1 14 15 16 17 18 Previous Next 179 Replies Latest reply: Apr 6, 2011 10:04 AM by izedneck Go to original post RSS
  • 170. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance

    IZEDNECK wrote:

     



    "you see the problem"  
    sorry but I don't see the problem....your compliant is that at times it might throw a low level group of players in with a high level group of players???  IT DOES THAT NOW!   A rank playlist and a unranked playlist is the way to go,  Treyarch might have to cut back on some of the stupid gametypes that are currently in the playlist's.  but, they should do that anyways



    They do need to stop putting me with noobs against full parties.
  • 171. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance
    schmambuman

    VileSelf wrote:

     


    So now tell me exactly whats wrong with that? There is something for everyone. Most people like ARs because they are the jack of all trades, and there are plenty of ARs that can take you far. People treat the game like its FAMAS vs Everything, but they're just blind and afraid to give anything else a chance.



    See, I am all for having a single gun in each category that is underpowered, so that people can gain respect by using it. What I am not for is having more than half the guns in a single category being underpowered compared to the rest of the guns. That's quite frankly ridiculous. In MW2, I instantly gained respect for anyone who used the F2k. It wasn't very good, but was still effective in skilled hands. In BLOPS, there are so many guns that are UP that I would run out of respect to give, if anyone actually used them. There is a reason the 74u is used more than the uzi/pm63/spectre/mpl/kiparis combined.

    Funny thing is, I might be fine with the games balance if there was more weapon diversity. First of all, having more than 2 fire rates would have been nice. Having ARs that kill in different numbers of shots would have been nice. Having SMGs that have different fire rates would have been nice. Having more diversity is good for gameplay. It's what makes your favorite weapon your favorite, not because it is generally the most effective weapon in the game, it's because there is something about that weapon that you personally like, and that allows you to do good. I personally like high fire rate weapons. The vector in MW2 was my favorite gun, with it's low recoil and ridiculous fire rate, it was quite good. I had a friend who hated the vector, said it had too much recoil. His personal favorite SMG was the UMP, for its high damage and lower firerate, which allowed for more controlled fire. The UMP was better at range, but since the Vector had low recoil, it was able to do damage at middle range, even if it was low damage. The vector would beat the UMP at close range, because of the fire rate difference.

    Nowadays, it's FAMAS. Everyone I know personally agrees that the FAMAS is the best gun. It has the fire rate, the damage output, the lower recoil, the handling and range of an AR, not to mention it doesn't have a low magazine size and therefore low starting ammo like the other SMGs that perform like it. If it's not the FAMAS, it's the Galil, or the 74u, or the AK47, or some other assault rifle.
  • 172. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance
    Mr. WEJ19

    schizogorilla wrote:

     

    MLG???   WOW! I didn't know that excited. Right on!


    MLG: Men Lacking Girlfriend.




    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   :P
  • 173. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance
    wii_man13
    Here's your answer, Vahn: Create a permanent Nuketown 24/7 playlist. You will be adored and a lot of the "Black Ops is too boring" complaints will cease to come to your ears so that you can focus on more prominent issues. Also, you could try creating a Quickscoping playlist in which regular games still occur but the sniper rifles are easier to use on a non-traditional level.

    Just my two cents.
  • 174. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance
    create a mercenary or "no party" search preference. if we can search for only local players, then we should be able to search for players that arent playing in a party.

    mercenary playlists dont cut it. players should be able to play a mercenary match of SnD or Domination, not just TDM or mosh pit. i play lone wolf most of the time and whenever i get into a lobby with a fully organized clan, my team usually gets crushed.

    this search preference would balance out matches for players that play alone, and i know there are a lot of them.
  • 175. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance

    IZEDNECK wrote:

     

    "you see the problem"  
    sorry but I don't see the problem....your compliant is that at times it might throw a low level group of players in with a high level group of players???  IT DOES THAT NOW!   A rank playlist and a unranked playlist is the way to go,  Treyarch might have to cut back on some of the stupid gametypes that are currently in the playlist's.  but, they should do that anyways



    What I'm saying is that there are simply not enough players where I live to consistently put me in a 5 star game it would not be a rare occurrence it would happen every single time.  I am suggesting a single ranked playlist just 1 so that it is heavily populated and I will be able to find a match my level.

