Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

[Larry Sizemore]

Except you don't know that.

 

I am pretty sure it does, as I doubt players will be bothered to play those extra 100 games over and over again every time. I know I wouldn't. 

 

I am pretty sure it does, because the games that have them implemented still have them implemented. 

 

Except you completely missed the point. Locking ranked to purify the experience or whatever won't drive interest in the playlist. Interest in the ranked playlist depends on the quality of the game. Nobody gave a shit about alts in H3 Team Slayer (as if anybody does now, aside from you), least of all low-levels. It's meant to be a competitive playlist. If they're reasonable people and aware of the fact that they're not that great, then they'll expect to have the occasional rough game in the playlist, and won't read much into it when it happens.

 

Seasons fixes the issue of getting bored at a high rank and starting over with a new account. If after that someone still wants to make an alt to pubstomp low level players, why would 100 social games stop them? Clearly they have time on their hands.

 

And for god's sake, shut up about Counterstrike and League. They're different games on different platforms that aren't competing for the flaky, ADD audience that Xbox caters to.

[xboxdigger 94]

Except you completely missed the point. Locking ranked to purify the experience or whatever won't drive interest in the playlist. Interest in the ranked playlist depends on the quality of the game. Nobody gave a shit about alts in H3 Team Slayer (as if anybody does now, aside from you), least of all low-levels. It's meant to be a competitive playlist. If they're reasonable people and aware of the fact that they're not that great, then they'll expect to have the occasional rough game in the playlist, and won't read much into it when it happens.

 

Seasons fixes the issue of getting bored at a high rank and starting over with a new account. If after that someone still wants to make an alt to pubstomp low level players, why would 100 social games stop them? Clearly they have time on their hands.

It's meant to give fair matches. 

 

You didn't give a shit about alts, nor did I, but if you look at complaints from beginners, they DO. That's why the system is in place, to protect them. 

 

I don't understand what you don't understand about that. 

 

The seasons are probably months apart. If I could guess I would say 6. I have gotten so many 50's, and even I wouldn't suffer through 100 Social games every time. 

[Gingerninja]

So what?

 

I don't understand what your argument is.

I said ranks are needed in all playlists so they are fair and balanced.

 

Every game should be ranked so that over time you are matched against players your skill level.

 

Did you miss that part because you were trying to make a point that wasn't there?

 

I don't really see the point in having to play x amount of casual games before ranked, seeing as your rank means absolutly nothing anyway.

You learn as you play ranked, why does it matter if you're shit when you start playing ranked?  

So will the people you will be matching, that is the point.  

All the good players will fly past you really quickly, so you'll be settled into playing people who are also new/crap/inexperienced.

Then naturally as you improve your rank will improve too and you'll play against better and better players.

 

Placement matches are there so that you are not matching people who will curb stomp you.

Other than the placement matches, there is no need to have an arbitrary number of games played before you enter ranked matchmaking.

Thats what the matchmaking algorithm is for, so you don't need to be good before you play,  because it will find a balanced match for you!

[xboxdigger 94]

 

You could argue that placement matches would fix much of this but you can only rank up so much because of them. You aren't even half through the ranking system when you have gotten a placement. Over time it's going to feel exactly like the 1-50 where you start at level one, because everyone else has ranked past Semi-Pro. 

 

and the placement system has problems of it's own..

 

On my first account I won 9/10 matches with pretty impressive stats and got put in Bronze  B)

 

On my next account I got put in Onyx right off the bat. 

 

You also didn't rank down and many players complained they where placed too high. 

[Larry Sizemore]

It's meant to give fair matches. 

 

You didn't give a shit about alts, nor I, but if you look at complaints from beginners, they DO. That's why the system is in place, to protect them. 

 

First of all, I love how you claim that beginners are so familiar with Halo that they're able to tell the difference between alt accounts and people who are just better at the game than them. I'd love to see a source for these complaints!

 

Now, assuming they actually exist, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED that the beginner complaints that you're talking about are coming from entitled little cunts who scream with rage every time they don't win at something? As opposed to the ordinary ,reasonable people I mentioned above who don't blink when they have a bad game in a ranked playlist? Why should these complainers be protected? They'll throw a fit every time they fail and blame it on something else. There's no way to placate people like that in a PvP game, so fuck them.

