Activision Patents Accused of hurting your K/D

[EastCoastHandle]

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.

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.

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

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.

 

[MrRockliffe]

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.

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.

Apple, as an example, hold patents for lots of random things that they don’t make use of.

So there’s a chance they’re not using the mechanics outlined in the patent at all.


That being said, if you read my original comment, I specifically say

“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”

I.e. I didn’t state that Activision aren’t making use of it.

 

[EastCoastHandle]

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.

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]

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.

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?

 

[EastCoastHandle]

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?

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.

 

[MissChief]

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.

 

[Alex_6n2]

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.

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.

 

[EastCoastHandle]

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.

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.

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.

You need to work more on your people skills.

 

[adolf hamster]

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.

You'll have a better time of it if you sit back with some popcorn (other snacking foods are available).

 

[agnes]

God these videos are from absolute idiots and trash streamers. Do your selves a favour, don't watch the videos. It's all click bait. It's absolute tosh, they had a dropped packet whilst playing and instant cry about it, honestly...

 

[Alex_6n2]

You need to work more on your people skills.

The irony continues. If you spoke to me like that in a real life professional setting you'd be made to sit on the naughty step.

 

[rubberduck]

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.'

You keep using these terms like someone who has read the first chapter of an undergraduate criminal law book and now think they understand them fully and can use them freely to progress their arguments by merely stating them. Please can you expand further on how you have categorised your evidence in relation to these terms?

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.

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.

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.

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.

It's how they program the algorithm.

Got any evidence m8?

 

[EastCoastHandle]

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?

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.

 

[rubberduck]

If the sun does indeed rise does it not shine? This is why seeing issues like this in 'absolutes' is a horrible way thinking. But I digress.

The sun rising in the sky is related to the rotation of the earth on its axis that creates the day/night cycle. The sun shining is as a consequence of nuclear fusion happening within the sun. While these 2 things cannot be fully decoupled they are quite different phenomena.

 

[EastCoastHandle]

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.

 

[Faustinooo]

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.

 

[EastCoastHandle]

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.

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.

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.

 

[Faustinooo]

https://publish.twitter.com/?query=https://twitter.com/Drift0r/status/1337193110254841856&widget=Tweet


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.

In xclusiveace's video he explained it a bit more than that. If you're a higher skilled player and SBMM exists it stands to reason matchmaking will take longer because there's fewer high skilled players.

Nobody should be protected. If players repeatedly die, they should learn what they're doing wrong and fix it like anything else.

 

[Malevolence]

Who gives a ****? Whatever happened to just playing games for fun?

 

[Rroff]

Who gives a ****? Whatever happened to just playing games for fun?

Personally I like to put my best effort into a game and be judged so to speak on my best effort if my best effort is being fudged by some black box mechanics designed to enforce some kind of artificial "fairness" that isn't fun.