Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,340
That died the day leveled equipment was introduced to online shooters
Activision Patents Accused of hurting your K/D
- Thread starter EastCoastHandle
- Start date
That died the day leveled equipment was introduced to online shooters
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,539
Dynamic difficulty adjustment is actually a good thing that leads to a more uniform user experience for all and more balanced matches. It is mostly just elitists against it that are just interested in roflstomping noobs. If two teams are perfectly matched in terms of skill then there will be no adjustment required. People just need to get over it.
Why would anyone play a game where when they get better, the game actively works against them to make their performance worse, while not treating all other players the same?
It's like having a small child tied to a top tennis player just because he's playing a lower seed, or giving a top football team diving boots when they play a smaller team. Sure, match players against players of about equal performance, but you don't make everyone equal by screwing with the performance of better players. Otherwise what's the incentive to play the game and improve? You're not even getting a fair result, because in a competitive game, good players should get better scores than worse players.
An even playing field means that all players have the same rules and it's their abilities that make the difference, not handicapping all the better players down to the worst players. It's patronising to the extreme.
And it's not as if the game companies are doing this for egalitarian reasons. They just want to sell more loot boxes and microtransactions.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,539
Top players will still rise to the top of the rankings. This merely reduces the delta between 'good' and 'bad' to create less absurdly one sided matchups.
Why would anyone pick up a game that’s been out for a few weeks if they’re just going to get stomped on badly by some basement dweller hopped up on Monster or G-Fuel who hasn’t left his room except to pee, take a dump and eat and has 1,000 hours in game in four weeks? So called SBMM encourages new players to stick around by not putting them up against seasoned veterans. The same applies when you’re getting better, it encourages you by not matching you against pros and streamers. SBMM is a GOOD THING for player retention in the long run, that’s why developers use it.
I'm actually less bothered about SBMM and more bothered about the lack of any anti-cheat. I don't play cod, but BFV has been awful in terms of coming across cheaters. The worst bit is when you see a cheater with the same name pop up again a few weeks later - clear evidence that DICE don't take the cheat reports seriously, or what's more than likely is they just ban the character rather than the account or even better the IP address. The problem with the former is they just create a new character, and with an auto-aim cheat they can literally power through a hundred levels in a few hours.
There are some obvious rules they should bring in, such as auto-kicking anyone with a 100+ ping (most of the cheaters from China have pings of 150+), and even implement a server votekick system which requires 51% of the server to vote kick a player.
I could deal with having my wings clipped (so to speak) to help lower skilled players enjoy the game a bit more, but i wished they'd focus more on anti-cheat as you could actually be a professional gamer and still get your ass handed to you by someone using auto-aim.
There are some obvious rules they should bring in, such as auto-kicking anyone with a 100+ ping (most of the cheaters from China have pings of 150+), and even implement a server votekick system which requires 51% of the server to vote kick a player.
I could deal with having my wings clipped (so to speak) to help lower skilled players enjoy the game a bit more, but i wished they'd focus more on anti-cheat as you could actually be a professional gamer and still get your ass handed to you by someone using auto-aim.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,340
because, shock horror, not everyone who plays video games wants a super competitive experience that requires what effectively amounts to actual training to compete in.
to use the tennis example it's like letting a world-class player enter the village tournament, then give him praises and trophy's for beating a bunch of old ladies who really only turned up for the bake sale and a chinwag.
what this does is raises the difficulty level for high tier players (which can be considered a bonus additional challenge) whilst also allowing everyone to enjoy themselves.
I've no problem with a game sorting new players together with other new players, and better players with other better players, but I just fundamentally disagree with any game offering an experience which effectively cheats the rules of the game to make better players worse, just so that new players feel that they are better than they are.
In any game or real life sport there are going to be better players and not so good players. I might enjoy a bit of tennis, but I don't expect to play against Federer and have his legs tied so that I feel better about myself. What's the point of a game that by it's nature has winners and losers, if the scores are not an honest representation of people's abilities and performance?
Associate
I can't fathom how some people view this type of thing as a positive. Playing competitive shooters and being actively handicapped to make you less competitive makes no sense. Ranked and casual modes would easily take care of this.
While I suspect you are trolling - no that is a terrible idea - people only get better when they have a real reference against what is good. This is the problem with people wanting all the rewards without putting in the effort. There is nothing commendable about what you are saying.
Not very enjoyable for skilled players whose best effort is being skewed by circumstances outside of their control and/or skewed so it doesn't represent their best effort.
The only thing of merit there is features for skill based matchmaking but you will still encounter people who'll smurf, etc. maybe the optional use of lobbies that actively advertise skill based balanced features as being active so players can avoid such practises (or choose them if they don't want to be challenged).
Permabanned
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,539
Sorry, but the "git gud or go home" attitude needs to disappear from video games. As already explained there is no such thing as a level playing field because of the differences in frame/refresh rates, resolution, internet connections, and input lag. That is without even considering the huge disparity in the level of play that people can hope to achieve. Of course the 40 year old dad who has 2-3 hours every Saturday night to play with a few beers is never going to be able to come close to youngster able to invest 3-4 hours of play every day. While self-improvement and 'getting better' is generally quite universally rewarding, one should not feel under pressure to level-up their gameplay in order to have fun matches and experiences
As I have said many times, the best players will still win the most and demonstrably have the best stats. People should actually take it as a compliment to their skills if the algorithm is trying to reduce the delta between your skill level and the opponents
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 2,029
No, this is what SBMM is for.
Being matched with people of similar skill to you is the answer to issues of people being stomped, not dynamically making that game harder for one person over the other.
That's an uneven gaming experience and frustrates more than it encourages as it leads to massive inconsistency in game feel depending on who you would be fighting at any one time.
Sorry I have very little time for a lot of this (including the get good or go home crowd) - I'm the kind of player who actually enjoys the challenge when my team goes a man down, etc. and/or actually switches to the losing team to try and turn things around if they are getting LOL camped into their spawn, etc. etc. the idea of the game fudging things behind the scenes to try and make my best effort more fair to another player - especially if that other player is say just LOLing about on their sofa putting little effort in, is abhorrent and no one should be OK with that kind of thing.
Having the option of lobbies for skill or servers that cater with different levels of play I'm fine with - I'll just avoid those.
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
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.
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.
Clearly these Streamers and skilled players are backing out of these lobbies for ‘easier’ games where they can dominate the server and get their long kill streaks. Clearly they don’t want even lobbies with similarly skilled players, they want easy kill games.
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
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.
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:
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
I am sorry to say you don't know what you are talking about. You even ask about the tickrate. How can anyone view your opinion as proof when you aren't confident enough to know the tickrate of the game? A quick search for Battlenonese will tell you that, for example. But I digress
Another example is that when you do have dropped packets and ping spikes the game will exhibit an icon showing you that. Something you didn't know. Even though I posted it. Which isn't available when those incidents occur. As that post was simply demonstrative evidence of what I'm trying to prove. Not proof in and of itself.
Last edited:
Soldato
I doubt we’d find any proof or credible evidence where/if this patent is being used unless someone can dive into the code. It’s not one for Youtuber streaming wallies to conspire about, it’s a waste of time.
There’s too many variables at play and we’ve all experience terrible hit reg, RNG, lag and general net code bugs in many of games over the years. Majority of games in the past 10 years have been pretty dire in regards to accurate and reliable online play.
There’s too many variables at play and we’ve all experience terrible hit reg, RNG, lag and general net code bugs in many of games over the years. Majority of games in the past 10 years have been pretty dire in regards to accurate and reliable online play.