Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Stupid stuff that should be fixed...
  • Subject: Stupid stuff that should be fixed...
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Stupid stuff that should be fixed...


Posted by: WhackyGordon
Posted by: ThreeSixXero
There's always going to be a way to abuse quitting; at least the quit ban prevents from it happening as much and it actually does its job. Saying "might as well give up" is a cop out to a bad problem, and the quit ban has lesser repercussions compared to those of not having any system at all.

I think it would be beneficial to try to incentivize players to stay in games, instead of disincentivizing them from quitting.

That's the same thing. The only way you'll get people to play more and stay more is if it has enough draw to it. No hidden mechanic or background subroutine is going to achieve that. It's purely based on the game. The quit ban just makes sure that the experience isn't further lessened with a lack of players on a team due to too much quitting.

  • 02.23.2012 1:34 PM PDT

Welcome to the internet. Joy dies here.

Posted by: ThreeSixXero
Big party restrictions are a background routine that make it more fun to play. That's what I'm talking about. Stricter matching would help too. I don't mind waiting a little longer if it means the match is going to be significantly more balanced and challenging. A better lag threshold would be nice too. I love playing a game that's laggy for 10 minutes, and then suddenly changing host right before the game ends.

And fixing the spawn system in objective games would reduce quitting quite a bit too. If you couldn't spawn camp until your opponents all quit out, you'd have a lot more of an incentive to score the objective and find another game.

  • 02.23.2012 1:42 PM PDT

Loading...

Read this Article called Quitting Halo, which is similar to what OP suggests.

  • 02.23.2012 2:58 PM PDT

Welcome to the internet. Joy dies here.

Posted by: IRON RUMBLER
Read this Article called Quitting Halo, which is similar to what OP suggests.

I like the three strike betrayal idea, but I think it would work better with the current boot dialog style - extra time spent holding buttons shouldn't be necessary. Only way I can see it backfiring is if somebody drove a full warthog in front of your rocket.

  • 02.23.2012 3:48 PM PDT

Why even bother, really?
I rage.

wrong thread...:/

[Edited on 02.23.2012 4:37 PM PST]

  • 02.23.2012 4:37 PM PDT

yea these r gre8 ideas

  • 02.23.2012 4:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag: wamego
  • user homepage:

forfeit button eh? oh you mean like a quit button?

  • 02.23.2012 4:41 PM PDT

Posted by: AngryBrute1
Oh yeah, since somebody does not believe what YOU believe; that makes us vapid...
I cannot grasp that what you call "Something happened to nothing, and that nothing became something, and it was smaller than than a period."

OP, I respect you and your intelligence :)
+1,000,000

  • 02.23.2012 4:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

There should be soft kill zones on Nightfall so you can't run ahead and skip entire sections of the level. A soft kill zone on the other side of the door that you forklift glitch through as well.

Why they haven't done this at least online .... is beyond me.

  • 02.23.2012 4:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

*wonders how New Clan Recruitment For Shadow Pack thread gets 55 replies*

*reads "Hi I'm Ashley. . ." *

[Question Answered]

*proceeds to read on, shakes head, and gently laughs*

1) Just quit if you cant handle playing an "unfair" game.

2) Its Action Sack. Game types are suppose to be stupidly fun. Plus the last thing thats needed is everyone coming on the forums complaining about "N00BY PLAYLIST!"

3) Why?

  • 02.23.2012 4:58 PM PDT

And so God called Moses to come forth but he came fifth and was therefore disqualified.

3. I think that Grifball, living dead, and action sack should be under 'casual games' and invasion should be under 'competitive'.

  • 02.23.2012 5:01 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2