Activision Patents Accused of hurting your K/D

EastCoastHandle

EastCoastHandle

EastCoastHandle

Soldato
Joined
8 Jun 2018
Posts
2,827



Content Customization Based on Player Skill Level


[0075] In a first implementation of the present specification, the system enables players of different skill levels to play together, in the same level of a gaming session, by providing players of different skill levels challenges tailored to their particular skill level. In embodiments, a multiplayer game environment is simulated by a computing system. The gaming parameters are adjusted within the gaming environment according to skill levels of the different players participating in the game. Adjustments result in each player in a team experiencing a different degree of difficulty or challenge while still experiencing the same content within the same level of the gameplay session and while still being able to cooperatively play as a team. In embodiments, the skill levels of the players are different for at least two or more players.
Click to expand...


[0077] The modification of the gaming parameters is based on the skill level of each player. In embodiments, the modification of gaming parameters is executed in real time during a gaming session. In embodiments, the modification of the gaming parameters are executed on a player-by-player basis, based on their skill levels, which may be different for different players. Therefore, the online multiplayer gaming environment generates a gaming environment within which two or more players can play cooperatively as a team within the same gaming environment of the same level of the same game and tailors the experiences in that gaming environment to the specific skill level of each player.
Click to expand...

[0081] FIG. 3B illustrates a table providing an exemplary list of parameters of a gameplay session that are modified based on a player's skill level and the corresponding experience for players of different skill levels. For example, in a first-shooter gaming environment, when a first player aims his weapon at a target, a parameter defining the tolerance for how accurate the player's aim must be to hit the target is modified based on the acquired skill level of the player. The computer assigns the tolerance for how accurate the player's aim must be to hit the target differently based on the skill level of the first player. A player having a higher skill level will be assigned a lower tolerance parameter and therefore, will have to be more accurate in aiming in order to hit the target. A player having a lower skill level be assigned a higher tolerance parameter and, therefore, could be less accurate in aiming in order to hit the target. As shown, column 310 of Table 1 lists modifiable parameters such as `degree of accuracy required to hit a target`, column 312 lists the experience of a player having a `high` skill level, which may be `high degree of accuracy required`, column 314 lists the experience of a player having a `medium` skill level, which may be `medium degree of accuracy required`, and column 316 lists the experience of a player having a `low` skill level, which may be `low degree of accuracy required`. Similarly, the table lists other modifiable parameters, such as `likelihood of being targeted by enemy`, where the experience of a player having a `high` skill level may be `high degree of likelihood`, the experience of a player having a `medium` skill level may be `medium degree of likelihood`, and the experience of a player having a `low` skill level may be `low degree of likelihood`. Another example parameter is `difficulty of an in-game puzzle`, where the experience of a player having a `high` skill level may be `high degree of difficulty`, the experience of a player having a `medium` skill level may be `medium degree of difficulty`, and the experience of a player having a `low` skill level may be `low degree of difficulty`. Another example parameter is `bonus chance of finding powerful treasure`, where the experience of a player having a `high` skill level may be `medium degree of chance`, the experience of a player having a `medium` skill level may be `high degree of chance`, and the experience of a player having a `low` skill level may be `very high degree of chance`. Yet another example parameter is `number of challenging enemies in a single encounter`, where the experience of a player having a `high` skill level may be a high number, for example 10-20, the experience of a player having a `medium` skill level may be a medium number, for example 5-10, and the experience of a player having a `low` skill level may be a low number, for example 1-5. Still another example parameter is `gold earned multiplier`, where the earning of a player having a `high` skill level may be `high`, for example 1.5.times., the earning of a player having a `medium` skill level may be `medium`, for example 1.25.times., and the earning of a player having a `low` skill level may be `low`, for example 1.times.. One more example parameter is `friendly-fire damage amount to team-mates`, where the experience of a player having a `high` skill level may be `high degree of damage`, for example 100% of damage, the experience of a player having a `medium` skill level may be `medium degree of damage`, for example 50% of damage, and the experience of a player having a `low` skill level may be `low degree of damage`, for example 0% of damage.
Click to expand...


Ok folks it's a lot of information. But the truth is I believe this is going on. With the game altering your aim while you are playing in combination with SBMM is alleged to hurt skilled players.

At least one other person spoke out and says he believes it's single player. However, the patent doesn't limit use of this mechanic to single player.

