API Designed Individual Rating System - Suggestions - Why Ranked Mode Needs Healing

[CaptainBes.5834]

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Davinci.7680 said:

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Leonidrex.5649 said:

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Leonidrex.5649 said:@Trevor Boyer.6524 before I waste my time reading the same arguments for n times.give me straightforward reply.Do you know a single game with similar concept, that did not backfire ? at least 1 example?

Fortnite

Super Smash Bros

anything that is even close to what gw2 is?fortnite is a joke and super smash bros is 1v1 game.

lol what

Both of those games might actually be the top 2 most successful pvp video game titles that the world has ever seen. Both use individual stat systems along with trackers for general win/loss rate. The psychological theory behind these games is that "the players always feel like they are winning even if they are losing" which is what I was explaining in the OP post, about what GW2 ranked is missing. Go watch some youtube videos about it, there are plenty that explain why those two game titles have been successful on unprecedented levels.

And if you think Smash Bros is a 1v1 game, well I guess this discussion is over before it began.

i play smash competitively and doubles barely counts. its 90% of the time 1v1. what are you even talking about?

Depends what branch you're running through in your local area.

Most of the tournaments presented in my local area were all ffa. Only once did we ever have 1v1 that was linked to national finals.

The game does offer after all,1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, and up to 8 player ffa.

You could claim that "1v1 is the most prestigious smash format" but claiming that the Smash series is a 1v1 game is just plainly incorrect. The entire series is designed from the ground up to be a ffa game.

ive never once done a 3v3 in my entire life. ive only done FFA with my child cousins for fun (with items enabled). if you pull up smash tournaments on twitch it is literally ALWAYS 1v1 and occasionally 2v2. youre literally just in the wrong here.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

@CaptainBes.5834 said:

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Davinci.7680 said:

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Leonidrex.5649 said:

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Leonidrex.5649 said:@Trevor Boyer.6524 before I waste my time reading the same arguments for n times.give me straightforward reply.Do you know a single game with similar concept, that did not backfire ? at least 1 example?

Fortnite

Super Smash Bros

anything that is even close to what gw2 is?fortnite is a joke and super smash bros is 1v1 game.

lol what

Both of those games might actually be the top 2 most successful pvp video game titles that the world has ever seen. Both use individual stat systems along with trackers for general win/loss rate. The psychological theory behind these games is that "the players always feel like they are winning even if they are losing" which is what I was explaining in the OP post, about what GW2 ranked is missing. Go watch some youtube videos about it, there are plenty that explain why those two game titles have been successful on unprecedented levels.

And if you think Smash Bros is a 1v1 game, well I guess this discussion is over before it began.

i play smash competitively and doubles barely counts. its 90% of the time 1v1. what are you even talking about?

Depends what branch you're running through in your local area.

Most of the tournaments presented in my local area were all ffa. Only once did we ever have 1v1 that was linked to national finals.

The game does offer after all,1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, and up to 8 player ffa.

You could claim that "1v1 is the most prestigious smash format" but claiming that the Smash series is a 1v1 game is just plainly incorrect. The entire series is designed from the ground up to be a ffa game.

ive never once done a 3v3 in my entire life. ive only done FFA with my child cousins for fun (with items enabled). if you pull up smash tournaments on twitch it is literally ALWAYS 1v1 and occasionally 2v2. youre literally just in the wrong here.

Of course that's what the streamers are doing all day. 1v1 is easier to stream and it's easier to watch with no shout-caster. Also with Smash, the camera zooms in on players much closer during 1v1 than it does if 8 players are out in the field jumping around the map, which again, is better for viewing. Go figure why the coverage always goes to the 1v1 stage.

There are plenty of other tournament formats that happen such as ffa. They just don't get the coverage like 1v1 for the reasons mentioned above. But it does get covered sometimes.

Here you go:

2v2 -

3v3 -

4v4 -

4man ffa -

8man ffa -

[voltaicbore.8012]

Sad to hear you're at that point, Trev. I always appreciated having a few brave ranger advocates left, but you're dwindling in number. I'd take up the mantle... if I had any clue what I was talking about and wasn't already on near-hiatus myself (I maybe log in for a few hours per month these days, tops).

BDO is really great right now, I suggest you check it out.

