>>14007477
It can be seen as limiting when its implemented in games which have a great amount of possible playstyles, with one not being particularly better than the other in any way. Ranking systems work when they encourage you to use your given toolset to its fullest extent, so of course when that toolset is incredibly broad, the question of what constitutes better performance becomes more ambiguous. Which is why they're borderline essential for arcade games in order to distinguish good players for shit players and have people coming back for competition, though what constitutes good/shit players in a stealth game is up for debate. Would it be someone who clears the level the fastest, or someone who ghosts the level, or someone who ghosts the level the fastest?
Instead a better solution would be to opt for several challenge runs you can choose from which challenge you to play in a particular way to accomplish particular goals (I think the newest HITMAN does this), and also Doom does this to some extent with its end-level ranking. If you want to 100% all items, secrets and enemies, you can't get the fastest par time, and vice versa.
Basically when the game tells you to do things however you like, grading the player's performance becomes rather counterproductive. Instead the player could set up his own challenge runs, though this should not be a substitute for a lack of difficulty via self-restriction *cough* Dishonored *cough* Symphony of the Night *cough*. The game should be smart enough to provide or encourage these kind of challenge runs on its own, like the classes you can pick between in Circle of the Moon. Unfortunately most people don't know the joy of playing a glass cannon Magician under a time limit because not everybody knows about the passwords on their first time through.