Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Legacy Halo

Make 1-50 Ranking Visible In Game

OP Clipen

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 10
Quote:
Quote:
What you just described is not a ranking system. A ranking system means you are ranked against other players.

They could have the exact system today, and no one would no what it means.
Here is your misconception: such a system is designed specifically for the benefit of the competition. A 1-50 simplifies matchmaking, and helps ensure that similarly-skilled players compete against each other, rather than against lesser-skilled players.

It's still a "ranking system", but without the ego boosters.
It's not a ranking system. Stop calling it that. Who cares if you have a 50 if you can't see what everyone else has? You still have no idea how many other people have a 50, and therefore no true idea of how good you are. Making the ranking system ineffective.
At this point it's committing game suicide if they don't implement an in-game visible ranking system. The game has already fone from 400k players online to 100k players. Why? Well mainly because there's no incentive to keep playing.

I'll leave you with this..

"Unlocking armor graphics isn't cool, you know what's cool?
A visible in-game ranking system with leaderboards, clan matches, and weekend tournies sponsored by 343. The winner can even have a cool helmet."

~Justiin Timberlake.
Quote:
I don't get why they won't do this. People call us the minority since we want it. If it we were that small a part of the fanbase, why is this such a common topic?
Because it's a vocal minority screaming the same thing over and over again.
Quote:
At this point it's committing game suicide if they don't implement an in-game visible ranking system. The game has already fone from 400k players online to 100k players. Why? Well mainly because there's no incentive to keep playing.

I'll leave you with this..

"Unlocking armor graphics isn't cool, you know what's cool?
A visible in-game ranking system with leaderboards, clan matches, and weekend tournies sponsored by 343. The winner can even have a cool helmet."

~Justiin Timberlake.
LOL. Is that real?
Quote:
Quote:
I don't get why they won't do this. People call us the minority since we want it. If it we were that small a part of the fanbase, why is this such a common topic?
Because it's a vocal minority screaming the same thing over and over again.
Why would you be unhappy with ranked and social?

Also, an experience and trueskill overall rank much like Halo 3's, and with experience you can unlock all the armor in the game.

Does that fit your needs? If not, why?
Quote:
Quote:
At this point it's committing game suicide if they don't implement an in-game visible ranking system. The game has already fone from 400k players online to 100k players. Why? Well mainly because there's no incentive to keep playing.

I'll leave you with this..

"Unlocking armor graphics isn't cool, you know what's cool?
A visible in-game ranking system with leaderboards, clan matches, and weekend tournies sponsored by 343. The winner can even have a cool helmet."

~Justiin Timberlake.
LOL. Is that real?
Good lord I hope not. I threw up in my mouth a little.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't get why they won't do this. People call us the minority since we want it. If it we were that small a part of the fanbase, why is this such a common topic?
Because it's a vocal minority screaming the same thing over and over again.
Why would you be unhappy with ranked and social?

Also, an experience and trueskill overall rank much like Halo 3's, and with experience you can unlock all the armor in the game.

Does that fit your needs? If not, why?
Account selling. Boosting. De-rankers. Trashtalkers.

If 1-50 worked properly, they would not have thrown it out.
Quote:
Account selling. Boosting. De-rankers. Trashtalkers.

If 1-50 worked properly, they would not have thrown it out.
You can play social.

Also, boosting is a big issue with these AFK experience boosters.

De-rankers were extremely rare, in the early days of Halo 3. Don't you think they could implement a system banning de-rankers at this point? (Halo 3 was 5 years ago.)

Boosting isn't a huge deal. You still had to play with people at your skill level, but I'm sure they could improve to fight against that as well.

I'm not saying the 1 - 50 was perfect. But it was a hell of a lot better than what we have now, nothing.

Also, you can play social if you don't like it.

I can't play ranked because I don't like social (in Halo 4).

Both would make everyone happy.
I can't play Social because my favorite gametypes aren't in Social.

The point is, players should be held responsible for their etiquette.

Sometimes the whole class is punished for the actions of a few students, and that's what we have here.

Poorly-behaved competitives caused 1-50 to go out the window, and I'm fine with that.

If you NEED a visible ranking system to truly enjoy a game, then why are you not on Halo 3?
Quote:
It's not a ranking system.
Yes it is. You just don't know what ranking systems in video games are for, apparently. It's not for your benefit, though you do benefit from it. It's for the matchmaking's benefit. It's for the game's benefit. It's for the competition's benefit. If you're looking to compare yourself to someone, you want a leaderboard.

Quote:
Who cares if you have a 50 if you can't see what everyone else has? You still have no idea how many other people have a 50, and therefore no true idea of how good you are. Making the ranking system ineffective.
Wrong on multiple counts:
1. If the matchmaking is working properly, and you're, say, a Lv. 42, you can be fairly certain that your opponents are close to you (+/-2, I would assume). If a player doesn't seem as good as he should be, a quick trip to Waypoint can confirm your suspicions.

2. You have a very clear idea of how good your opponent is (and consequently, how good you are when combined with your own knowledge of your rank) when you play against him.