    If there are under 5000 people in a playlist it is very difficult for me to find a suitable connection match I would like to see 1 ranked playlist so that it is filled with a number like 30000 that way I can play it and have a good chance at finding a competitive match.  Not 30000 people spread through 6 playlists.
  • 176. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance
    iKraZer
    plz make a MLG play list on cod like they have on halo, halo has always had a MLG game setting that you can play. cod never had that and would please allot of people. would consist of the MLG maps and restrictions such as no rapid fire, no flak jacket, no equipment. and so on according to the guidelines of MLG game play
    and would do random game types CTF, SnD and so on.
    along with no kill streaks
    and any other things that apply to the MLG guide lines
    anyone els think this would be a good thing to have ?????
  • 177. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance
    FuzzyOtterBalls
    Hi Vahn,

    First off, thanks for posting this topic, thanks for being active in the thread and reading responses. Most of all, thanks for being receptive to well-reasoned feedback while explaining the limitations vis a vis development resources and the tools at your disposal.

    I love that Black Ops has widened the skill gap from previous iterations and, while not eliminating chaos (as that would render a game boring), it does its best to provide mitigating solutions. A certain degree of uncertainty is necessary to keep the game interesting -- if you knew the outcome going in, why even bother playing? Black Ops should also be commended for decreasing the frequency of player deaths that are beyond the player's control. In MW2, if I get OMA/DC tubed across the map off of spawn, that's incredibly frustrating. In Black Ops, I can choose to run Flak Jacket and just laugh.

    True balance is providing options for the player that do not result in a particular loadout and playstyle becoming overwhelmingly dominant. A FAMAS will probably give you the highest odds for success, but it is not even close to guaranteed. In many opinions, it happens to be the best and most versatile option, but one can be successful with pretty much anything in Black Ops, if they adapt their playstyle sufficiently.

    I competed in Black Ops at MLG Dallas. I got to meet online friends in person for the very first time. I got to network with a lot of very influential people in the competitive Call of Duty community. I even got to meet Vahn and shake his hand. It was a very fun weekend -- playing hours of Black Ops, competing against top-level players, hanging out and talking about an interest in which we were all extremely passionate.

    Here's the thing: 99.9% of the people reading this post will never, ever share in this experience.

    Even though it was completely open registration, there were less than 60 Black Ops teams at the event. That's less than 250 players, in the WORLD, who have played Black Ops at an MLG event. Being the first event, I expect both the player and team pool to grow substantially and rapidly from here (hotels at the next event, MLG Columbus, are already sold out), but there will always be a monetary barrier to entry.

    In addition, finding three likeminded and financially capable people with which to team is an incredibly daunting task. One only needs to look at the number of roster changes made in the week prior to MLG Dallas to get a sense of how volatile the scene is. And if you look at all those roster changes, they were all between a handful of teams. One player would leave one team and wind up on another. That's because the MLG competitor community is comparatively tiny. There's less than 1.5 million Gamebattles accounts (I would venture to say far less than 500,000 active players at any time, across all games). Black Ops alone has sold 22 million copies.

    I have only been involved in the competitive scene for a few months now, and I consider the speed of my integration extremely uncommon. I've gone from barely being able to spell "MLG" to competing at a Major League Gaming national event, however grudgingly, on a division of one of the top professional Call of Duty teams (I coach TeaM FeaR's Female Division and one of the four couldn't play). I have MLG Pro Points, for chrissake (then again, the majority of CoD participants at MLG Dallas do). But I am a rarity; most of the players I met in Dallas have been around for years, and there are many more with years under their belt who did not attend Dallas.

    Most people do not enjoy this degree of involvement. Even players who have competed for years find themselves struggling to form teams. Just look at the sheer number of "F/A for Columbus HMU plz RT" messages propogating throughout Twitter in the wake of Dallas.

    When looking at the MLG playlist, it is not sufficient to get "close enough" or "close as possible". Furthermore, given your concerns about low numbers in the Barebones and Pure playlists, I'm not sure you're focusing on the correct problem. Chaos / Fun vs Balance / Competition is a fundamental multiplayer game design problem that is impossible to get right for everyone. MLG players will tell you that will all be corrected with an MLG playlist, and I would like to believe that, but ultimately I do not think that is true. Though highly frequented at first, you would soon find such an imperfect playlist abandoned since, to the large majority of players, competitive gaming is boring as hell. The learning curve is too steep without someone to guide you.