[Infinity]

Yeah, good for them but I'm not a fan. I don't want to be forced to play social games to play what I want.

 

Don't lock me out.

It would be only about 5 games unranked so the average player learns the mechanics of the game. Plus, if the Ranked playlists are minimalist you'd only be missing out on very little.

[Larry Sizemore]

I don't understand what your argument is.

I said ranks are needed in all playlists so they are fair and balanced.

 

Every game should be ranked so that over time you are matched against players your skill level.

 

Did you miss that part because you were trying to make a point that wasn't there?

 

I don't really see the point in having to play x amount of casual games before ranked, seeing as your rank means absolutly nothing anyway.

You learn as you play ranked, why does it matter if you're shit when you start playing ranked?  

So will the people you will be matching, that is the point.  

All the good players will fly past you really quickly, so you'll be settled into playing people who are also new/crap/inexperienced.

Then naturally as you improve your rank will improve too and you'll play against better and better players.

 

Placement matches are there so that you are not matching people who will curb stomp you.

Other than the placement matches, there is no need to have an arbitrary number of games played before you enter ranked matchmaking.

Thats what the matchmaking algorithm is for, so you don't need to be good before you play,  because it will find a balanced match for you!

 

So... how is this relevant to anything I've posted?

[Gingerninja]

You could argue that placement matches would fix much of this but you can only rank up so much because of them. You aren't even half through the ranking system when you have gotten a placement. Over time it's going to feel exactly like the 1-50 where you start at level one, because everyone else has ranked past Semi-Pro. 

 

and the placement system has problems of it's own..

 

On my first account I won 9/10 matches with pretty impressive stats and got put in Bronze  B)

 

On my next account I got put in Onyx right off the bat. 

 

You also didn't rank down and many players complained they where placed too high. 

 

Hopefully since that was just beta, they'll have refined it more.  IIRC the SC2 system doesn't let you get higher than platinum right off the bat, but at least then by platinum the games should be of decent quality and not a complete and utter stomping. 

 

 

So... how is this relevant to anything I've posted?

 

You replied to me...  twice.

To be fair only the top part was aimed at the you.

The rest was fairly general observation that the placement games + everything ranked are a better system than having a silly social rule before entering ranked matchmaking.

[xboxdigger 94]

First of all, I love how you claim that beginners are so familiar with Halo that they're able to tell the difference between alt accounts and people who are just better at the game than them. I'd love to see a source for these complaints!

 

Now, assuming they actually exist, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED that the beginner complaints that you're talking about are coming from entitled little cunts who scream with rage every time they don't win at something? As opposed to the ordinary ,reasonable people I mentioned above who don't blink when they have a bad game in a ranked playlist? Why should these complainers be protected? They'll throw a fit every time they fail and blame it on something else. There's no way to placate people like that in a PvP game, so fuck them.

The reasons are not coming from me, but from the developers that have a constant stream of feedback and criticism, and statistics like in League of Legends and CS. 

 

I mean, just look at this. It's me on an alt I just found because of all this talk. There has to ring some bells.

 

http://halo.bungie.net/Stats/GameStatsHalo3.aspx?gameid=1820096138&player=RED%20MVMVMVMVMVM

 

http://halo.bungie.net/Stats/GameStatsHalo3.aspx?gameid=1820092521&player=RED%20MVMVMVMVMVM

 

3 alts going in!

 

http://halo.bungie.net/Stats/GameStatsHalo3.aspx?gameid=1820163331&player=RED%20MVMVMVMVMVM

[o0crispy0o]

I feel locks on playlists is unnecessary and would be a bad idea in many cases. Majority of the time I may only have time for a quick game or two throughout the week. If I had to be relegated to a playlist I didn't want to play I'd be turned off to the game fairy quickly, and I'm someone who loves halo. With all the games coming out around that time new players would be more inclined to pick up another game rather than play through matches they don't want to be a part of.

 

Learning mechanics is something I think is best done in campaign.