[CaptainBes.5834]

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@CaptainBes.5834 said:

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Davinci.7680 said:

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Leonidrex.5649 said:

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

@Leonidrex.5649 said:@Trevor Boyer.6524 before I waste my time reading the same arguments for n times.give me straightforward reply.Do you know a single game with similar concept, that did not backfire ? at least 1 example?

Fortnite

Super Smash Bros

anything that is even close to what gw2 is?fortnite is a joke and super smash bros is 1v1 game.

lol what

Both of those games might actually be the top 2 most successful pvp video game titles that the world has ever seen. Both use individual stat systems along with trackers for general win/loss rate. The psychological theory behind these games is that "the players always feel like they are winning even if they are losing" which is what I was explaining in the OP post, about what GW2 ranked is missing. Go watch some youtube videos about it, there are plenty that explain why those two game titles have been successful on unprecedented levels.

And if you think Smash Bros is a 1v1 game, well I guess this discussion is over before it began.

i play smash competitively and doubles barely counts. its 90% of the time 1v1. what are you even talking about?

Depends what branch you're running through in your local area.

Most of the tournaments presented in my local area were all ffa. Only once did we ever have 1v1 that was linked to national finals.

The game does offer after all,1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, and up to 8 player ffa.

You could claim that "1v1 is the most prestigious smash format" but claiming that the Smash series is a 1v1 game is just plainly incorrect. The entire series is designed from the ground up to be a ffa game.

ive never once done a 3v3 in my entire life. ive only done FFA with my child cousins for fun (with items enabled). if you pull up smash tournaments on twitch it is literally ALWAYS 1v1 and occasionally 2v2. youre literally just in the wrong here.

Of course that's what the streamers are doing all day. 1v1 is easier to stream and it's easier to watch with no shout-caster. Also with Smash, the camera zooms in on players much closer during 1v1 than it does if 8 players are out in the field jumping around the map, which again, is better for viewing. Go figure why the coverage always goes to the 1v1 stage.

There are plenty of other tournament formats that happen such as ffa. They just don't get the coverage like 1v1 for the reasons mentioned above. But it does get covered sometimes.

Here you go:

2v2 -

3v3 -

4v4 -

4man ffa -

8man ffa -

2v2 - normal doubles stuff but its online and team damage off which makes it ultra meme. you couldve included like any of the actual professional doubles matches in the past 20 years.3v3 - not even 3v3, its just tag team/crew battle with 3 players each.4v4 teams - a literal 1 off meme which is even stated in the video. its basically never happened in any tournament in the 6 years since this video4man FFA - its an "official" nintendo tournament which are always the least competitive and most out of touch with the scene lol. enough said.

like you might as well say spvp is balanced around 8v8 legacy mid team fight because the community ran a tournament for it once in 2014. just because you can find obscure examples does not mean people EVER use these game types for tournaments more than once every other year.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

@"CaptainBes.5834"

Really what you're saying is that, you feel the only matches that count are the 1v1 matches that streamers run or that get covered by shout-casters.

A better analogy to what you said, would be if I said: "Guild Wars 2 WvW does not exist. Only 10 vs 10 GvG exists because that's what gets covered."

You can say that Soul Calibur VI or Tekken were 1v1 games and you'd be correct. But the Smash series clearly supports multiple multiple match formats past 1v1. Local tournaments, including the ones that aren't covered, often support formats past 1v1. Get on your facebook, look up your local branches, there are plenty. People sitting at home who aren't playing for esports, run various different formats. Coming from someone who has been playing the series since the days of the N64, I can tell you that when people gather for a big weekend party, aint no one waiting for 1v1s dude. People want to play the ffa mode and it's always been that way. The Smash series began to seriously snowball in popularity during a time before esports, before internet connected home console gaming systems. Back in a time where multi player console was only possible if a bunch of people drove somewhere to meet in real life and sit down for a hard night of gaming, Smash Melee became the undisputed king of party gaming, and it was due to the free for all mode.