    Balance, fun, chaos -- they all matter extremely little to a competitive player if we're talking about adding an MLG playlist. Unless the settings were IDENTICAL to that of the MLG Variant (that includes banning certain perks and attachments -- something that, from our conversation, I gathered would be next to impossible in Black Ops), the hardcore MLG players such a playlist targets would be extremely underwhelmed.

    I can already tell you that MLG Variant players look down on Override players. Override is another ladder on Gamebattles on which players can play only a single gametype per match. Gamebattles does not mandate that these matches conform to MLG Variant settings so, for example, one could play certain Override matches with Flak Jacket. The random pool of maps from which the Gamebattles matchmaking system selects three is also larger than the MLG Variant pool. For example, MLG does not include Radiation Domination. Override does.

    The solution isn't changing Black Ops pubs to cater to competitive gamers with a playlist; the solution needs to be enticing more pub players into competitive gaming. I would venture to say that almost no one playing competitive Black Ops today ventured into the MLG/Gamebattles arena without knowing someone else who was already in the community. Gamebattles and MLG player acquisition is almost entirely viral.

    Its exclusiveness is also its curse. Look at all the trash talk between players on the 1st and 2nd place teams. Look at trash talk between players ON the 1st place team. Competitive gaming is an extremely hostile environment that is, at best, wary of newcomers. Unless you're extremely invested, you'll get frustrated very quickly.

    The idea of an MLG playlist is beautiful. I would love, LOVE, the ability to hop into a matchmaking lobby by myself or with a full team of 4 and play MLG settings. It wouldn't be true GB or MLG play (the level of competition alone would determine that), but it would be a stepping stone. Certainly closer than its closest analog -- Team Tactical (my favorite playlist). Ultimately, however, it would be extremely underutilized, probably less popular than either Barebones or Pure. That's because, unless it was exactly MLG settings, competitive players would just go scrim, play pick-ups, or find a match on Gamebattles.

    Without a comprehensive ranking system (essentially, integrating a native Gamebattles-type ranking INTO the next Call of Duty title), the reward incentive would also be entirely removed. GB rank is very important to a large subset of players on GB, much like the MLG Playlist ranking was important to players on Halo 3 and how CoD players care about their K/D. Divorcing that rank from the regular public statistics would also be important. It's not uncommon, even in the Dallas title match, for a top pro player to go negative. Why would I risk dirtying my player match combat record statistics by willfully playing more difficult competition? (Halo solves this by having two sets of statistics: ranked and social.)

    I would also advocate ignoring any sort of "trueskill" factor, like what I imagine Black Ops does now for public matches. Gamebattles is blind -- you post and the other party accepts the match, without first seeing your rank. Wondering if the match is going to be a cakewalk or a pummeling is part of that "chaos" that makes gaming fun. Plus, on PS3, skilled players looking for easy competition would just make an infinite number of new accounts to beat up on kids with low trueskill. The lobby should be kept blind until players are "locked" into the lobby, so players can't back out when they see a more skilled team. It happens in public lobbies, it will happen way, way more often in an MLG-type setting.

    As far as keeping sharks out of the kiddie pool, that's going to be tough. As you mentioned before, as you segment the player base by skill level, matchmaking becomes more of an issue. I believe part of the fun of being a shark is, by definition, most others are minnows. A competitive playlist is going to self-select a lot of the sharks into playing with other sharks. They'll all play each other at a higher level and the rest of the pool will be free to splash about, using Second Chance and resorting to Red Dots on their AK-74us.

    Not to sound arrogant, but there's not many pub games I've run into that I find difficult to win, even less so if I have any number of competent teammates with me. The only time there's an issue is if I'm solo and I run into a full party. When we talk in the lobby afterward, guess what? They all play GB too.

    Justin Wong aka FuzzyOtterBalls
    youtube.com/FuzzyOtterBalls
    twitter.com/justingwong
  • 178. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance
    ball ache2008

    FuzzyOtterBalls wrote:

     

    Hi Vahn,

    First off, thanks for posting this topic, thanks for being active in the thread and reading responses. Most of all, thanks for being receptive to well-reasoned feedback while explaining the limitations vis a vis development resources and the tools at your disposal.