[xboxdigger 94]

I feel locks on playlists is unnecessary and would be a bad idea in many cases. Majority of the time I may only have time for a quick game or two throughout the week. If I had to be relegated to a playlist I didn't want to play I'd be turned off to the game fairy quickly, and I'm someone who loves halo. With all the games coming out around that time new players would be more inclined to pick up another game rather than play through matches they don't want to be a part of.

 

Learning mechanics is something I think is best done in campaign.

We are different, and that is great.

[Hard Way]

Honestly, if Reach's arena system (the win/loss one) was implemented in every ranked playlist, we'd be fine. It only gives new accounts like 5 placement games before they start playing who they're supposed to, and seasons reset so selling accounts isn't really viable. The only problem with Reach was that the game sucked and the settings sucked (1 grenade...why...)

[Nj Pro]

Switching things up for a second, but how do we grow the halo esports community? Or for that matter, how does any game grow the competitive scene?

 

I've been thinking about it for a while and there are couple puzzling aspects.

 

My first question is do we transition existing halo players (the TS gurus, Big Team Battle warriors, the Griffball diehards, the SWAT guys etc.) to the competitive community? and how? Or, do we attract new players who have no previous experiences with halo?

 

My guess is both, but the majority coming from attracting new players. Im having a hard time grasping the idea of a die hard SWAT/actionsack guy converting to an esports guy. 

 

This leads me to my next question, how do we attract new players?

[zZunair]

If you are a serious player you'll slip through if we have that 1000 games combined rule.

 

If not, you are going to play this game for 3 years, and if you truly are a serious player you can manage not play ranked for 3-5 days.

 

If you haven't played the game before (and Halo games before), it's great to practice in social a little bit first.

 

And if your just gonna fuck up and screw the ranking system, hey, here's a 100 game limit on new accounts. Play them first, every time you are making a new account!

in black ops 2 I was mainly interested in League Play. Didn't really care for social play as its generally pub stomping and that's kinda boring. Literally the first game I played of blops 2 was league play a few months after the game came out.

 

As a consumer, I would be upset I was locked out of games my friends want to play and I had to fill some stupid grinding criteria to get in when I know full well I am not a bad player. I haven't even played a CoD game at that point since Black ops 1 IIRC

 

The ranking in h5 beta was pretty good when I played and I think we'll be fine without some lock for ranked.

[Nokterne]

Honestly, if Reach's arena system (the win/loss one) was implemented in every ranked playlist, we'd be fine. It only gives new accounts like 5 placement games before they start playing who they're supposed to, and seasons reset so selling accounts isn't really viable. The only problem with Reach was that the game sucked and the settings sucked (1 grenade...why...)

 

I think the Reach system needed some simplification. It should have been pure win/loss. It should have rated you after each match instead of forcing you to play multiple games before seeing your rating (gamers need dat instant gratification). The ratings should have been clearly aligned with different skill levels (I remember having some kind of four digit rating, and being confused about how it correlated to overall rank). And your rank should've been visible across all playlists for the swagger factor.

 

Gotta remember these systems need to be clear and simple as to not fly over the heads of the masses. I do agree with you on the seasons system being a positive. The gameplay/settings did hurt the potential of the system, but I wouldn't add it to any competitive game without some major revisions.

[Infinity]

Reach needed three things to make Arena great:

 

- Good Settings

- Win/Loss instead of individual Skill (they eventually did this but it was far too late)

- MLG put under Arena

[Gobias]

Halo 5's ranking system doesn't work like the 1-50 ranks. Players don't start from the bottom of the ladder; they start in the middle of the spectrum for placement matches--it's like starting around level 25 and having each placement match count about three times more than normal matches (analogy). If you're an experienced player making a new account, your only option for stomping bad players in a ranked playlist is deranking, which is a much more complicated problem.

[Basu]

Reach needed three things to make Arena great:

 

- Good Settings

- Win/Loss instead of individual Skill (they eventually did this but it was far too late)

- MLG put under Arena

You can blame 343i for the first and last point. They didnt bother to add ranks to MLG when asked because they were "busy making H4" lol yeah that turned out great

[Andy]

But guys, even if they wanted to, they had legacy problems.....