That free for all mode carried the game series in a time before internet connected consoles, from Jan 21st 1999 N64 release to now in 2020 on Switch. The Smash Melee phase as the true competitive platform was long. The Wii Smash and the Wii-U Smash had slower dumbed down mechanics compared to Melee, so the competitive players kept playing and covering Melee. Since this was happening via a Nintendo Gamecube, these players had to DRIVE or FLY places to play competitively in tournaments, while sitting directly next to the people they were playing against, while holding 6ft cord Nintendo controllers in their hands. You'd think that in a time when esports & internet connected consoles were now thriving, that people would become disinterested in an old console game with no internet connection and no easy way to stream or cover it from the privacy of one's own home. But somehow, Nintendo had once again magically created a game that was so $%^&ing good, that people were willing to ditch the convenience of the internet, and even willing to drive across state or nation or even fly to other countries to play and watch Smash Melee on a Gamecube that had no internet access, while connecting it to an old styled square box tv "that was important for delivering the game's best latency and fps". And that goes for not only the top players in the world, but also semi-pro tournaments, or even the many local tournaments being held all over the place, that weren't connected to the official branch of world finals. Sure, at the top end of the leaderboards, you'd mostly see a lot of 1v1 covered. But during Melee, there was a lot of ffa and especially 2v2 being covered as well. What you don't see in that coverage was how much ffa'ing and messing around for fun that happened before the actual tournament would begin. But that the coverage wasn't being done in the same way it is today, there wasn't really a preference for "what was easiest to stream or shout-cast and what was easiest on the eyes" no, this old footage was often just a room full of crazy Melee fans yelling things aloud while you hear the players talk smack to each other. And before anyone tries to act like ffa and 2v2 WASN'T a thing in Smash Melee, let me remind you where the catch phrase "Wombo Combo" originated from. It was from Zhu, during a 2v2 Melee tournament. Notice the video has 17 million views.

And that brings us to now, in 2020. Smash Ultimate was released in 2018. Only as of the past 2 years, have we seen the competitive Smash player base leaving Melee and feeling comfortable to embrace a new platform in the series that has good enough game mechanics to carry a competitive scene. Only as of these past 2 years have we seen a big transition in the way things are covered for the Smash series, through convenient self live streaming using the internet. Of course due to the commercial interests of streaming and shout casting, 1v1 has become the most covered mode for obvious reasons concerning ease of application and ease on the eyes. This does not mean that "Smash is a 1v1 title" that's a ridiculously naïve thing to say, as if a person were not aware of what made and what keeps the game series wildly successful to this day. What you see being covered for commercial interests is such a tiny miniscule fraction of what people are using the game for around the world. The people covering Smash probably represent about 1% of how many are playing around the world. And the 1v1s they cover probably represent 10% or less of their actual play time playing the game. If you seriously believe those people are not ffa'ing with their buddies at parties or doing team vs. team, you're crazy.

Just remember that streamers & pro players don't make a game. The game makes the game and then streamers and pro players will come to play & cover it. Like crème, the good games will rise to the top. The Smash series did this by being the absolute hands down best ffa game that players around the world could get their hands on, for two decades in a row and counting mind you. Not many game titles have ever even been in the same league as the Smash series concerning ffa popularity. If it weren't for that wildly successful party ffa mode that built the fan base and drew so many players to follow the series, the 1v1 scene that you see covered now would not have been possible.

But you can go ahead and believe that "Smash is a 1v1 game" all you want. I guess it's a matter of perception.

And on a side note pertaining to this thread directly about individual rating scores, it is very interesting to examine a game like Smash. The ffa mode, or 2v2s or even 1v1s, can be toggled from stock match to score. So in the case of a ffa stock match, the winner is the person who survives to the end. But in a ffa score match, the winner is the person who is getting the most kills and dying the least, and sometimes if a kill/death ratio is the same, scores from other types of actions apply to declare who the winner is. This type of individual scoring with various misc factors involved, goes back into a lot of what I've mentioned earlier in this thread. There are many ways to win in a game like Smash. Even when someone is the worst player in the match, there are ways that they can still score a win for the feel of their own personal growth that is on record. A good example would be a new player in a local scene joins a tournament and he's bad at the game compared to the other participants. Even though he loses all night to everyone, he is the only player in the room that happens to score a clean kill on the best player in the room, which will be reflected in the personal stats in his tagged name profile. Even though he lost all night, he did something that no one else could do, and that in itself is a trophy. <- That kind of stuff for individual record holding is what games like Guild Wars 2 are missing.

[Davinci.7680]

it's unbelievable to me how you literally took 30 minutes to explain smash history to me when I have thousands of hours in the game. I go to multiple locals every week. I watch every top tournament both melee and ultimate, singles and doubles. the competitive scene is 90% 1v1, 10% doubles as a fucking side event that no one actually practicing for. almost every doubles team that wins is just a couple really good singles players who showed up the day of without any communication except "wanna do dubs?"