    I love that Black Ops has widened the skill gap from previous iterations and, while not eliminating chaos (as that would render a game boring), it does its best to provide mitigating solutions. A certain degree of uncertainty is necessary to keep the game interesting -- if you knew the outcome going in, why even bother playing? Black Ops should also be commended for decreasing the frequency of player deaths that are beyond the player's control. In MW2, if I get OMA/DC tubed across the map off of spawn, that's incredibly frustrating. In Black Ops, I can choose to run Flak Jacket and just laugh.

    True balance is providing options for the player that do not result in a particular loadout and playstyle becoming overwhelmingly dominant. A FAMAS will probably give you the highest odds for success, but it is not even close to guaranteed. In many opinions, it happens to be the best and most versatile option, but one can be successful with pretty much anything in Black Ops, if they adapt their playstyle sufficiently.

    I competed in Black Ops at MLG Dallas. I got to meet online friends in person for the very first time. I got to network with a lot of very influential people in the competitive Call of Duty community. I even got to meet Vahn and shake his hand. It was a very fun weekend -- playing hours of Black Ops, competing against top-level players, hanging out and talking about an interest in which we were all extremely passionate.

    Here's the thing: 99.9% of the people reading this post will never, ever share in this experience.

    Even though it was completely open registration, there were less than 60 Black Ops teams at the event. That's less than 250 players, in the WORLD, who have played Black Ops at an MLG event. Being the first event, I expect both the player and team pool to grow substantially and rapidly from here (hotels at the next event, MLG Columbus, are already sold out), but there will always be a monetary barrier to entry.

    In addition, finding three likeminded and financially capable people with which to team is an incredibly daunting task. One only needs to look at the number of roster changes made in the week prior to MLG Dallas to get a sense of how volatile the scene is. And if you look at all those roster changes, they were all between a handful of teams. One player would leave one team and wind up on another. That's because the MLG competitor community is tiny. There's less than 1.5 million Gamebattles accounts (I would venture to say far less than 500,000 active players at any time, across all games). Black Ops has sold 22 million.

    I have only been involved in the competitive scene for a few months now, and I consider the speed of my integration extremely uncommon. I've gone from barely being able to spell "MLG" to competing at a Major League Gaming national event (however grudgingly) on a division of one of the top professional Call of Duty teams (I coach TeaM FeaR's Female Team). I have MLG Pro Points, for chrissake (but then again, the majority of participants at MLG Dallas do). But I am a rarity; most of the players I met in Dallas have been around for years, and there are many more with years under their belt who did not attend Dallas.

    Most people do not enjoy this degree of involvement. Even players who have competed for years find themselves struggling to form teams. Just look at the sheer number of "F/A for Columbus HMU plz RT" messages propogating throughout Twitter in the wake of Dallas.

    When looking at the MLG playlist, it is not sufficient to get "close enough" or "close as possible". Furthermore, given your concerns about low numbers in the Barebones and Pure playlists, I'm not sure you're focusing on the correct problem. Chaos / Fun vs Balance / Competition is a fundamental multiplayer game design problem that is impossible to get right for everyone. MLG players will tell you that will all be corrected with an MLG playlist, and I would like to believe that, but ultimately I do not think that is true. Though highly frequented at first, you would soon find such an imperfect playlist abandoned since, to the large majority of players, competitive gaming is boring as hell. The learning curve is too steep without someone to guide you.

    Balance, fun, chaos -- they all matter extremely little to a competitive player if we're talking about adding an MLG playlist. Unless the settings were IDENTICAL to that of the MLG Variant (that includes banning certain perks and attachments -- something that, from our conversation, I gathered would be next to impossible in Black Ops), the hardcore MLG players such a playlist targets would be extremely underwhelmed.

    I can already tell you that MLG Variant players look down on Override players. Override is another ladder on Gamebattles on which players can play only a single gametype per match. Gamebattles does not mandate that these matches conform to MLG Variant settings so, for example, one could play certain Override matches with Flak Jacket. The random pool of maps from which the Gamebattles matchmaking system selects three is also larger than the MLG Variant pool. For example, MLG does not include Radiation Domination. Override does.

    The solution isn't changing Black Ops pubs to cater to competitive gamers with a playlist; the solution needs to be enticing more pub players into competitive gaming. I would venture to say that almost no one playing competitive Black Ops today ventured into the MLG/Gamebattles arena without knowing someone else who was already in the community. Gamebattles and MLG player acquisition is almost entirely viral.