The problem is that this has been said for about a year now. And, it's finally gaining some traction. There are posts on reddit that have talked about this for sometime now.
https://www.reddit.com/r/modernwarf..._design_proof_of_sbmm_and_how_its_even_worse/

Another problem is that how SBMM appears to work is that those who have a K/D less then 1.2 (or there abouts) will probably not know what you are talking about. This is my personal experience as the game seem to play find until I got over 1.1 k/d or so. Then things became much worst. It's a combo of SBMM (sweater lobbies), hit registration not working, kills streaks that don't work on certain people and difficulty getting your cross hair on an opponent. Which seems to all happen simultaneously.

The problem is that this seems to be used to force people to buy the Season Pass. Which is rumored lessen the effects of their patent. If other publishers like EA get wind of this they could use this to substitute lootboxes for example.




Edit:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/9789406

Newest Patent: December 3, 2020
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=2&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=Activision&s2=Multiplayer&OS=Activision+AND+Multiplayer&RS=Activision+AND+Multiplayer

Older Patent from 2019
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=2&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=60&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=Activision&OS=Activision&RS=Activision
 
Last edited:
rubberduck said:
The fundamentals of playing well still exist however in terms of technique and decision making to generate the best possible outcome for you within the game, these will not change. People are happy to accept advantages that are provided to them i.e. better internet connections (reduced latency), faster reactions, higher framerates, reduced input lag, higher refresh rates and resolutions etc etc. so there is no such thing as a completely level playing field. The 'best' players will still be the 'best', however this is a dynamic way of reducing the delta between the 'best' and 'worst' such that the experience of the worst player does not feel quite so bad. This should lead to less people quitting the game because they are fed up of being dominated in every game i.e. healthier populations. Moreover, people who start playing the game some time after it has been released will not be as badly exposed to getting easily defeated by the players who have many many hours of experience and practice. Another advantage of this approach is that it will allow players with a bigger difference in skill level to play competitively together, hence reduced queue times for matches.
Click to expand...

I fundamentally disagree. And believe that cost and profit is playing a factor in why these stumbling blocks are hampering players from experiencing an accurate result from their game play.

Just like how they used lag compensation for host players do to p2p connections. Which put them at a similar disadvantage. The same can be and will be said about sbmm and their patents. We all know and mostly agree that lag comp. should have never been a thing if they invested in a dedicated server infrastructure. All this is doing is trying to place a Monetary incentive to get you to buy something.

If they truly wanted to keep noobs from getting owned they would lump them into their own lobbies until they reached a certain threshold. Which would put them into the general population.

What they are doing is so unnecessarily convoluted that it’s clear there is more involved then protecting noobs.

This is in fact hampering decent players from exercising their skill level in this first person shooter, full stop!!!!! There is no ifs, ands nor buts about this fundamental principal behind the patent and sbmm. It is not helping noobs as it cuddles them. Preventing them from improving in the game. It is not helping decent players as it hinders their ability to play.

As a matter of fact it’s the first case of gas lighting I have seen in a FPS game. In which the game would make you think it’s you that’s the problem. People have bought modems, mouse, headphones, routers, controllers, better internet, rebuilt PCs, all in the vain attempt to compensate for a problem which never existed on their end. Text book gas lighting.

All because their:
Aim is off
Can’t hear footsteps at the start of a match of enemies.
Bullets don’t register. Score streaks that don’t register. But still register with you even though you are inside a building,
They can’t move fast enough or are sluggish. While timmynothumbs run around the map as “the flash”
They don’t see opponents they should have seen
Higher then normal pings and spikes in ping that should not exist
Blocked players still showing up in your lobbies
A pattern of getting owned buy a weapon that has some sort of bullet tracer effect. Or buy the same type of weapon from different players.
Being shadow banned inwhich you are placed in cheat lobbies. <——People forgot that activision is still actively doing this. Duration can be a few hours or a week.
Etc....

When you explore the details of what they are doing it does not come off as innocent as you imply. The offense this game brings is so egregious it comes off as demonic in nature.
 
Last edited:
MissChief said:
It’s always someone else’s fault. If everyone else stopped hacking, lag switching, using controller mods, using controller on PC and stopped using WiFi then I’d never die.
Click to expand...
MrRockliffe said:
I can't help but wonder how much of this is people just looking to blame deaths etc on something else.

