MW3 blackout - AKA brogamers and kiddies have finally realized that COD has gone to shit - General

Fix the issues DLC, only 20$!

CoD 4 killstreaks were almost perfect, and Black Ops killstreaks below 7 or so work as well. MW2 and MW3 have retarded killstreaks that, instead of giving the winning player an advantage as an award for his personal ability, simply saturate the map in explosions or give obscene amounts of information.

too many people play mw3 for this to work

[QUOTE=Raidyr;35393548]Nah, you got them reversed. Killstreaks are a natural evolution of mechanics that go back to CS and DotA, where the winning team gets more rewarded for doing well and the losing team gets punished for doing poorly. Deathstreaks upset this balance by outright rewarding a player for doing poorly, thereby increasing the incentive for bad behaviors. Especially stupid ones like martyrdom only exacerbate the problem by encouraging players to just run around and die for a lucky kill that required absolutely no ability. Now if you want to argue that the killstreaks have gotten a bit ridiculous I would agree, but the concept and game theory of killstreaks in and of themselves work well in the context of the game, as they have in competitive games for decades.[/QUOTE] Is the same. In CS, whichever team wins the pistol round wins the entire match 80% of the time from my experience. Dunno about DOTA, I haven't played it. Now, which seems better to you: an excellent player getting given AI dogs that kill the enemy team for him around the entire map so he can make his epeen even bigger, or a new guy that doesn't know how the game works getting a HP boost from painkillers after dying a few times?

Should have started the protest by refusing to buy the game in the first place.

[B]News flash:[/B] Not even half of the people, who play the game, give a fuck about the "problems" listed in this video.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393576]Is the same. In CS, whichever team wins the pistol round wins the entire match 80% of the time from my experience. Dunno about DOTA, I haven't played it. Now, which seems better to you: an excellent player getting given AI dogs that kill the enemy team for him around the entire map so he can make his epeen even bigger, or a new guy that doesn't know how the game works getting a HP boost from painkillers after dying a few times?[/QUOTE] The latter, why? Eventually he'll learn how to play the game and the HP boosts will stop cause he won't get anymore deathstreaks. It's just to pull the bad players on their feet and get them playing. I don't need some guy thinking he's so good because he has AI kill the enemies for him. If you're so good, kill em yourself.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393525]Detahstreaks are ok, killstreaks aren't. Kill streaks help the winning team further curb-stomp the losing team. Most of COD matches are a race to whoever gets a powerful streak first (nuke, dogs, chopper gunner). Deathstreaks get players that are not doing so well back on their feet.[/QUOTE] People shouldn't get a boost for being bad, that doesn't encourage them to get better. If a player isn't doing so well then they should get motivated to improve, not expect the game to hold their hand and give them buffs to even the playing field for them without any effort on their part.

[QUOTE=HorizoN;35393619]The latter, why? Eventually he'll learn how to play the game and the HP boosts will stop cause he won't get anymore deathstreaks. It's just to pull the bad players on their feet and get them playing. I don't need some guy thinking he's so good because he has AI kill the enemies for him. If you're so good, kill em yourself.[/QUOTE] Exactly, that is the beauty of deathstreaks. Once you get good at the game, you wont get them anymore. They are there purely to help new guys. I dont see why people cry about deathstreaks so much.

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;35393634]People shouldn't get a boost for being bad, that doesn't encourage them to get better. If a player isn't doing so well then they should get motivated to improve, not expect the game to hold their hand and give them buffs to even the playing field for them without any effort on their part.[/QUOTE] It's called an encouragement.

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;35393634]People shouldn't get a boost for being bad, that doesn't encourage them to get better. If a player isn't doing so well then they should get motivated to improve, not expect the game to hold their hand and give them buffs to even the playing field for them without any effort on their part.[/QUOTE] There motivation to get good is the 100s of unlockables/killstreaks. By your logic of games not needing to "hold your hand", games should not include tutorials or instruction manuals. Obviously, a true PRO gamer doesn't need the game to help them along at all, do they? only [I]scrubs [/I]need tutorials, am I right? Plus, if a new guy gets constantly raped for 1 hour, they aren't gonna keep playing the game. If a deathstreak helps them get one or two kills, they might stay about.

The only way that Activision is going to really give a shit is if sale drops. They really don't care if less people play the game. At the end of the day they got their paycheck and whether or not people are interested in the current game is irrelevant once they purchase it. Activision and Infinity Ward feel hardly obligated to improve the quality of the game through patches while int he reality they are in debt to the CoD community. If you're going to keep throwing out sequel after sequel in a production line fashion and chunk out overpriced DLC, at the very least make sure your game is of quality. Make sure there's not game breaking features or bugs on launch at the very least. I don't expect a 9/10 game each year from them anymore since MW2, but they've really gone downhill and the fashion they're throwing out new installments is only part of the problem.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393638]Exactly, that is the beauty of deathstreaks. Once you get good at the game, you wont get them anymore. They are there purely to help new guys. I dont see why people cry about deathstreaks so much.[/QUOTE] I don't cry about deathstreaks at all, but they represent an increasingly-worrying trend in shooters where the bottom of the barrel, lowest-common-denominator playstyle is rewarded. [editline]1st April 2012[/editline] I'd rather a player who is bad get good at the game himself, or just quit out of frustration. But then again I'm not a stockholder at Activision who needs the game to succeed and markets to anyone with a 360 and a TV.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393654]There motivation to get good is the 100s of unlockables/killstreaks. By your logic of games not needing to "hold your hand", games should not include tutroials or instruction manuals. Obviously, a true PRO gamer doesn't need the game to help them along at all, do they? only [I]scrubs [/I]need tutorials, am I right?[/QUOTE] That's fucking stupid. A tutorial gives a player the information needed to play the game and the tools they'll need to begin learning and improving. A deathstreak just gives you a straight up mechanical advantage for being bad. If your opponent is greatly more skilled than you, they SHOULD win. That's how competitive games fucking [I]work[/I].