3. You assume the 1-50 is an absolute scale of definable skill. According to the system, it may be; but I'm fairly certain there are some 50's who are much better than other 50's. See the problem?

Again, the only reason you want me to see your skill is to show how much better you are than me. You wish to belittle me outside the field of battle via the game's own system. Why should you be allowed to do that? That's not the "competitive spirit", that's being an -Yoink--hat.
Quote:
Quote:
It's not a ranking system.
Yes it is. You just don't know what ranking systems in video games are for, apparently. It's not for your benefit, though you do benefit from it. It's for the matchmaking's benefit. It's for the game's benefit. It's for the competition's benefit. If you're looking to compare yourself to someone, you want a leaderboard.

Quote:
Who cares if you have a 50 if you can't see what everyone else has? You still have no idea how many other people have a 50, and therefore no true idea of how good you are. Making the ranking system ineffective.
Wrong on multiple counts:
1. If the matchmaking is working properly, and you're, say, a Lv. 42, you can be fairly certain that your opponents are close to you (+/-2, I would assume). If a player doesn't seem as good as he should be, a quick trip to Waypoint can confirm your suspicions.

2. You have a very clear idea of how good your opponent is (and consequently, how good you are when combined with your own knowledge of your rank) when you play against him.

3. You assume the 1-50 is an absolute scale of definable skill. According to the system, it may be; but I'm fairly certain there are some 50's who are much better than other 50's. See the problem?

Again, the only reason you want me to see your skill is to show how much better you are than me. You wish to belittle me outside the field of battle via the game's own system. Why should you be allowed to do that? That's not the "competitive spirit", that's being an -Yoink!--hat.
^Finally, someone who understands our side of the argument...
I vote we put it in and make it visible to yourself, but not others. We already have an issue with people quitting when they're losing(In my experience anyway. Everytime I JIP its too a team massively losing) and people who quit like that would see someone high rank and bug out, making JiP worse...
Halo needs this.

If it offends you or you simply suck at Halo, then put in the work to get better or play social.
Quote:
I can't play Social because my favorite gametypes aren't in Social.

The point is, players should be held responsible for their etiquette.

Sometimes the whole class is punished for the actions of a few students, and that's what we have here.

Poorly-behaved competitives caused 1-50 to go out the window, and I'm fine with that.

If you NEED a visible ranking system to truly enjoy a game, then why are you not on Halo 3?
What gametypes weren't implemented in social? I thought they were all there and some more.

Trash talking is still very existent in Halo 4.

Is mute not an option anymore? If you don't like trash talking, you are allowed to mute. The technology is there. With competition comes bragging rights, but that's life. People will always be better than you at something. If you really can't handle it, you will be in for a long life. Competition makes people better, and is a more fun environment to play in.

I'm not on Halo 3, because I want to help steer this community and game in the right direction. Plus, that's a dumb argument, the game is five years old, am I not entitled to a new Halo game that I enjoy?
Because Halo 3 is dead, population wise. You're telling everyone to play your way or the highway, that just isn't going to fly. You keep using "Poor behavior" as your excuse for why we shouldn't have 1-50. News flash: You're going to get jerks no matter what happens in online gaming. Call of Duty has no ranking system like 1-50 yet you can still get try hard trash talkers. You obviously seem to think that players will only play the way you want them too if you remove the one thing the went to Halo for in the first place, they're not. You take away the competitive scene from Halo, they're not going to go to Social games and play nice. They're not going to stay in Halo at all.

The Trash Talkers you keep talking about were a minority, you seem to be under the very false impression that all 50's were jerks that don't know how to say "GG" at the end of the game. That just isn't the case, you're basing your argument around something that isn't even there.

Quote:
I can't play Social because my favorite gametypes aren't in Social.

The point is, players should be held responsible for their etiquette.

Sometimes the whole class is punished for the actions of a few students, and that's what we have here.

Poorly-behaved competitives caused 1-50 to go out the window, and I'm fine with that.

If you NEED a visible ranking system to truly enjoy a game, then why are you not on Halo 3?
Quote:
Wrong on multiple counts:
1. If the matchmaking is working properly, and you're, say, a Lv. 42, you can be fairly certain that your opponents are close to you (+/-2, I would assume). If a player doesn't seem as good as he should be, a quick trip to Waypoint can confirm your suspicions.

2. You have a very clear idea of how good your opponent is (and consequently, how good you are when combined with your own knowledge of your rank) when you play against him.

3. You assume the 1-50 is an absolute scale of definable skill. According to the system, it may be; but I'm fairly certain there are some 50's who are much better than other 50's. See the problem?

Again, the only reason you want me to see your skill is to show how much better you are than me. You wish to belittle me outside the field of battle via the game's own system. Why should you be allowed to do that? That's not the "competitive spirit", that's being an -Yoink!--hat.
1. Right, but I still want to see where my friends are. I want to know I'm better than anyone on my friends list, that's fun.