I'm not saying they are, just wondering :)
Click to expand...
You do realize it's in their patent posted in the op?
Besides, I can play battlefield games and not see the highten level of hardware and software cheating as I do with cod games. SBMM and their patent helps fuel cheating. The more they try to prevent normal game play the more they will find a way to over ride it. Its human nature.

The problem here is that its a well known fact that cod has had odd hit rego issues well before sbmm and this patent was known. It simply was viewed as fishy. So cheats it is...

Xim, chonous, strike pack, scuff mods, etc all have roots in cod. Its not rocket science.
 
I am all for keeping the low skill players Corraled in the kiddie pool. But don't alter the more skilled players in the main pool for adult swim.

However they should also keep the cheaters segregated in their own lobbies as well. Its not hard to figure out either.
 
Last edited:
MrRockliffe said:
Having a patent for something doesn't mean it's being implemented/used.

Furthermore, how could you prove it's being used?
Click to expand...
You may also think tires on a parked car means they are not in use. And when the car is no longer in that spot argue the same.

But we know what tires on a car are used for. Therefore, we don't need to see the car in motion to know that tires are being used.

The same level of critical thinking applies to the patent when you factor in evidence that can be
Anecdotal, Analogical, Circumstantial or Demonstrative.

All that is needed is to create reasonable doubt that the patent is applied in the game.

Absolutes is a flawed methodology.
 
Last edited:
rubberduck said:
A very large proportion of IP never makes its way in to a product of service. Often companies purposely file patents they have no intention of using, solely to limit their competitiors freedom to operate in a space.

One thing you can almost guarantee with games related tech is that if something was being done, gamers would find a way to evidence it... People have been claiming for years that FIFA exhibits a 'momentum' mechanic but I do not believe any evidence has ever been brought forward to show it. EA have always said it does not exist.
Click to expand...
Like I said before
'The same level of critical thinking applies to the patent when you factor in evidence that can be
Anecdotal, Analogical, Circumstantial or Demonstrative.'

What you are objecting to is something called a false equivalence. Where you cannot prove what Activision is not doing with the patent. Only what you believe some other business didn't do with their patent. Which really doesn't suggest that Activision isn't using it.

Now you can choose not to believe it. It's your choice. But it's not proof that it is not happening. Those are 2 very separate constructs. For example, you can choose not to believe that the sun won't shine tomorrow. While I believe that it will using Anecdotal, Analogical, Circumstantial or Demonstrative evidence presented so far. It's not absolute proof that the sun will rise tomorrow. But based on what I have so far the evidence does suggest that it will. Therefore, I choose to believe that it will.



Grim5 said:
This is happening in black ops cold war right?

first 10 games or so was getting KD ratio of 7:1 and it felt easy, every game after that the players are much better and the KD ratio dropped to 2.5:1
Click to expand...
It's worst in CW then in MW. But if you go back to BO4 it wasn't that pronounced if at all.
But sure, you can go on a several win, high k/d and will suddenly find yourself up against some sweats. For me I usually notice it within 5 straight wins in a row. It's how they program the algorithm.
 
Last edited:
MrRockliffe said:
Your argument here doesn’t hold up, here’s why: having myself worked on patents, albeit engineering based ones, I can assure you that not all patents are put into practice.

Furthermore, in software, patents are typically pursued for royalties rather than implementation, usually known as patent wars.
Click to expand...
Here is where you argument doesn't hold up: You cannot state that Activision isn't using the patent in MW and CW. I do not care what you think other companies do with their patent. And since you post some affliation with patents isn't proof in and of itself that activision isn't using it. If you actually do work in a patent office you would know that. The rest is part of your false equilvance on other businesses. That's not relavant. We are only talking about Activision use of the patent in MW/CW. Not apple and their phones, etc.

All that we are concern with is the Anecdotal, Analogical, Circumstantial or Demonstrative evidence that the patent is being used.

If your argument is not more then say "I work in patents...therefore activision isn't using it in game" doesn't make any sense and there is no level of evidence other not believing it. Like I said before, your belief that they aren't isn't evidence in and of itself.
 
Alex_6n2 said:
Jesus Christ mate, this isn't twitter. You don't need to defend you position at the absolute expense of everyone else's. Are you 15?

You're belief and some anecdotal evidence isn't proof they're doing anything either, so the real answer is... who knows?!

