- swvjdirector
- |
- Honorable Heroic Member
"What are we holding on to, Sam?"
"That there's some good in this world, and it's worth fighting for."
Posted by: JungleCreator
The fact that the ranks actually somewhat measure skill. As opposed to Reach, where people who don't know what strafing is acquire the highest rank, these people in Halo 3 are First Lieutenants, and there's no way there armor lock can save them.
This. Basically, Halo 3 had things such as:
The absence of bloom
Weapons such as the BR, which was not overpowered, no matter what people say ;)
The fact that the trueskill system put you where you desrved to be. Some people hated the system because they felt that they should be rewarded for simply playing the game. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but I prefer a system that gives you cold, hard facts than a game that pretends you're good because you reached Onyx rank and have a KD of .26. I understand that not everyone has the time to spend getting good enough at a videogame to move up the trueskill system. But then why are the people who do have the time to spend not getting rewarded any more than those who do not?
Really, everything in Halo 3 was designed to give you great competetive play. If you didn't want to focus, there was always social. Reach was designed with crazy social moments in mind. That's not necessarily bad, but people who love competetive play (like myself) were disappointed.