    Its exclusiveness is also its curse. Look at all the trash talk between players on the 1st and 2nd place teams. Look at trash talk between players ON the 1st place team. Competitive gaming is an extremely hostile environment that is, at best, wary of newcomers. Unless you're extremely invested, you'll get frustrated very quickly.

    The idea of an MLG playlist is beautiful. I would love, LOVE, the ability to hop into a matchmaking lobby by myself or with a full team of 4 and play MLG settings. It wouldn't be true GB or MLG play (the level of competition alone would determine that), but it would be a stepping stone. Certainly closer than its closest analog -- Team Tactical (my favorite playlist). Ultimately, however, it would be extremely underutilized, probably less popular than either Barebones or Pure. That's because, unless it was exactly MLG settings, competitive players would just go scrim, play pick-ups, or find a match on Gamebattles.

    Without a comprehensive ranking system (essentially, integrating a native Gamebattles-type ranking INTO the next Call of Duty title), the reward incentive would also be entirely removed. GB rank is very important to a large subset of players on GB, much like the MLG Playlist ranking was important to players on Halo 3 (like how CoD players care about their K/D). Divorcing that rank from the regular public statistics would also be important. It's not uncommon, even in the Dallas title match, for a top pro player to go negative. Why would I risk dirtying my player match combat record statistics by willfully playing more difficult competition? (Halo solves this by having two sets of statistics: ranked and social.)

    I would also advocate ignoring any sort of "trueskill" factor, like what I imagine Black Ops does now for public matches. Gamebattles is blind -- you post and the other party accepts the match, without first seeing your rank. Wondering if the match is going to be a cakewalk or a pummeling is part of that "chaos" that makes gaming fun. (plus, on PS3, skilled players looking for easy competition would just make an infinite number of new accounts to beat up on kids with low trueskill).

    As far as keeping sharks out of the kiddie pool, not to sound arrogant, but there's not many pub games I've run into that I find difficult to win, even less so if I have any number of competent teammates with me. The only time there's an issue is if I'm solo and I run into a full party. When we talk in the lobby afterward, guess what? They all play GB too.

    Justin Wong aka FuzzyOtterBalls
    youtube.com/FuzzyOtterBalls
    twitter.com/justingwong



    Single best post i have seen on the forums in a long time. Seems you well and trully know your stuff. I also happen to agree with all your arguments regarding the situation. Pleasure to have you on the forums   
  • 179. Re: Swiming with Sharks. Chaos/Fun vs Competition/Balance
    izedneck

    Competitive gaming is an extremely hostile environment that is, at best, wary of newcomers. Unless you're extremely invested, you'll get frustrated very quickly.




    Sorta like the casual gamer who is a level 35 with a .50 k/d and a legit .40 w/l ratio getting **** on by far better players in pubs without any kind of factor keeping them from playing with kids who have k/d's and w/l ratio's that are above 1.5 each....

    I have kids that are age 13,12, & 7. so unless you get to watch kids play MP, or other bad players try and have fun at a game they "think" is fun to play at first...but then watch them turn it off cause some level 50 is rocking ghost pro, hacker pro and is corner camping like all of them do.  With his nerdy w/l and k/d ratio who thinks he is good.  Save the talking out of both sides of your mouth.....

    The game in it's current state needs the following...

    1. A Ranked playlist that Groups players into a Group/Skill level. A simple 1 - 5 star ranking will do.  From there when searching for a ranked game it will search for a player/players that are close to your skill level....if no games are found quickly it will search downward/upward based on Skill.

    2. A Unranked playlist...you still get xp like you would in a ranked game and can level up.   but unranked = who cares...play how you like


    3. MLG playlist would be a huge hit, I would have to disagree with MR. WONG on this one.   unlike Mr. WONG I've been a competitive Call of Duty player since 2007...many LAN's and Local Tournaments.  I've yet to attend a MLG event as a player account of the travel/time/money that is needed, I don't play GB as I use to, account of cheating, hacking, stealing of accounts...Gamebattles is still a joke with all that goes on.


    Future COD games can live without #3, but i'm not to sure they can live without 2 & 3.
1 14 15 16 17 18 Previous Next