Thagomizer
Member
I don't get what's so bad about PV. Pretty much every example I saw in these videos and gifs, you could get the same result by just watching the radar.
Will there be a skill based ranking system like in Halo 3 ?
I hate that multiplayer games nowadays don't require actual skill to achieve a high rank.
That's one of the reasons why I think that Halo 3 is still the best multiplayer game, there is no way you can get to level 50 without skill, hell skill is not enough you have to be a pro to get a 50 in most playlists.
Unless I'm seeing things wrong, PP + BR shenanigans look to be much more effective than they have since H2. If I can't have my 3sk magnum back, I'll gladly take the noob combo. The cascade of tears it brings are such sweet, sweet nectar.
Massively upset with the blatant COD bits added in. Not going to complain much as I played Halo on the PC and played it well enough on the XBox (3 and Reach). I no longer own an Xbox so I wont be fretting over the decision to buy this game, but I really think they ruined the uniqueness of Halo by taking too many cues from what most games have in their games.
The game is nothing like it used to be, I still hold that CE was the best, and it's too bad 343 decides to add things like ordinance packs, and these perk systems which I feel ruins the basic balance of what Halo was to me.
Just my two cents, but I've seen so many great, solid, confident franchises borrow from COD this gen:
-Battlefield
-SOCOM
-Killzone (3)
-Uncharted (3)
never thought I'd see Halo do it. Absolutely no need for things like the points popping up on screen, and I think something like that is cheesy and cheapens the HUD. I have no faith that the perk system and the loadouts will be balanced only because the community always finds and sticks to what is popular. It's tricky to balance such a number of variables, and personally, I always viewed Halo as a game that was fun because u could simply spawn equal to everyone else and plan ahead via map control and predicting patterns of weapon spawns. But, to those who like it, I hope u enjoy it
Compared to when they borrowed the health system or 2 weapons at a time from Halo? Most of the people at 343 come from those studios who made those games including infinity ward. The loadouts have been in games since before COD and weapon unlocks as well. BF has had this for as long as i can remember. I understand that MW is popular but it didn't invent the wheel.
I never said that those features were made by COD, but this gen COD definitely popularized them, and now most gamers are too familiar with them to want to learn anything else, so I see many games incorporate the nonsense carrot-on-a-stick unlock system/constant reward system to keep these players around. I just don't see why so many games need to take what is popular in COD and put it into their game.
This..I really hope 343 use the Halo 2 rank system.Oh yeah that's right, there was some funky things going on behind the scenes of H3's ranking system where it factored in your trueskill as well. People with a bad win/loss ratio would take forever to rank up. Whereas if you had a fresh account you could get a 50 in <50 games.
Imo they need to just abandon trueskill altogether. Go back to Halo 2 where it was a pretty consistent 3-4 wins in a row to level up. Period.
This..I really hope 343 use the Halo 2 rank system.
That was a horrible system.
hahahahahahahahaha
Halo 2 hasn't been close to equaled yet... ranking is one of the reasons why. Halo 2 ELO ranking was godly.
How is a rank system based on the team winning 3 games in a row better than a skill based system based on your actual performances? Oh i know, its easier to rank up.
Man, another totally pointless use of Promethean Vision. I love your gifs, OddOne, but the actual gameplay is driving me nuts. Elamite was using it to locate enemies right in front of his face, when he could have just as easily glanced at radar. He even has the enhanced radar in that gif (I think)!
:\Perks AND kill streaks AND wall hacks AND it's Reach 2?
No thanks.
How is a rank system based on the team winning 3 games in a row better than a skill based system based on your actual performances? Oh i know, its easier to rank up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
if you have a hard time understanding... it's not just "3 wins in a row"
The way I understand it, Trueskill, which Halo 3 used, did not take personal performance of the player into account. It was a win/loss system that took each player's skill level (based on previous W/L) and uncertainty level (their consistency in winning and losing) into account when deciding how much to reward or punish players for a win and loss respectively, not K/D, not flag captures, not assists, nothing like that. Microsoft has a page explaining their algorithm here. This isn't to say that Halo 2's system was any better, because a system where you could actually lose progress towards the next rank for winning against a significantly worse team is not a good system. But I wouldn't act like one is a cancer and not mention that the other had the same problem.I know that, but in Halo2, you would never rank up unless you won a certain amount of games regardless. I know this cause i was consistently the best player by far on my team and most times the game, but because i was matched with idiots, my performance no matter how good, id rank down because of the loss. If i play well even on a losing team it shouldn't matter. Halo2 relied way too much on winning.
