|
Post by iw5000 on Nov 9, 2017 9:03:11 GMT -5
What are you referring to as trash? It's kind of an interesting story and it relates to current events, with how most everyone on this board hates how Activision monetizes their games with things like supply drops, CoD points and other things. The above older story talks about, alleges that youtubers (like Driftor) were being paid by Activision to be hacks, sell that crap without disclosing being on the payroll. Like he said: trash Well, if it's trash, why does this board continually, like ALL THE TIME, discuss Activision and it's business models (COD points, monetizing pay to win, DLC, etc..). This board is constantly complaining (and possibly rightfully so) about how CoD's is becoming pay to win. And most recently, the topic of how this will affect WW2. So unless this guy is completely lying, and the videos of some youtubers admitting it aren't real, it ties into one of the busiest topics on the board. Just asking here. I'm curious. Edit...or is it because his video targets Driftor, who has posted here in the past and is tied into one of the members (Marvel?). Is that it? If so, I can sort of see where you are coming from, but the above youtuber posted screen shots of Driftor tripping all over himself (or one could even say lying) trying to explain his relationship to Activision.
|
|
|
Post by illram on Nov 9, 2017 10:51:31 GMT -5
Ooooooh footsteps are loud again. They were non existent in the beta which had me worried. And if you are on Xbox: does anyone else notice Windows Sonic makes them even louder or is it just me? I've been having fun so far but I wonder if this title is going to get boring quicker. There are 9 maps (!) and the class load-out system seems sort of lame to me. I do like the idea of buying contracts with payroll. Not totally sure how I feel about the whole HQ thing. Like in the beta the UI is kind of confusing. But enough with the meta talk, which gun is the best, bros? That's why we are all here right? Just bought the One X, Windows Sonic sounds interesting, though never heard of it. Is it suitable for mixamp pro - HD598s? Also are the footsteps comparable to BO3 or old school CoD? Also is the spawn system decent in this game? You would want to turn off all surround effects of the Mixamp, rendering it sort of useless. As for positional accuracy, I still prefer Dolby 5.1 or 7.1 virtualized for headphones. I have not tried Atmos for headphones which is also available for a free trial. I believe Sonic is a 3D audio engine, not a virtualization algorithm for channel surround, so it needs the game to be specifically coded to support that type of audio. I don't think WW2 supports it as the positioning does not sound accurate. BUT footsteps are still nice and loud. I can't speak to the spawns yet as I don't have enough playtime to give all the maps an objective assessment.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Nov 9, 2017 11:02:42 GMT -5
Well, if it's trash, why does this board continually, like ALL THE TIME, discuss Activision and it's business models (COD points, monetizing pay to win, DLC, etc..). This board is constantly complaining (and possibly rightfully so) about how CoD's is becoming pay to win. And most recently, the topic of how this will affect WW2. So unless this guy is completely lying, and the videos of some youtubers admitting it aren't real, it ties into one of the busiest topics on the board. Just asking here. I'm curious. Edit...or is it because his video targets Driftor, who has posted here in the past and is tied into one of the members (Marvel?). Is that it? If so, I can sort of see where you are coming from, but the above youtuber posted screen shots of Driftor tripping all over himself (or one could even say lying) trying to explain his relationship to Activision. Who's complaining about Activision? I don't follow every release, but it seems like they're doing the best out of any of the major publishers - COD is the only franchise that it can be said they're ruining with microtransactions. Their other top FPS games are Destiny (where microtransactions aren't an issue as of now) and Overwatch (which seems like the gold standard for how players can reasonably want a current franchise to monetize post-launch). What they've done to COD is despicable. You can reasonably expect them to go less than three months before they make the multiplayer pay to win. Once those season pass sales are locked in, they're going to bleed you without regard for what it does to the experience.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Nov 9, 2017 12:10:03 GMT -5
For the first time in like a decade, I didn't buy the DLC last year. I just bought the $65 game. I did play Infinite Warfare a good bit. I got up to fourth or fifth prestige? I don't even know. At some point though, not sure when, I just stopped playing. Sometime last spring. It wasn't due to other games, I just kind of stopped gaming for a while. But one factor was the whole variant gun thing. I got tired of playing, especially with friends, and everyone talking about having this gun, that gun, etc...And having to get them by going to the spinning loot crate thing. It left a foul taste in my mouth. Like I could see all these better guns on the list, but there was no way to play enough, to get enough points, to get them all. Unless of course, I paid real money. They probably did get $10 extra out of me.
