Posted by: WaysideGerm4
You've given two main benefits: (1) 100% predictable game lengths and (2) greater translation of skill gap into the score. The former is pointless because players don't normally play during a significant time crunch so game length is not as significant of a factor as gameplay itself during the game. The latter will inflate stats horrendously with a preference for the better players at the cost of the average-joe player which may ultimately be detrimental to the halo community (bluntly put, people will quit if they get as outmatched as you say). If you're truly good, then multiple pwnage games should be common and you shouldn't need uncapped kills to make it evident to yourself or others. Your third pseudo-reason is that it would lead to consistency, although logic dictates that greater score variance and more evident skill gaps would lead to more divergent scores amongst formerly homogenous groups of players.
You argument about stats is pointless. Yes, it will mean that better players have a higher K/D ratio and worse players have a lower K/D. That's not a bad thing.
Economically, people buy the game to enjoy it. Losing by itself is not necessarily unenjoyable, but losing by embarrassing or devastating margins is unenjoyable in any game. People will quit. Unlike sports, where you are physically there with people face-to-face, the anonymity of online multiplayer means that people have no such worries about quitting influencing public/self perception of themselves. Your argument that people will continue to play the game even if they're losing is invalid - they will only continue if (a) the losing margin is small enough, (b) they care about credits (I understand there's a penalty or something?), (c) they care about quit bans, (d) they are unusually resolute and committed to a video game. Average players, like myself, will quit in such circumstances because I didn't pay $60 + XBL to get pwned for 12 minutes.
Everyone has their own reasons for purchasing XBL. Perhaps some people wanted to have a few games where they would completely crush their opponents with over 200 kills.
The current system of score+time limits is good as others have mentioned. The time limit is really intended to be secondary to the score; it only comes into effect in slower/camping games to almost "end the misery/boredom" in a sense.
You have no reason to believe you know what the intention of the time limit is. All we know is that most often, the score to win is reached rather than the time limit.
It seems that the only real problem have with this idea is the fear that it would increase the probability a player would quit due to competitive . If reach had a proper MM system where players of equal skill were matched (ie TrueSkill was used) and quitting resulted with harsh penalties on your rank, I think my idea would work very well.