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393654]There motivation to get good is the 100s of unlockables/killstreaks. By your logic of games not needing to "hold your hand", games should not include tutorials or instruction manuals. Obviously, a true PRO gamer doesn't need the game to help them along at all, do they? only [I]scrubs [/I]need tutorials, am I right? Plus, if a new guy gets constantly raped for 1 hour, they aren't gonna keep playing the game. If a deathstreak helps them get one or two kills, they might stay about.[/QUOTE] He has a point, because games these days are really REALLY dumbed down so that the player rarely has to figure stuff out all by himself.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393638]Exactly, that is the beauty of deathstreaks. Once you get good at the game, you wont get them anymore. They are there purely to help new guys. I dont see why people cry about deathstreaks so much.[/QUOTE] Because it's not entirely fair when a player who has been working hard to get the skill he has gets his winning streak cut short by the new guy's deathstreak grenade. Yes, they help pull new gamers out of a bad streak and encourages them to play more and improve. This is good in the casual sense, but in the competitive sense it's entirely unfair.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;35393662]I don't cry about deathstreaks at all, but they represent an increasingly-worrying trend in shooters where the bottom of the barrel, lowest-common-denominator playstyle is rewarded. [editline]1st April 2012[/editline] I'd rather a player who is bad get good at the game himself, or just quit out of frustration. But then again I'm not a stockholder at Activision who needs the game to succeed and markets to anyone with a 360 and a TV.[/QUOTE] So you would rather someone not play a game atall because they aren't [I]~L337 pr0~[/I] enough for you, than them get a little nudge? Painkiller in MW2 divided all damage taken by 3 every 3rd life until you get a kill. OH NO ITS RUINING THE GAME INDUSTRY ITS REWARDING THEM FOR BEING BAD. HOW DARE SOMEONE NOT BE GOOD AT A VIDEO GAME WHAT A CRIME GIVE THEM THE CHAIR No, its not. Rewarding a player for being bad would be putting chopper gunners in as kill streaks.

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;35393671]That's fucking stupid. A tutorial gives a player the information needed to play the game and the tools they'll need to begin learning and improving. A deathstreak just gives you a straight up mechanical advantage for being bad. If your opponent is greatly more skilled than you, they SHOULD win. That's how competitive games fucking [I]work[/I].[/QUOTE] Yeah, but it isn't really fair to put a heavy weight champion and someone who just started boxing in the same ring. Games like these need some sort of system that let's players who have less experience fight against people with equal experience. MW tried this with the matchmaking, but failed quite miserably.

[QUOTE=DesumThePanda;35393685]Because it's not entirely fair when a player who has been working hard to get the [B]skill[/B] he has gets his winning streak cut short by the new guy's deathstreak grenade. Yes, they help pull new gamers out of a bad streak and encourages them to play more and improve. This is good in the casual sense, but in the competitive sense it's entirely unfair.[/QUOTE] Hahahahahahaha [I]skill[/I], in a [I]videogame[/I]. Hahahahahahahaha

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393654]There motivation to get good is the 100s of unlockables/killstreaks. By your logic of games not needing to "hold your hand", games should not include tutorials or instruction manuals. Obviously, a true PRO gamer doesn't need the game to help them along at all, do they? only [I]scrubs [/I]need tutorials, am I right?[/QUOTE] My main problem with tutorial as of recent is that you can't disable them. They literally tell you everything within the first few levels in which the player is the most curious. Putting forth effort to actually find out what to do is rewarding. Being told and held by the hand is not. [QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393654]Plus, if a new guy gets constantly raped for 1 hour, they aren't gonna keep playing the game. If a deathstreak helps them get one or two kills, they might stay about.[/QUOTE] You're half right. If someone is losing constantly they may refuse the play the game:however, the urge to improve and/or curiosity in the game can keep a player interested in the game and chances are if there's decent matchmaking you won't be paired up with players at a far higher skill level than you.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393698]Hahahahahahaha [I]skill[/I], in a [I]videogame[/I]. Hahahahahahahaha[/QUOTE] That's just dumb. Being good at competitive video game takes just as much skill as any other hobby. Not MW necessarily, but BF3, CS etc..