My problem with the DLC was this. Prior to last year, I just bought the bigger version of the game. Spend $99 for the game? So I guess I was spending $65 plus another $30 prepaying for the DLC....rather than $65 plus $15 per pack? Prepaying was a rip off. Especially with PSX getting the maps first. Why pay for four bundles, when I might not even be playing when two or three of them come out.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Nov 9, 2017 12:10:59 GMT -5
Well, if it's trash, why does this board continually, like ALL THE TIME, discuss Activision and it's business models (COD points, monetizing pay to win, DLC, etc..). This board is constantly complaining (and possibly rightfully so) about how CoD's is becoming pay to win. And most recently, the topic of how this will affect WW2. So unless this guy is completely lying, and the videos of some youtubers admitting it aren't real, it ties into one of the busiest topics on the board. Just asking here. I'm curious. Edit...or is it because his video targets Driftor, who has posted here in the past and is tied into one of the members (Marvel?). Is that it? If so, I can sort of see where you are coming from, but the above youtuber posted screen shots of Driftor tripping all over himself (or one could even say lying) trying to explain his relationship to Activision. Who's complaining about Activision? I don't follow every release, but it seems like they're doing the best out of any of the major publishers - COD is the only franchise that it can be said they're ruining with microtransactions. Their other top FPS games are Destiny (where microtransactions aren't an issue as of now) and Overwatch (which seems like the gold standard for how players can reasonably want a current franchise to monetize post-launch). What they've done to COD is despicable. You can reasonably expect them to go less than three months before they make the multiplayer pay to win. Once those season pass sales are locked in, they're going to bleed you without regard for what it does to the experience. Most of the complaints have been about CoD, in the CoD sections.
|
|
Usagi
True Bro
Grin and Barrett
Posts: 1,674
|
Post by Usagi on Nov 9, 2017 12:28:11 GMT -5
So whats up with the KAR? Does anyone else notice lots of quicksco pe heroes working that gun? I tried it out with bots and it does indeed feel very forgiving when you quick scope it. I.e., time the shot just right so the hitbox/aim assist is just right. Or whatever that exploit used to be. (Am I remembering that right?) It's a nasty gun. ADS time is so fast and I've yet to get a hitmarker with it. Snipers are kinda ruining PC at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by GodMars on Nov 9, 2017 12:35:05 GMT -5
Edit...or is it because his video targets Driftor, who has posted here in the past and is tied into one of the members (Marvel?). Is that it? If so, I can sort of see where you are coming from, but the above youtuber posted screen shots of Driftor tripping all over himself (or one could even say lying) trying to explain his relationship to Activision. It's trash because it's like that "deep state" conspiracy nonsense that's being peddled by some in our society. It's so stupid and illogical it's not even worth the time we're spending on it here.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Nov 9, 2017 12:46:27 GMT -5
Edit...or is it because his video targets Driftor, who has posted here in the past and is tied into one of the members (Marvel?). Is that it? If so, I can sort of see where you are coming from, but the above youtuber posted screen shots of Driftor tripping all over himself (or one could even say lying) trying to explain his relationship to Activision. It's trash because it's like that "deep state" conspiracy nonsense that's being peddled by some in our society. It's so stupid and illogical it's not even worth the time we're spending on it here. Ok. I'm just not seeing that I guess, the conspiracy. It's seems pretty black and white. Activision was funneling undisclosed money to some youtubers so that they would pump up the good news for Call of Duty. One or two of the youtubers ultimately admitted to it. Not seeing a conspiracy there. In fact, I'm not even surprised they did it.
|
|
|
Post by GodMars on Nov 9, 2017 13:02:37 GMT -5
It's trash because it's like that "deep state" conspiracy nonsense that's being peddled by some in our society. It's so stupid and illogical it's not even worth the time we're spending on it here. Ok. I'm just not seeing that I guess, the conspiracy. It's seems pretty black and white. Activision was funneling undisclosed money to some youtubers so that they would pump up the good news for Call of Duty. One or two of the youtubers ultimately admitted to it. Not seeing a conspiracy there. In fact, I'm not even surprised they did it. So Activision paid Drift0r to dog on IW and their CoD loot box system? Seems legit. Edit: He also lost a good chunk of money not covering IW. Did Activision pay him to not cover it? Or did they pay him to make up for his losses?
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Nov 9, 2017 13:46:30 GMT -5
Ok. I'm just not seeing that I guess, the conspiracy. It's seems pretty black and white. Activision was funneling undisclosed money to some youtubers so that they would pump up the good news for Call of Duty. One or two of the youtubers ultimately admitted to it. Not seeing a conspiracy there. In fact, I'm not even surprised they did it. So Activision paid Drift0r to dog on IW and their CoD loot box system? Seems legit. Edit: He also lost a good chunk of money not covering IW. Did Activision pay him to not cover it? Or did they pay him to make up for his losses? What you are talking about, is exactly what was discussed in the video. The complaining about BO3, well after the game was out. With like a few weeks left in the game cycle. And was that 'criticism' of Driftor's just one of sour grapes, because he wasn't going to be paid for IW? Love the game when getting paid to cover it. Find out your not getting paid for IW...boom, out comes the negative video.