2. I can assume how good my opponents are, but you know what assuming does right? It makes an -Yoink- out of you and me.

3. It's not perfect, but better than any ranking system I have seen to date. If you weren't a 50 in Halo 3, you weren't very good (in comparison to me) 95% of the time. It's not perfect, but I'll take a 95% ratio over 0%.

You can mute me. You don't have to play with me for multiple games. You can take off your mic. I can't play and make you talk to me.
Being better than someone is all well and good.

Shoving it in the lesser-skilled player's face is not. That's ego problems.

Everyone has a different opinion on where Halo should go. Some of us are satisfied. Some of us aren't.

I am satisfied. I have played since 2002 with CE LAN parties, I've played Halo 2, 3, Wars, ODST, Reach, and 4, and am happy with the direction it is going.

In my view, the problems that 1-50 created in the community were worse than the benefits of competition.

If the competitive community worked on improving it's behavior towards casual and lesser-skilled players, then things could change.
Quote:
Quote:
Wrong on multiple counts:
1. If the matchmaking is working properly, and you're, say, a Lv. 42, you can be fairly certain that your opponents are close to you (+/-2, I would assume). If a player doesn't seem as good as he should be, a quick trip to Waypoint can confirm your suspicions.

2. You have a very clear idea of how good your opponent is (and consequently, how good you are when combined with your own knowledge of your rank) when you play against him.

3. You assume the 1-50 is an absolute scale of definable skill. According to the system, it may be; but I'm fairly certain there are some 50's who are much better than other 50's. See the problem?

Again, the only reason you want me to see your skill is to show how much better you are than me. You wish to belittle me outside the field of battle via the game's own system. Why should you be allowed to do that? That's not the "competitive spirit", that's being an -Yoink!--hat.
1. Right, but I still want to see where my friends are. I want to know I'm better than anyone on my friends list, that's fun.

2. I can assume how good my opponents are, but you know what assuming does right? It makes an -Yoink!- out of you and me.

3. It's not perfect, but better than any ranking system I have seen to date. If you weren't a 50 in Halo 3, you weren't very good (in comparison to me) 95% of the time. It's not perfect, but I'll take a 95% ratio over 0%.

You can mute me. You don't have to play with me for multiple games. You can take off your mic. I can't play and make you talk to me.
THAT, right there, is why I won't care if I never see 1-50 again. That exact type of behavior and superiority complex right there.
You wanna know why 1-50 failed so bad?

First of all it was a horrible measure of skill,people just boosted or tended to buy accounts just to achieve a high rank.
One reason i stopped playing ranked matches in Halo 3 wasn't because it was too hard or people trashed talked i don't give the crap about that.

It was for the simple fact
-people constantly leaving just to derank
-people teamkilling you to derank
-people helping someone boost to just rank up
-being ranked with a high level who ends up going the most negative on your team because he just boosted to have that magnificent higher rank
-people seeing others rank then just leaving the match in turn making you lose the match
-Basically there were players who deranked to own noobs at the lower ranks since they didn't wanna play with higher rank people anymore and noobs who boosted or bought stuff to be at the higher ranks, tell me how that in any way or shape is an actual balanced ranking system.

honestly it's the reason i stopped playing ranked matches or trying to get ranked up.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You couldn't be further from the truth.

a visual rank system gives players a reason to keep playing, it indicates your progress and something to work towards. It's not about measuring e-peens, it's about having a system that you personally can work towards and feel accomplished when you do well. It's about getting placed against harder and harder opponents to see how far you can take it. It's about actually trying, because matches matter.

H4 right now: "It's a game where everyone wins and the points don't matter"
Please don't mistake my intentions. I want a "visual ranking system". I want that 1-50 (or higher, why not?). I want to see my rank, and easily.

But I don't want to see your rank, and I don't want you to see mine- for reasons I've already stated.

With this in mind, go ahead and re-read my post, and see if it makes better sense.
Exactly. Invisible-to-everyone-but-you ranks would solve everything.

Because it's not about being better than everyone else, it's about being as good as you can be.

This way, we would have something to go after, something to achieve, while the badly-behaved part of the competitive community would have no ground to stand on when they want to trash-talk everyone below them.
I feel the way Halo 4 is set up seeing people's K/D ratio is worse than seeing people's ranks. I feel that there is MORE trash talking due to this than I've ever encountered during H3. I was a 50 in H3 and people trash talked about "oh man look at that tryhard guy in this room". So don't go around saying that 50's in H3 were the only one's talking trash.

Who cares what people say over chat, it's called trash talk for a reason. It happens in every online video game, occurs in sports when playing with friends. It's all about getting the opponents not focused on the game and be distracted by the trash talk.

Another thing that H4 has that H3 did not have is pregame lobby trash talk. You can only really talk to the opponents in the lobby right after the game. You can back out right after the game so you don't have to hear anything. Problem solved about avoiding trash talk.

I'm all for the ranking system, but I'm all for the social playlist as well. Why not make both parties happy? I don't see a problem catering to both parties in this situation.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 10