Yeah, that’s the stuff I strongly like about Xbox Live. Because you have to pay for online play, it cuts down on that phenomenon.
Yeah, it’s nice to start over without a lot of the problems of newbie-dom. Of course, I’m still a crappy shot. With any gun or grenade. And I can’t duck and weave worth a damn. And can’t spot the enemy to save my virtual life. And tend to blow myself up with the RCXD. And fall to my death on the Summit map. And stand still in the open while considering picking up an enemy gun.
But apart from that, I’m WAY better now.
I don’t know if I’d say only dumb, so much as young and dumb.
The funny thing is that me and my gaming friends (all late-30s, professionals, been gaming for 30 years, give or take) have had discussions about this- we all agree that the retard play style of BLOPS and most FPSes in general is due to the overly quick respawn rate.
If you’re playing a game where you respawn 15 seconds later, max, with no real penalty, then you’ll play considerably riskier than if you had to wait out the remainder of the round (think Rainbow 6: Raven Shield). Same thing goes for non-hardcore mode. Combine the two, and you have a massive recipe for idiotic game play, and what I’d call a military-themed FPS, rather than any sort of military simulation.
We haven’t had much luck in thinking up a way to come up with an awesome game we’d like, without driving the 13 year old “CONSTANT STIMULATION OMG YAY” players away (I suspect they buy a lot of games) because what we want, isn’t what they want.
And for the people who say that gaming is primarily done by people in their 40s, that total probably includes Flight Sim games, military strategy games, things like Civ, and a bunch of non reflex-dependent games. If you play FPSes or other fast paced games, they tend to be overwhelmingly middle school, high school and college aged players, with some old farts like me thrown in the mix.
I’d like to see a team mode where if you get killed, you’re out of the game. The game ends when one side is obliterated or the the time runs out. Now THAT would encourage careful tactics. But then you’d hear everyone complaining about the F’n Campers. Maybe if you stay in one place too long, mortars start coming in on your position.
ETA: another old fart here. I think my reflexes just aren’t up to the challenge for this kind of game. But I still enjoy it.
Gears of War. Also, in Call of Duty, Search and Destroy does this. You die and you’re out until the next round.
How good are the motion sensors?
I used them for Search and Destroy gametypes. Not much more than that. Then again, I’m used to people running UAV Jammer, making them obsolete.
Yeah, I play almost exclusively TDM, and they’re pretty useless in that game mode. As far as I can tell, the motion sensor is only useful in that game mode if you’re going to do some pretty serious camping. (I used to have a class set up called “MEGA-CAMPER” that used a motion sensor and a LMG, but I never really used the class, so I got rid of it. )
When using the motion sensor, I liked putting it in an advance area, around the corner. For some people, not a lot of people run Hacker, which is nice. That way, I get advance warning in some high traffic areas. For example, when sniping in Havana, I might drop a motion sensor on my side of a wall in a high traffic area to see what’s up. If my team isn’t flipping the spawn, that’s the only area they can come from or mount any kind of an offensive that isn’t in my field of vision. At least I can flashbang some folks and get the drop on them.
Has anyone had the experience of being thrown into an already running game? Sometimes, I’ll be waiting and waiting for a match and then suddenly I’m in Nuketown, losing 5200-2600 with only 3 minutes on the clock. And if I try to back out, I get the “You will be credited a loss” warning!
Yep. It’s because there’s no discernable matchmaking apparatus in Call of Duty games. That’s because it’s across so many platforms. Microsoft has TrueSkill, to pair you up with people that are of your skill level. I suspect that Sony and Nintendo have something similar, and sometimes developers have their own matchmaking algorithms (like Bungie, for example). I remember getting Blops not too long after release and getting tossed in rooms with people that went through their first Prestige already. Treyarch and Infinity Ward, so far, don’t have much of a care with regards to making even teams, so far as skill goes.
As far as actual warm bodies? They use a drop-in-drop-out system, where you can hop in and out of any game, and the game will fill up with players looking for a game. Of course, such a system makes it pretty difficult to have any way to distribute players based on skill, especially if you’re at the ends of the bell curve.
That Trueskill is interesting. But I wonder if win/loss is the only criteria for judging changes in rank. It seems that KDR, total kills, or hit percentage might be useful factors to include. But I guess there are scenarios that would screw with those measures as well.
That is correct. YouTube is littered with the videos of people that whore for kills (and in Modern Warfare 2, tactical nukes) in objective games. So, when everyone is going after the objective, they’ll sit around the side and camp and kill, just to get their stackable killstreak, to bring them to the nuke. Then they upload it to YouTube.
Hit percentage is strongly skewed in favor of snipers. Blops is not very sniper-friendly.
I play Blops with a regular group of people and we’re all pretty good players. We have strategies and tricks and places to be and what have you. We would routinely steamroll people. I think we had a 50 or 60 game winning streak going. That, to me, is a broken game. There’s no reason that we should be matched up with people that are bad. That’s not fun for me and certainly isn’t fun for them. I like it when matchmaking works for everyone, and that’s not what Call of Duty games have historically done.
Does it match you against pubbies or other groups?
Your winning streak might just have to do with better coordination. If you’re talking to each other you’re going to have that much over a team of people who aren’t communicating at all. I’ve had the same kind of experience.
There is some of that, but the matchmaking does unquestionably suck- I recall when I started the game (about a week after release), I was playing people with their first prestige already. Yay. Or, when I’m playing (level 50; haven’t bothered to prestige, would probably be about 1st prestige level 40 by now), I’ll see people with sergeant’s stripes playing fairly commonly. That shouldn’t be the case.
I’m not sure what the match making is based on, but it doesn’t seem to put people who haven’t prestiged in with people who have prestiged 10 times. There’s probably not a lot of difference between no-prestige and 1st-prestige and the game allows for it to widen the pool of possible games for you. It’s just a guess, but I have hit the prestige button several times (dunno, 7 or so maybe) and I commonly play with people who have prestiged several times (sometimes the maximum number) and very seldomly with people who have just started playing.
Prestiging is almost entirely a byproduct of time spent playing. Everybody in the game can prestige if they stick to it, no matter how good or bad they are. In fact, if you put in the time you’ll find that there are a LOT of people who have prestiged that outright suck. I’m on my sixth prestige (soon to be eligible for seven) and I’m nothing special. I’ve improved to the point where I typically get a 1+ KDR, but overall I have a .93 due to the fact that I sucked while I was learning how to play.
It’s not the level they’re at that should concern you. It’s their KDR over the long term that indicates their skill level.
Yes. Both. Another facet I don’t like about their matchmaking.
Yep. Hell, I’ve had the experience when you’re even in our party, albeit not frequently, and not in a while.
Yeah, communication helps in being a better team. Even if you suck, let us know where they are and how many, and I’m cool with that. Just stay even.
Airman Doors, it’s not the K/D that you should be looking at. That’s like looking at batting average when judging baseball players. A more accurate stat would be kills+assists/deaths (if you can get it). Really, you’re looking more at win percentage, or, at the very least, taking that strongly into account. If you have Call of Duty Elite, I think it’ll give you some more advanced metrics.