Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MetaNigh7

A Case for Visual Ranks: Encouraging Teamwork

Recommended Posts

A repost I made on the GOW forums

 

 

A lot of you who've been here for awhile know that I am a huge advocate of all things competitive in regards to Gears of War.
The first thing I wrote in the Gears of War Next Gen wishlist was the competitive section, respectively the Old Guard portion.
One thing I left out was how visual skill ranks encourage teams to play together and cooperate with each other in order to win.
What I've experienced in playing Halo, CSGO, COD and GOW was that GOW and COD pubs were the ONLY games where I would see players just running around, doing whatever they wanted to do, regardless of purpose.
They didn't care about blocking off lanes, securing power weapons, or map position. They simply didn't care about winning.

I pop in Halo and every time there's a player going to Rockets, OS and Snipe on The Pit.
I load up CSGO and everyone checks in with their mics and calls out which lane they're going to push or block off.
I search in Black Ops 2 League Play and kids I've never played with are inviting me to their party chats so that we can work together.

I play Gears of War and I'll see absolutely no one go outside on Hotel to secure the Boomshot even though its a rocket with three shots that is almost ALWAYS guaranteed 2-3 kills. Same thing with Old Town. I play Checkout and almost no one wants to play the Checkout lanes, instead electing to go for the nades. No one is in game chat. No one is communicating. No one really cares.

I thought for awhile why was it that GOW seemed to be the only competitive game I played that seemed to have players that just didn't care to win?
Then it hit me. They had no reason too. You win a game, so what? You lose, so what? You could advance the leaderboards just by performing well and thats pretty easy if you're only playing for yourself.
There was nothing to gain as a team.

In the other games I mentioned, there was something to gain. An insignificant icon that mattered absolutely no where else other than in that specific game, but yet that little icon was the encouraging factor for teams to try their best and play together. Having a visual indicator that let not just you, but everyone else know how good you were at the game. Its a mix of shame and honor, the essence of all things competitive. The feeling of contempt from a loss and the pride of a well earned win.
Visual Ranks encourage players to play together because it validates their performance.

Share this post


Link to post

I think this kinda goes without saying. Great read, but you're preaching to the choir here. I'd be willing to say 100% of Team Beyond members are for visual, competitive ranks that increase and decrease as you win or lose.

Share this post


Link to post

I think this kinda goes without saying. Great read, but you're preaching to the choir here. I'd be willing to say 100% of Team Beyond members are for visual, competitive ranks that increase and decrease as you win or lose.

statistically speaking, your wrong :kappa:

 

@@MetaNigh7 on an unrelated note, what has the gears community been up to lately? I lost interest in the series about 6 months after GOW3 came out, but still I'm kind of curious about the state gears is in right about now.

Share this post


Link to post

On the side note, I'm kinda iffy on the new company "black tusk" on handling the new GOW game... I just play it for the story...always have,  but..they might pull a H4 in regards of trying to make things "fresh". I hope not, but ehhh ..

Unless I'm missing something

Share this post


Link to post

On the side note, I'm kinda iffy on the new company "black tusk" on handling the new GOW game... I just play it for the story...always have,  but..they might pull a H4 in regards of trying to make things "fresh". I hope not, but ehhh ..

Unless I'm missing something

in terms of SP GOW1 was the only one I found enjoyable to be honest, can't speak for judgment but 2 and 3 were absolute garbage mainly due to too many off-the-rail segments (GOW2) and far too many cutscenes (GOW3) so really to say black tusk will pull a "halo 4" is just silly because already the campaigns have been reduced to garbage, even further halo 4 isn't even the worst SP in the series, most people would probably say halo 2 was the worst and they would (although I disagree) say that halo 4 was pretty good SP wise.

 

btw just because a game feels "fresh" doesn't necessarily mean its garbage, did you not have a somewhat similar feeling with halo 1,2, and 3? frankly the main problem gears has always had is poor vision and execution, Black Tusk would probably be better off trying to throw away some of the poor ideas/concepts that Epic had before.

 

The real question is whether or not it'll be good, and on that level I have absolutely no idea, sorry.

 

Share this post


Link to post

statistically speaking, your wrong :kappa:

 

@@MetaNigh7 on an unrelated note, what has the gears community been up to lately? I lost interest in the series about 6 months after GOW3 came out, but still I'm kind of curious about the state gears is in right about now.

New company Black Tusk had sponsored one of the last major GOW LANS(Hype 3) and have been pretty tuned in with the competitive community, but I'm still cautiously optimistic.

 

Gears of War has some complex game mechanics and even EPIC stumbled a lot in between titles so its kind of hard for me to believe that a new company will get it right on their first shot. 343i was given Halo which IMO had an easier formula in regards to map design, kill times, etc but still messed that up at launch.

Share this post


Link to post

Obviously a hyperbole. Nothing is ever 100%.

nah 100% of beyond is against flinch. there was a poll and only the trolls voted for it in and even with that it was 98%
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

nah 100% of beyond is against flinch. there was a poll and only the trolls voted for it in and even with that it was 98%

that's certainly more accurate, I would say roughtly 95% of the halo community in general hate flinch, the 5% that don't are either stupid or trolling.

Share this post


Link to post

it got 91.3% on waypoint forums back when halo4 was actually relevant.

also 71.8% wanted sprint removed

https://forums.halowaypoint.com/Default.aspx?g=posts&t=211131&

well just to be the devils advocate that poll was undoubtedly influenced by :beyond: so I'm not sure how accurate it may be on the casual side of things, but its the best idea of what the halo community is feeling I suppose.

 

for sprint I've seen some level of opposition towards removing it, not many of the arguments have any real merit but overall I think theirs a decent amount of players who enjoy sprint, however unfortunate that may be.

 

as for flinch practically no one ever really say anything good about it, I have yet to hear any kind of argument as to why flinch is better than descope and so IMO its pretty much decided on that matter.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.