|
|
haoz
True Bro
Posts: 185
|
Post by haoz on Nov 9, 2017 13:55:31 GMT -5
Why would you even watch trash content like that? What does MLG have to do with drift0r? What are you referring to as trash? It's kind of an interesting story and it relates to current events, with how most everyone on this board hates how Activision monetizes their games with things like supply drops, CoD points and other things. The above older story talks about, alleges that youtubers (like Driftor) were being paid by Activision to be hacks, sell that crap without disclosing being on the payroll. I didn't feel like watching the videos, so I only looked at his video thumbnails. Channel is literally tabloid titles that puts "dirt" on other youtubers or dramatizes relatively minor news. I really don't care for Youtuber drama or sensationalistic reporting. Does he have any real evidence youtubers get paid by activision? It doesn't matter anyway. It's an obvious incentive for a CoD youtuber to promote CoD; their income depends on continued popularity of the game, and developers won't invite haters to their studio for content. Any reasonable person should watch drift0r and others with this in mind. Activision and the studios don't even need to pay youtubers to get free promotion. You can dislike supply drops and monetization without approving of content like what this guy produces. (although I don't find loot boxes to be a moral disaster like some others here feel)
|
|
|
Post by GodMars on Nov 9, 2017 14:18:06 GMT -5
And was that 'criticism' of Driftor's just one of sour grapes, because he wasn't going to be paid for IW? Love the game when getting paid to cover it. Find out your not getting paid for IW...boom, out comes the negative video. But they paid him to cover MWR and WWII? You do realize how illogical and irrational this line of thinking is, right? Never mind, don't respond, I do not wish to further engage in this discussion with you.
|
|
|
Post by illram on Nov 9, 2017 14:47:15 GMT -5
Doesn't Activision fly people out to get free sneak peeks at the games? You don't need to literally hand someone a check to curry favor with them. I'm not specifically talking about Drif0r or whoever, I don't know who that was but I believe they were providing some YT personalities with such access.
Any freebies to anyone who purports to present a neutral opinion on something should be considered in that person's evaluation of whatever they are reviewing. This goes for every product and every review. For instance, tech sites that get stuff for free, vs. tech sites that buy stuff off the shelf. Etc. Ignoring that is naive.
|
|
|
Post by illram on Nov 9, 2017 15:00:03 GMT -5
do people actually need help on why someone whos made positive cod videos for a decade might be on good terms with activision Fixed.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Nov 9, 2017 15:58:25 GMT -5
And was that 'criticism' of Driftor's just one of sour grapes, because he wasn't going to be paid for IW? Love the game when getting paid to cover it. Find out your not getting paid for IW...boom, out comes the negative video. But they paid him to cover MWR and WWII? You do realize how illogical and irrational this line of thinking is, right? Never mind, don't respond, I do not wish to further engage in this discussion with you. nothing on here says you have to. Move on then.
|
|
Dumien
True Bro
Black Market Trader
No engrams. Only disappointment.
Posts: 3,292
|
Post by Dumien on Nov 9, 2017 16:30:16 GMT -5
tbh blizzards had some pretty questionable monetization practices in hots, hearthstone, and diablo as well. but those first two are free to play so its not a great comparison. eh. Hearthstone is definitely pay-to-win for its average player. Takes some skill to go infinite in arena or hit legend without buying packs. For most TCGs and CCGs that is the expection. Get more cards. Win. All else have massively generous economies due to the dominance of Hearthstone. The big turning point for me that made me lose faith in CoD was the release of the Marshals in Bo3. Some of the appeal of CoD ...for alot of people i think... was the idea that everyone had everything and you could counter almost everything with at the very least a mirror match. The Marshals were something different. Either you had them and you were unbeatable in close range (WITH A SECONDARY) OR you didnt have them and you had to keep out of marshal range else you lose. All because of a lootbox roll. Other games (hearthstone included) let you scrap your unwanted stuff loot drops and get whatever the hell you want. That would have solved the marshal problem. But naw...they elected to scrap some of their "integrity" in favor of more money... and who can blame them? If they 1) let you trade in loot for armory credits and 2) have all lootbox exclusive weapons available for purchase with armory credits then I am perfectly alright with them "printing" new dlc weapons
|
|
haoz
True Bro
Posts: 185
|
Post by haoz on Nov 9, 2017 16:37:59 GMT -5
tbh blizzards had some pretty questionable monetization practices in hots, hearthstone, and diablo as well. but those first two are free to play so its not a great comparison. eh. Hearthstone is definitely pay-to-win for its average player. Takes some skill to go infinite in arena or hit legend without buying packs. For most TCGs and CCGs that is the expection. Get more cards. Win. All else have massively generous economies due to the dominance of Hearthstone. The big turning point for me that made me lose faith in CoD was the release of the Marshals in Bo3. Some of the appeal of CoD ...for alot of people i think... was the idea that everyone had everything and you could counter almost everything with at the very least a mirror match. The Marshals were something different. Either you had them and you were unbeatable in close range (WITH A SECONDARY) OR you didnt have them and you had to keep out of marshal range else you lose. All because of a lootbox roll. Other games (hearthstone included) let you scrap your unwanted stuff loot drops and get whatever the hell you want. That would have solved the marshal problem. But naw...they elected to scrap some of their "integrity" in favor of more money... and who can blame them? If they 1) let you trade in loot for armory credits and 2) have all lootbox exclusive weapons available for purchase with armory credits then I am perfectly alright with them "printing" new dlc weapons I stopped playing IW before extra weapons appeared, but my understanding is that they were accessible through crafting or whatever. Only AW and BO3 have the random luck process for extra weapons (with BO3 having extremely low rates for obtaining the weapons).