Do you discuss and debate with people like that in real life?
Click to expand...
The question is do you act 15 when you are not able to rebut the claim? Because clearly in your reply this is all I see.
He replied to my post and I answered him. And if you comprehend what I said I made it clear he is entitled to his belief. I simply added it doesn't make it a fact.
I provide information suggesting that it is being used. And I do believe they are doing just that.

Lets say that Activision does have other patents. Patents they are not using. However, I am talking about this patent. Not the others they aren't using. Which brings us back to the original point.

So is this how you discuss and debate with people in real life. Because from the looks of it does.
 
Last edited:
MissChief said:
There is currently no concrete proof that this service is being used in any game, let alone Call Of Duty. Any suggestions that they are are, as you’ve said, is anecdotal and biased. British Rail patented a flying disc for gods sake. You file a patent to protect your investment, as Activision have done.
Click to expand...
It is not biased and I told you it was anecdotal. That's were you got it from. What people are saying about Activision in how they are trying to monetize MW/CW has nothing to do with British and their flying disc.

Alex_6n2 said:
Tried to help you see the aggressiveness and ironic assertiveness of your position, but this is the internet after all so it was my mistake of bothering.
Click to expand...
You need to work more on your people skills.
 
rubberduck said:
Please can you expand further on how you have categorised your evidence in relation to these terms?



Could you not make the argument that analogical evidence shares a high degree of overlap with false equivalence arguments (or at least it can)? We aren't legally looking to prove anything here other than share our opinions on essentially 'what we reckon'. Generally, if you believe a activity is taking place the emphasis is on this to be proven. An example would be a company has to prove that another company is infringing its patent, not that a company has to constantly prove that it is not infringing patents. Ultimately, internet forums are places where thoughts and ideas get shared, often without absolute proof. If you reduce every debate to 'prove it!' you will spend a lot of time going round in circles.



Looking past the horrible double negatives here, it is you that seems to be the one employing false equivalence here as you talk about the 'sun rising' and the 'sun shining'. While these 2 things are not mutually exclusive they can be argued to be different phenomena. Likewise you trot out the old "Anecdotal, Analogical, Circumstantial or Demonstrative" line again but have not expanded on this in a meaningful way. From what I can tell you actually used 'inductive reasoning' for your assertion here, which is fine but not fully in line with your arguments.



Got any evidence m8?
Click to expand...
Haaa!
It seems that your feathers are ruffled there. Good.
As you have completely loss traction of the topic at hand. I am talking from experience and the information provided is from the experience of other players. All of which correlates to the patent being used.

Now since you are not capable of talking about mw or cw I have to assume you don't know. As you seem to blather in a circle about your feelings. However, contrary to how you feel about my explanation of the evidence provided it doesn't change the fact that mw and cw have exhibited issues consistent with the patent.

Yes, I rejected and rebuked the notion that it was a random patent created at their whim. And I rebuked 'absolutes' because critical thinking would have told you it was Anecdotal, Analogical, Circumstantial or Demonstrative evidence. Based on experience playing the game and the example given in my earlier posts. It is not hard to get a grasp on the situation.

Since you don't believe in it thats your prerogative. But as I've said before that doesn't turn itself to be fact over the information provided. Nor do I have to pander to you. As the info you seek has already been posted.

I got a good chuckle from you regarding my example. I posted it that way to see how you respond and you did not disappoint. If the sun does indeed rise does it not shine? This is why seeing issues like this in 'absolutes' is a horrible way of thinking. But I digress. :D
 
Last edited:

Looks like the cod community is fighting back with the companion app. That gives you stats of players in real time to tell how bad you are sbmm'd in that match. Something activision has kept hidden from you.

Thats one way to circumvent the algorithm. If the skill level is too high you can back out of the game.
:D:D
 
Last edited:
Faustinooo said:
I don't understand backing out of lobbies because they're too hard before a game even starts. Even before any SBMM existed and you were matched based purely on ping you would get matched with better players and that's how you get better at the game.
Click to expand...

https://publish.twitter.com/?query=https://twitter.com/Drift0r/status/1337193110254841856&widget=Tweet
Our data indicates that skill influences ping & matchmaking time. This is different from MW19 or MW2 where it didn't seem to affect connections. Full results coming maybe this weekend.
Click to expand...