The way I understand it, Trueskill, which Halo 3 used, did not take personal performance of the player into account. It was a win/loss system that took each player's skill level (based on previous W/L) and uncertainty level (their consistency in winning and losing) into account when deciding how much to reward or punish players for a win and loss respectively, not K/D, not flag captures, not assists, nothing like that. Microsoft has a page explaining their algorithm here. This isn't to say that Halo 2's system was any better, because a system where you could actually lose progress towards the next rank for winning against a significantly worse team is not a good system.
Halo Reach's Arena ranking system initially took kills, deaths, and assists into account but it was a complete shitshow and encouraged people to play selfishly. It was removed almost immediately.
I know that, but in Halo2, you would never rank up unless you won a certain amount of games regardless. I know this cause i was consistently the best player by far on my team and most times the game, but because i was matched with idiots, my performance no matter how good, id rank down because of the loss. If i play well even on a losing team it shouldn't matter. Halo2 relied way too much on winning.
halo needs to change the announcer guy. hes old.
*shock* you play a game designed around winning and losing, you lose a game and you expect to rise in the standings?
whaaaaat?
ps bungie.net also showed precisely where you were in terms of level progression, since it appears you never used it.
you don't just automatically level down. You play against poor players and win and you're not going to level up quickly. if you play against poor players and lose they gain and you lose. Eventually in the end it levels out as long as you keep playing.
it's getting obvious you didn't read anything about ELO in the link i gave you, either. ELO was the exact system that Halo 2 used.
Halo 3's was the in the same vein as 2, where win/loss was the only variable that mattered...as I literally just explained. But on the whole, in a team game you have to encourage team play over individual and the best motivation for that is a ranking system. You might not have liked how the game treated your team as a single entity, but with early Reach Arena, it was more beneficial to the player to let his teammates die and swoop in for their kill. An individual system promotes users camping, kill stealing, and overall diminishes team play. There's a reason that Arena went back to win/loss, and it was because everyone, including Bungie, realized how selfish people are. Fact is, they did exactly what you're looking for and it was a complete disaster.And that why i personally disliked it in Halo2. Halo3 i cant remember how it was. No matter how well i played in H2 though, the loss made me rank down every time. That to me is more of a team rank, not individual rank which im not interested in when im being matched with unknowns on the internet.
I expect to be properly ranked if i score 5 goals in a 6-5 loss.
Halo 3's was the in the same vein as 2, where win/loss was the only variable that mattered. But on the whole, in a team game you have to encourage team play over individual and the best motivation for that is a ranking system. You might not have liked how the game treated your team as a single entity, but with early Reach Arena, it was more beneficial to the player to let his teammates die and swoop in for their kill. An individual system promotes users camping, kill stealing, and overall diminishes team play. There's a reason that Arena went back to win/loss, and it was because everyone, including Bungie, realized how selfish people are. Fact is, they did exactly what you're looking for and it was a complete disaster.
to me it sounds like you weren't a good player and you were desperately holding onto your rank while making excuses about the people you were playing with.
I have played Halo 2 quite a lot... I play with pretty good people. Actually, very good people. Everyone I know was accurately ranked. Bad players float around 15-20. moderate 22-25. Good 25-29. Great 30-34.
Beyond that was elite level players and hackers (which essentially condensed the ratings down a bit)
Statistically if you keep playing and losing... eventually it's figured out it's not the people you are matched with that sucked... it was you all along.
ELO is a no bullshit ranking.
You can't use the radar to line up a head shot.Man, another totally pointless use of Promethean Vision. I love your gifs, OddOne, but the actual gameplay is driving me nuts. Elamite was using it to locate enemies right in front of his face, when he could have just as easily glanced at radar. He even has the enhanced radar in that gif (I think)!
Well if thats the case, i was better than i thought cause i was 36. Couldn't get passed it no matter how good my kill/death was since at that point id win as many as i lost, but it didnt really take K/D into account so it felt like i was being jipped.
I don't get what's so bad about PV. Pretty much every example I saw in these videos and gifs, you could get the same result by just watching the radar.
You can also aim for the enemy before he turns the corner. Enemy's 1 shot? Insta headshot as soon as he peeks
Radar requires you to look away, also, PV allows you to see where someone is facing and what they are doing.
It's a team game and if you are winning as many as you lost (outside of games which were lost due to malicious activity) than that says it accurately ranked you
K doesn't mean shit unless it's vanilla deathmatch.
Grenades look strong, i love it!
Normal slayer's still in the game, right?