|
|
|
Post by illram on Nov 9, 2017 18:38:12 GMT -5
thanks for specifying i was worried someone may think i was talking about the guys whove been shitting on them for ten years I know. That's why I am here. Lookin' out for my 'bros.
|
|
Slick
True Bro
Taking the piss
Posts: 1,015
|
Post by Slick on Nov 9, 2017 21:17:56 GMT -5
On the zombie side of things, it's alright, but content feels lacking which is making me notice the grind. The zombie types and the tropes they destroy are the best element of this particular zombie experience. Zombies are actually slightly scary to shoot down, and is harder than classic Treyarch zombies. I hate the fact the obviously op specialist mods are so many hours of grinding away. 6 hours in and constant 20 round games with hundreds of kills each and the progress is crawling.
|
|
Slick
True Bro
Taking the piss
Posts: 1,015
|
Post by Slick on Nov 10, 2017 18:04:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by illram on Nov 10, 2017 18:57:35 GMT -5
I'm already bored and playing Infinite Warfare again.
|
|
|
Post by lazy on Nov 11, 2017 7:57:30 GMT -5
So I must have some sort of sadomasochistic tendencies because I am now thinking of getting WW2. How does the map voting work can you keep voting for the previous map, if there's one thing that really pisses me off is playing the same map over and over and over again. How are the servers and have they done anything to speed up the time between games. I just don't think I can face another torturous CoD experience.
|
|
|
Post by illram on Nov 11, 2017 11:11:21 GMT -5
Map voting does not work for me. I vote and nothing registers. Figures.
The post-game delay is gone. I never really have connection issues with my internet and location so I can't speak to that really, connection is usually rock solid for me.
|
|
malgato
True Bro
Farm ammo, then everyone wipe.
Posts: 1,195
|
Post by malgato on Nov 11, 2017 15:18:46 GMT -5
There aren't very many maps and map voting doesn't seem to do anything - I don't think I've seen evidence of anyone voting, and my vote doesn't seem to do anything. If you are looking for map variety, now is not the time to purchase, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by lazy on Nov 11, 2017 15:19:42 GMT -5
Thanks illram mostly good to hear. With the map voting can you still vote for the previous map. It drives me nuts when the same map gets voted, in BO3 the small map with the white building and truck in the middle just seemed to be constant even if I changed lobby it would be that map, I think at one point I must have played it about nine or more times in a row. So that is a definite deal breaker.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Nov 11, 2017 17:40:11 GMT -5
Thanks illram mostly good to hear. With the map voting can you still vote for the previous map. It drives me nuts when the same map gets voted, in BO3 the small map with the white building and truck in the middle just seemed to be constant even if I changed lobby it would be that map, I think at one point I must have played it about nine or more times in a row. So that is a definite deal breaker. You cannot directly vote for the same map. You have the option of two new maps and "classified," which will result in a random map (which can be the same map you just played).
|
|
|
Post by lustindarkness on Nov 11, 2017 17:51:10 GMT -5
I don't think I have played the same map twice in a row.
|
|
|
Post by lazy on Nov 11, 2017 18:12:58 GMT -5
Ah that's good, that's a much better idea than the old system. I like a bit of variety.
|
|
|
Post by illram on Nov 11, 2017 23:03:24 GMT -5
I bet alot of people aren't voting because the very poorly designed UI buries the option at the bottom of the screen. It's easy to overlook.
The UI really is terrible. Seems like one of those things that should not be hard to do well.
|
|
|
Post by lazy on Nov 12, 2017 3:36:17 GMT -5
Ye you'd think by now every game would have a decent UI and a decent amount of adjustability options. I've given up on games because of these things ruining my experience. (I'm old now and I like things a certain way.)
|
|