#prestiging

[thatcodmoment]

When You Prestige

1st Prestige

Finally Reaching 10th Prestige: 

"You know there's 15 prestiges right"

I REJECT YOUR REALITY AND SUBSTITUTE MY OWN

[dedtime]

Ranks in Video Games, and the Bullshit tied to them.

As it stands now, ranks in games are total bullshit. They show nothing of how good you are and more about how much time you waste. These thoughts just sprung back up in me after remembering what Jose said before he left "You better be a Colonel in Battlefield before I come back".

Ex: In Battlefield 3 you could be the worst player, lose every game and get a .021 K/D and still make it to colonel with that 200 points you get from completing a round. Sure it would take a fucking eternity, but you could do it. The same goes for Halo: Reach and/or any number of newer games with ranking systems.

Now I don't have a problem getting to a Colonel, as I do love me a good game or 12 of Battlefield 3, but to me it means absolutely nothing. The last game (I think) to do actual ranking, and correct me if I'm wrong, was Halo 3 (and maybe Halo Reach with Arena games.. but it only took your best 3 games into account, and you had to play on 7 separate days within that month). You win a game or 2 and your rank goes up, you lose a couple of games and your rank goes down. It was based on how well you played the game and not on how long you've played it. If you made it to rank 50 it "usually" meant you were someone that would kick ass (not including the people that paid for 50's). I'm not counting out that playing a game until you reach the top "rank" wouldn't teach you a thing or two in the skill department, but in Halo 3 you could play thousands of games and still be a rank 22 because your skill was not up to par (or you were paired with a really shitty team every time.. which is highly unlikely). It would match you with people on the same level, with the occasional 50 playing with lower ranked friends. And even if you hit that 50 you could always go down in rank, forcing you to be consistent with your skill.

This isn't about me, I'm not saying I'm the best at any game (my highest rank in Halo 3 was a 41), but don't try to throw a pointless number in my face. 

It is very clear and obvious that the "point/credit" system of ranking was made for the lesser skilled people (mainly the casual gamers) to keep their interest in the game, or to even make some cheap ass Achievements/Trophies like "Get to rank so and so". But the only way to really get better is to play with and against people that ARE better.

Once again back to Halo 3, for the casual gamers there was a section where you could just go and play without rank, and just have fun, a clear divide between ranked and non-ranked games. I'm not saying the credit system is bad, using credits to unlock armor in Halo or in COD to unlock attachments and new weapons is cool, but tying that to a rank just diminishes the status that came with ranking. So when I hear, oh you're only "insert rank here" in "insert new game here", it means nothing to me. You may be a forerunner in Halo: Reach but you still suck, you may have prestige'd in Call of Duty "insert title here" 237 times.. but.. you still suck. 

Having a high rank used to mean that you were good, but now all it does is show who wastes more time. 

And there goes my "once in a blue written" clear thought. :)

Hmm maybe I should write one about yearly releases for game franchises.......