I love how this 'news' article without a proper source feeds off of original information posted on reddit almost a week ago gets to hot but when I post an actual news story with proper crediting and tags with one spelling error in the last sentence of the article it gets reported.
2191d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView commentInappropriate
I'm pretty sure, as foxtrot says, that when updating the game it tries to implement new stuff in an existing world, disregarding everything you've already explored. I've had this happen a few times; having to search a long ways from home to encounter something new. But it could also corrupt your world so making a back up or starting over is always better
What about the gameplay do you not like that much? In terms of difficulty, that metric is subjective as the setting you're playing at defines your experience. The fairly low grade stems from the fact that the difficulty is sometimes inconsistent. But if you want a Dark Souls Geralt lovebaby, putting it on the highest difficulty will scratch that itch.
As much as I'd like to attack you in my defense, I'll just state that MW3 took 16 days to get to a billion. That came out a month after Battlefield 3, the best selling BF game. Same year as Crysis 2, Homefront, Killzone 3, Red Orchestra 2, Operation Flashpoint etc. It was crowded then as well. And those are just the games that came out in the same year. You mention only one game that came out this year.
Bored of being wrong? In the article we describe the exact games that didn't make a billion. Not so coincidentally those were all released in sequence, starting with ghosts all the way through advanced warfare, Black ops 3 etc. So yeah, there was a period of time, not 10 years mind you, but a good 5 years where the franchise was stuck in a rut. People weren't wrong, they were critical of a franchise that wasn't that good anymore and the sales figures reflect this. But they've ...
I re-submitted this article because the initial one failed to be approved by anyone within days of submitting it. As you can imagine, trying to keep this community informed is quite hard when no one bothers to approve perfectly fine articles
Nonsense! For every 20 year old player there would have to be three 1-year olds and one 2-year old to get an average of 5. Your estimate, good sir, is totally bonkers!!
But seriously though, it is a valid point indeed that maybe the younger players aren't as cooperative as more mature players. So this quest certainly helps. I think Fortnite should also feature way heavier punishment for leaving a team mid-game and rewards for playing cooperatively. Teach the kids to work togeth...
Well unless Infinity Ward decides to turn every weapon in the game into a pea shooter nothing could anger the entire community of course :P But I understand the criticism. We continually try to create headlines that both cover the contents of the article but draw people in. And sadly click bait works while nobody clicks on 100% honest headlines unless the news is colossal. I do agree taht this headline operates in a gray area and it could always be better!
I cite multiple sources and provide links to many people's opinions that, I'm pretty sure, are also a part of the community. So please explain to me what about the headline or the article is untrue and I'll rectify accordingly
Based on the research featured in the YouTube vid, the flowchart is exactly what's wrong with the system. pistol vs m4 -->get rekt for multiple games in a row, ruining your experience->get paired with other rekt and inexperienced players-> stomp them while ruining their experience multiple games in a row. Of course you can profit in the short term but I don't see how embedding gameplay elements into your game only to have players pull their hair out over it half the time is e...
There's nothing wrong with matchmaking per se, but the fact that CoD is designed to be an adrenaline fueled game means that there has to be a certain amount of imbalance in the game. If you are always pitted against equally skilled players, getting a high kill streak is always just out of reach. Not to mention the whole gameplay loop MW introduced where you are encouraged to play with all the guns in the game. Good luck getting a pistol camo or attachment when you are in a high skilled me...
I'm pretty sure, as foxtrot says, that when updating the game it tries to implement new stuff in an existing world, disregarding everything you've already explored. I've had this happen a few times; having to search a long ways from home to encounter something new. But it could also corrupt your world so making a back up or starting over is always better
What about the gameplay did you hate?
What about the gameplay do you not like that much? In terms of difficulty, that metric is subjective as the setting you're playing at defines your experience. The fairly low grade stems from the fact that the difficulty is sometimes inconsistent. But if you want a Dark Souls Geralt lovebaby, putting it on the highest difficulty will scratch that itch.
As much as I'd like to attack you in my defense, I'll just state that MW3 took 16 days to get to a billion. That came out a month after Battlefield 3, the best selling BF game. Same year as Crysis 2, Homefront, Killzone 3, Red Orchestra 2, Operation Flashpoint etc. It was crowded then as well. And those are just the games that came out in the same year. You mention only one game that came out this year.
Bored of being wrong? In the article we describe the exact games that didn't make a billion. Not so coincidentally those were all released in sequence, starting with ghosts all the way through advanced warfare, Black ops 3 etc. So yeah, there was a period of time, not 10 years mind you, but a good 5 years where the franchise was stuck in a rut. People weren't wrong, they were critical of a franchise that wasn't that good anymore and the sales figures reflect this. But they've ...
You'll find that in the article, I pretty much agree with you :D
We've slightly updated the article to reflect said problems are also present on the Xbox version of the game. Thanks!
I re-submitted this article because the initial one failed to be approved by anyone within days of submitting it. As you can imagine, trying to keep this community informed is quite hard when no one bothers to approve perfectly fine articles
Nonsense! For every 20 year old player there would have to be three 1-year olds and one 2-year old to get an average of 5. Your estimate, good sir, is totally bonkers!!
But seriously though, it is a valid point indeed that maybe the younger players aren't as cooperative as more mature players. So this quest certainly helps. I think Fortnite should also feature way heavier punishment for leaving a team mid-game and rewards for playing cooperatively. Teach the kids to work togeth...
Nothing has been announced in terms of a discount. Also the Steam Autumn sale ends December 3rd so I don't think it will be on sale.
Well unless Infinity Ward decides to turn every weapon in the game into a pea shooter nothing could anger the entire community of course :P But I understand the criticism. We continually try to create headlines that both cover the contents of the article but draw people in. And sadly click bait works while nobody clicks on 100% honest headlines unless the news is colossal. I do agree taht this headline operates in a gray area and it could always be better!
I cite multiple sources and provide links to many people's opinions that, I'm pretty sure, are also a part of the community. So please explain to me what about the headline or the article is untrue and I'll rectify accordingly
Based on the research featured in the YouTube vid, the flowchart is exactly what's wrong with the system. pistol vs m4 -->get rekt for multiple games in a row, ruining your experience->get paired with other rekt and inexperienced players-> stomp them while ruining their experience multiple games in a row. Of course you can profit in the short term but I don't see how embedding gameplay elements into your game only to have players pull their hair out over it half the time is e...
There's nothing wrong with matchmaking per se, but the fact that CoD is designed to be an adrenaline fueled game means that there has to be a certain amount of imbalance in the game. If you are always pitted against equally skilled players, getting a high kill streak is always just out of reach. Not to mention the whole gameplay loop MW introduced where you are encouraged to play with all the guns in the game. Good luck getting a pistol camo or attachment when you are in a high skilled me...