you don't care about a ranking system, you wouldn't mind if there was one right? I think that people who complain about the 1-50 rank stystem just don't like to be rated bad. In the 1-50 system everyone can see that there not that good, in reach there's no way to tell how good a player is based on his rank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.