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393698]Hahahahahahaha [I]skill[/I], in a [I]videogame[/I]. Hahahahahahahaha[/QUOTE] Yeah, skill. It takes great hand-to-eye coordination and planning to be good at a game.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393698]Hahahahahahaha [I]skill[/I], in a [I]videogame[/I]. Hahahahahahahaha[/QUOTE] uhh yup

[QUOTE=Hullu V3;35393709]That's just dumb. Being good at competitive video game takes just as much skill as any other hobby. Not MW necessarily, but BF3, CS etc..[/QUOTE] At the end of the day shooters are real-time point and click adventures. It doesn't take a huge amount of effort to mouse over a bad guys head and click. There is no "skill" in it. And this is coming from the guy with over 1000 hours in TF2, 300 or so in CS:S and about 200 in BF3.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393693]So you would rather someone not play a game atall because they aren't [I]~L337 pr0~[/I] enough for you, than them get a little nudge?[/QUOTE] Well, honestly, yes. If someone isn't willing to put the necessary effort into improving their skills, then they shouldn't expect to do as well as someone who has, and if they can't accept that, then they shouldn't be playing competitive games. Honestly, the far more reasonable thing to do would be to try and set up a matchmaking system that actually matches you with people of around an equal skill level, that way you'll be able to get better at the game without being completely overwhelmed by players of infinitely higher ability. But giving people an actual mechanical edge is not the answer.

[QUOTE=Hullu V3;35393694]Yeah, but it isn't really fair to put a heavy weight champion and someone who just started boxing in the same ring. Games like these need some sort of system that let's players who have less experience fight against people with equal experience. MW tried this with the matchmaking, but failed quite miserably.[/QUOTE] I agree but it has nothing to do with killstreaks. [QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393698]Hahahahahahaha [I]skill[/I], in a [I]videogame[/I]. Hahahahahahahaha[/QUOTE] Reflexes, reactions, aim, timing, situational awareness, general awareness, information gathering. There are plenty of skills inherent in video games. [QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393693]So you would rather someone not play a game atall because they aren't [I]~L337 pr0~[/I] enough for you, than them get a little nudge? Painkiller in MW2 divided all damage taken by 3 every 3rd life until you get a kill. OH NO ITS RUINING THE GAME INDUSTRY ITS REWARDING THEM FOR BEING BAD. HOW DARE SOMEONE NOT BE GOOD AT A VIDEO GAME WHAT A CRIME GIVE THEM THE CHAIR No, its not. Rewarding a player for being bad would be putting chopper gunners in as kill streaks.[/QUOTE] I never said any of that though. I'm not even pro myself. I just don't like players who are dying being rewarded for dying. It's bad incentive. Should a player in CS gain more money for dying 3 rounds in a row? Should a player in DotA be given some gold for dying 3 times without a kill or assist? No, because that's against the very nature of competition. Good players win because they are good, bad players lose because they aren't as good. They will get better with time and practice and one day they will be the ones calling in the dogs and the chopper gunners and the AC-130s and what have you. But deathstreaks at their core are antithetical to that idea. [editline]1st April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Hullu V3;35393709]That's just dumb. Being good at competitive video game takes just as much skill as any other hobby. Not MW necessarily, but BF3, CS etc..[/QUOTE] I'd argue MW more than BF3, as evidenced by more sponsor and league support. BF3 is a great game but poor for competition.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393732]At the end of the day shooters are real-time point and click adventures. It doesn't take a huge amount of effort to mouse over a bad guys head and click. There is no "skill" in it. And this is coming from the guy with over 1000 hours in TF2, 300 or so in CS:S and about 200 in BF3.[/QUOTE] the only video games are first person shooters sarcasm aside, playing a shooter is more than point and click.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393693]So you would rather someone not play a game atall because they aren't [I]~L337 pr0~[/I] enough for you, than them get a little nudge? [/QUOTE] It's not very rewarding to accomplish something simple or easy. Getting a kill in, say, Killing Floor on easy isn't very fun. Able to take out a squad of competitive and experienced CS player with an entire magazine of an assault rifle is. [QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393693]Painkiller in MW2 divided all damage taken by 3 every 3rd life until you get a kill. OH NO ITS RUINING THE GAME INDUSTRY ITS REWARDING THEM FOR BEING BAD. HOW DARE SOMEONE NOT BE GOOD AT A VIDEO GAME WHAT A CRIME GIVE THEM THE CHAIR[/QUOTE] Well it is ruining the game industry if it's a popular trend (which as far as I can tell deathstreaks are not). It's ruining the overall quality of the game and yes, we should be concerned with out favorite hobby.

[QUOTE=WittyUsername;35393732]At the end of the day shooters are real-time point and click adventures. It doesn't take a huge amount of effort to mouse over a bad guys head and click. There is no "skill" in it. And this is coming from the guy with over 1000 hours in TF2, 300 or so in CS:S and about 200 in BF3.[/QUOTE] Okay, wait, nevermind, this guy can't possibly be for real, I'm guessing that by this point he HAS to be trying to aggravate us, right?

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;35393767]Okay, wait, nevermind, this guy can't possibly be for real, I'm guessing that by this point he HAS to be trying to aggravate us, right?[/QUOTE] most likely