 

 

 

 

 

...As in, ruining the Halo legacy with Halo 4,,,,

[Infinity]

You can blame 343i for the first and last point. They didnt bother to add ranks to MLG when asked because they were "busy making H4" lol yeah that turned out great

No, adding them in that late would have done nothing. If they were there from day 1 it would have been a much more successful system.

[Larry Sizemore]

The reasons are not coming from me, but from the developers that have a constant stream of feedback and criticism, and statistics like in League of Legends and CS. 

 

I mean, just look at this. It's me on an alt I just found because of all this talk. There has to ring some bells.

 

http://halo.bungie.net/Stats/GameStatsHalo3.aspx?gameid=1820096138&player=RED%20MVMVMVMVMVM

 

http://halo.bungie.net/Stats/GameStatsHalo3.aspx?gameid=1820092521&player=RED%20MVMVMVMVMVM

 

3 alts going in!

 

http://halo.bungie.net/Stats/GameStatsHalo3.aspx?gameid=1820163331&player=RED%20MVMVMVMVMVM

 

In no way does this counter anything that I've said.

 

Switching things up for a second, but how do we grow the halo esports community? Or for that matter, how does any game grow the competitive scene?

 

I've been thinking about it for a while and there are couple puzzling aspects.

 

My first question is do we transition existing halo players (the TS gurus, Big Team Battle warriors, the Griffball diehards, the SWAT guys etc.) to the competitive community? and how? Or, do we attract new players who have no previous experiences with halo?

 

My guess is both, but the majority coming from attracting new players. Im having a hard time grasping the idea of a die hard SWAT/actionsack guy converting to an esports guy. 

 

This leads me to my next question, how do we attract new players?

 

There's no rule saying that someone can't be a fan of say, SWAT, and a fan of competitive Halo. You draw those people in by simply making the competitive product great. It has to be interesting to play and to watch. Right now the pieces are all there, but barring some kind of sea change from 343's design philosophy it's going to be up to a third party to take vanilla Halo 5, work with it, and make the best settings possible and somehow sell 343 on using those variants over the out-of-the-box ones. Because the last time we saw arena footage, the item placement, and subsequently the game quality, was crap.

 

As far as new players go search times have to be lightning quick. Like, almost instant. It's hard to compete with CoD for casuals/new gamers when CoD puts them in a game immediately and Halo makes them stare at a loading screen for about a minute. Combine that with the fact that the MCC cloud will definitely be hanging over H5 as launch gets closer, and... yeah. 343 can grease the wheels here by keeping the launch playlist count to an absolute minimum.

[Hard Way]

I think the Reach system needed some simplification. It should have been pure win/loss. It should have rated you after each match instead of forcing you to play multiple games before seeing your rating (gamers need dat instant gratification). The ratings should have been clearly aligned with different skill levels (I remember having some kind of four digit rating, and being confused about how it correlated to overall rank). And your rank should've been visible across all playlists for the swagger factor.

 

Gotta remember these systems need to be clear and simple as to not fly over the heads of the masses. I do agree with you on the seasons system being a positive. The gameplay/settings did hurt the potential of the system, but I wouldn't add it to any competitive game without some major revisions.

That's still the old system. At some point in Reach's lifespan, they revamped it to only factor in wins and losses. That's what I was alluding to. I agree that the UI should be tweaked so that your skill rank is more easily seen.

[o0crispy0o]

I agree that as long as the product is good the competitive fans and players will come regardless of their preferred playlist. Although I think it would be easier for someone who enjoys swat to get into hcs before someone who enjoys btb.

[Basu]

No, adding them in that late would have done nothing. If they were there from day 1 it would have been a much more successful system.

 

343i took over in Semptember 2011 when the zero bloom TU was released. Anniversary just came out. Reach had one more year to go (with how terrible H4 turned out it actually had three years to go).

 

Plenty of time, it's just that 343 had their priorities messed up since day one.

[Moa]

No, adding them in that late would have done nothing. If they were there from day 1 it would have been a much more successful system.

Under that logic, MCC should never be fixed because it won't bring back all the players.