It's much worst now then in MW. So people are backing out of matches because they are noticing that someone who's just a 1.5 k/d, for example, is being paired with people who's kd is 3.0 and higher. So they get the double whammy. Higher ping lobby with sweats that more often then not will get a better k/d. Making you the cannon fodder.

All they had to do is keep everyone who is 1.0 k/d and lower in protected lobbies and level everyone else in general public lobbies without being "selected" based on k/d, kpm, etc. Because as it stands it makes no sense why someone with a 1.5kd is being matched with someone who has a 3.0 k/d, for example.
 
The gaming experience that more skilled players have are just as important as those of a lesser skill. As has been demonstrated by the app. both can be affected by this patent. Remember, skilled players are not using the app to create 'billygoat57' lobbies. They are simply backing out of lobbies until ACTIVISION puts them into a 'billygoat57' lobbies. It is Activision and them alone that are creating these lobbies. And you have no idea that you are about to be "Touched" by a player who has double your k/d. All because that algorithm decided you are going to be "Ad Placement" for that match. So yeah, there is some incentive of buying those gun packs. And it's true when you do you are put into easier lobbies.

Therefore, you are not immune to getting curb stomp no more then a skill player is put into shadow banned lobbies full of cheaters. Activision designed the algorithm that way. In order to incentivize you to buy from them. Be it a weapon pack that offers tracers. Skins for your character you see all the time, etc.

The problem is that based on the algorithm players are placed into shadow banned lobbies without provocation. I know this 1st hand because I've experienced it. And it's not limited to higher ping lobbies either.

Another example:
I have seen it 1st hand that I can have a good round. Go 10-0 so far in the match and only get killed by a person with a weapon that shots tracers that look like lightening bolts of some kind. And there is only 1 person on the other team using that weapon. I can consistently out maneuver and out gun everyone else except that player with the lightening bolt tracer rounds. That is a form of Activision trying to incentivize me, AKA Gas Light me, into believe that weapon has a better meta then what I am using. Therefore, I should go to their store and buy that weapon that cost about $20.

This is why, IMO, they created that patent. This is why SBMM is a thing. It's not to protect lesser skilled players but corral all players in a way to be Gas Lighted into buying from Activision.
 
Start at 13:56. At 16:09 he shows it in slow motion. As you can see his bullets don't register. At 17:21 you see the patent forces him to look away from the target.
The important part of this is there were no server error related icons to indicate packet loss, etc. If it were just packet loss or a ping spike an icon would have appeared in the lower left side of the screen.

Here is a perfect example of this patent in full effect. As you can tell by Dr. Disrep. reaction he cannot believe what happened. As you can see he clearly should have won that engagement. Someone climbing up a ladder will always lose the gun fight to a decent - skill player - just waiting for you. Yet as you see, as he was told, his aim was swaying left/right from target and his bullets weren't registering. Both of those are the best example of Activision Patent working in real time in a multiplayer, online game.


Here is another example. Again, no packet loss or ping spike icon to indicate a server/internet communication problem. But yet we are seeing the same thing again (but done differently). This time you can see the ping spike around 0:50 mark just before he engages the enemy. But there is no indicator present. That's because there isn't a problem with his connection. But the algorithm interfering with the game overriding the communication trigger to let you know there is some sort of communication problem. Because the algorithm is causing it. He is not having an "issue" communicating with the server.



Look at the score so far. As you can see 8thoughts was already on a team that was curb stomping the other team. As his best teammate had a 7.00 k/d (7 kills, 0 deaths). The algorithm kicked in to "level the playing field" by improvising hit registration/ping. But the important part of this is that the algorithm is effecting the entire team. Not just the player who is doing well. Had there been no algorithm his entire team should have been above 2.0 k/d while the other team would have a negative k/d. Perhaps causing some to rage quite. However, that is Activision's fault for placing those group of people together into teams like that.

So in these 2 videos the algorithm can effect:
-Ping
-Aim
-Hit Registration

All in real time. It's not limited to using just ping. It's not limited to just hit registration. It's not limited to swaying your aim. But a combination of any and all of these. And it's not limited to just that. It can cause you to move slower too, etc.

And Dr. Disrespect reaction to it when it happens is the typical reaction when it happens too. When it happens to you when you know you have the advantage you will also say, "WTH just happened!!!"
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom