Man, am I glad I have Ninja to explain all this bettter than I can <3

Good players can cope with those issues and still get great scores , again, there is a reason why so many self-respecting gamers play COD and it ain't because it's all based on luck. Yes there are other attributes that COD has that many people don't like but map knowledge isn't affected by lag is it ?. With gun on gun battles, I don't really notice lag affecting it enough to make it a gamble ?.

There are issues in every online game but that doesn't mean it is a gamble, if you lost, it just means that you were second best and are making excuses for it . If you are a good player than you will still win the majority of your gun fights regardless of lag that is present. Blaming your failures on game issues is a bit of a poor man's excuse IMHO. Yea, I rage a fair bit but most of the time I know inside that it was actually my fault rather than the game's.

If you won a match or two would you put it down to luck ?, probably not which matches this idea of "luck" directly with you having some bad games and playing poorly. Look at your own playstyle/accuracy etc. before placing all your failures in the game itself. -_-

Mitchell wrote:

Good players can cope with those issues and still get great scores , again, there is a reason why so many self-respecting gamers play COD and it ain't because it's all based on luck. Yes there are other attributes that COD has that many people don't like but map knowledge isn't affected by lag is it ?. With gun on gun battles, I don't really notice lag affecting it enough to make it a gamble ?.

There are issues in every online game but that doesn't mean it is a gamble, if you lost, it just means that you were second best and are making excuses for it . If you are a good player than you will still win the majority of your gun fights regardless of lag that is present. Blaming your failures on game issues is a bit of a poor man's excuse IMHO. Yea, I rage a fair bit but most of the time I know inside that it was actually my fault rather than the game's.

If you won a match or two would you put it down to luck ?, probably not which matches this idea of "luck" directly with you having some bad games and playing poorly. Look at your own playstyle/accuracy etc. before placing all your failures in the game itself. -_-

So getting killed by chopper gunners that are OP, getting killed by OP weapons, RPG's, unbalanced killstreaks or in U3's case pre patch quick boom is my fault? No that's the game and/or developer's fault for inlputting something so unbalanced. Why do you think people like BrokenGamez always rages? cause he know's that it is the games fault when he dies mostly and not him.

Also, to the map knowledge, it is in someway skill, yes, but in a way no. If you know how to manipulate the spawns, then you're usually killing people who have just spawned and have little to no time to react. You're killing a defenseless person and have no challenge at all. That's not skill, rather timing, and spawn rape. This is also another thing that most people on Machinima/YT use. Get good team, play Dom/TDM on highly manipulative maps and spawn rape. Couple that with the already present problems and the only reason they get those scores is because of all the above factors.

Mitchell wrote:

Good players can cope with those issues and still get great scores , again, there is a reason why so many self-respecting gamers play COD and it ain't because it's all based on luck. Yes there are other attributes that COD has that many people don't like but map knowledge isn't affected by lag is it ?. With gun on gun battles, I don't really notice lag affecting it enough to make it a gamble ?.

There are issues in every online game but that doesn't mean it is a gamble, if you lost, it just means that you were second best and are making excuses for it . If you are a good player than you will still win the majority of your gun fights regardless of lag that is present. Blaming your failures on game issues is a bit of a poor man's excuse IMHO. Yea, I rage a fair bit but most of the time I know inside that it was actually my fault rather than the game's.

If you won a match or two would you put it down to luck ?, probably not which matches this idea of "luck" directly with you having some bad games and playing poorly. Look at your own playstyle/accuracy etc. before placing all your failures in the game itself. -_-

Like I said, there's still a subtle requirement of skill to overcome the obstacles. But it's silly to just say "If you were good, you'd be able to shoot that guy that was teleporting."

Yeah, there's also the factor of popularity and money. A few months ago, I saw a video from some YT commentator, he was bored of CoD, wasn't going to buy MW3. I think he started making videos of other games. Few months later, another video comes out, apparently he was having financial troubles or something, and decided to "not be selfish" and buy MW3 to make his fans happy.

Map knowledge isn't affected by lag. It's a valid advantage for an experienced player in any game.

Of course you're not going to notice many things when the gunfight lasts less than a few seconds. Are you telling me you've never got into a gunfight where your target started teleporting?

It's very situational, and I can easily distinguish when it's due to bad design decisions, or if it's due to lag, or if I simply made the wrong move. I don't get mad at campers, they're some of the easiest targets. But I don't see how "being good" can counter having literally no chance to fight back or take cover when, say, you spawn and have a giant red diamond over your head that is already being fired on by a chopper.

I'm lucky that the game connected to a nearby host, rather than one on another continent. I'm lucky that it was randoms-vs-randoms. I'm lucky that there wasn't packet loss when I fired at someone. I'm lucky that the game matched me up against level-1 players. I'm lucky that I got matched up with a party.

I can still acknowledge that a small amount of skill is still needed. My mediocre performance is a result of me not caring about doing well, because I don't feel like there's a solid challenge with a solid reward.

Don't know if I'd consider myself "good", but [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Static-Star1 wrote:

Also, to the map knowledge, it is in someway skill, yes, but in a way no. If you know how to manipulate the spawns, then you're usually killing people who have just spawned and have little to no time to react. You're killing a defenseless person and have no challenge at all. That's not skill, rather timing, and spawn rape. This is also another thing that most people on Machinima/YT use. Get good team, play Dom/TDM on highly manipulative maps and spawn rape. Couple that with the already present problems and the only reason they get those scores is because of all the above factors.

Map knowledge is definitely one of the valid advantages for someone that has played longer, rather than them having access to better equipment.

I can see spawn trapping being a valid tactic, because you're suppressing the enemy back into their spawn. But there needs to be spawn protection, like the uncaps in BF, the redline in MAG, or the bots in KZ2. It's boring enough sitting there and waiting for them to spawn. At least give them a chance to fight back. [Even though I still want to quit when they're stuck in their protected spawn, because it's just too damn boring.]

That's one thing I don't like about the post-CoD4 killstreaks. There's no finesse in just firing on giant red diamonds as they appear, killing someone before they even have a chance to blink. It's so boring, it feels like I'm cheating. The basic 3-5-7 uncontrolled killstreaks in CoD4 weren't too bad.

I have come across very few teleporting players in my 5 days of playtime.
By map knowledge I don't mean spawn killing I mean traversing the map so as to avoid getting into stick situations or "close-call" gunfights, requires skill and experience, it's assessing the situation and choosing how to act correctly in your position.
Everyone has to deal with a game's problems, if you deal with them better than others than you are a good player, everyone is in the same boat....

Not this old chestnut again

To say a game takes no skill is well wrong just because it does not meet your personal
Requirement of what you class as skill does not mean it takes no skill.
I'm not gunna sit here and list the good and bad in this game coz it'll take all day
So I'll say this.
Every game ever made takes some sort of skill.
And each game requiems different types of skill
Every online game iv played has problems there will never be a game that everyone likes .(or that works perfectly) so that means people will pick holes in it.
Also every game I know of people like to say O that game takes no skill so you could have the same argument for every game ever made so IMHO this is a point less conversation because it just looks like an argument off I like CoD and I don't like CoD and both sides finding points to
Validate there side.

I buy, at most, one game per year (on average). This year, should it be BO2? Y'all know I play casually and infrequently and am not interested in leader boards, ranks, expansion packs, etc. Or, given that I've been having a blast playing Ratchet and Clank recently, should I get R&C: Full Frontal Assault instead?

For the record, I enjoyed MW2 but liked Black Ops better (tempered only by the poor hit detection and frequent lag). I don't have MW3 but I do have R3 which I think is a pretty poor online multiplayer game.

eattheword wrote:

I buy, at most, one game per year (on average). This year, should it be BO2? Y'all know I play casually and infrequently and am not interested in leader boards, ranks, expansion packs, etc. Or, given that I've been having a blast playing Ratchet and Clank recently, should I get R&C: Full Frontal Assault instead?

For the record, I enjoyed MW2 but liked Black Ops better (tempered only by the poor hit detection and frequent lag). I don't have MW3 but I do have R3 which I think is a pretty poor online multiplayer game.

I'd go for R&C instead.
Perhaps you'd enjoy Borderlands?

Black ops 2 hardened edition.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Black ops 2 Care package edition.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

If I have a little money to spend, I might buy the care package edition... Just waiting for the price.

I would buy it just for the zombies , JK, not that hardcore .

I pred-ordered this the other day, can't wait !, especially for zombies but am getting more interested in COD multiplayer too !

I'm gonna pre-order it as soon as I get money.

I seriously want this game to be good. Please don't f*** it up treyarch... Please...

jolli-timer wrote:

I'm gonna pre-order it as soon as I get money.

I seriously want this game to be good. Please don't f*** it up treyarch... Please...

Why would you pre-order it if you're unsure of its quality?

Because I loved Black Ops, and I really want to know the rest of Masons story. If the multiplayer doesn't hold up, I'll just play the SP and sell it.

I'm not really unsure, but you can never be too sure, atleast with Call of Duty... I mean MW3 looked good too me at first, Until I played it.

That was the plan

Sure why not I'll most likely be getting it on Midnight release. If I don't like it and you haven't bought it, I'll hit you a pm or what ever.

(Absolutely no promises that I wont like it though)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Zombies reveal trailer !! .

Looks like it has more substance to it this time, me likey !
Also.......

Am I the only one dissapointed by that trailer ?

Its just zombies, 4 people. Not 8 player matches like they said ? Whats up with dat!?

Yes you are

Just because they didn't show all 8 players doesn't mean it's a bad trailer, it's been confirmed anyway . Look below....

Confirmed Info about Black ops 2 zombies:

- 8 player Co-op and 4 Vs 4 Team matches.


- Maps will be bigger.


- There will be female characters.


- Nuketown 2025 to be the preorder bonus map.


- Black Ops 2 Zombies will feature 8 modes which are:
Classic
Survival
Race
Meat
No Man’s Land
Turned
Returned
Grief

damn, I better start putting my foot in my mouth more often.
That sounds awesome, even though I did find the trailer a little disappointing I did enjoy it.

I might finally start playing zombies when this game comes out.

And there's more......

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Can't wait for this !!, Treyarch are really pulling out all the stocks for this one

Jesus, the rabbit hole is getting deeper and deeper. Black ops 2 is looking more awesome everytime I read about it.

Shame it will get all the COD hate :/ Why don't you distance your self treyarch! you're actually a good developer..

Nice updates, Mitch, thanks.

Regarding the OP: In my experience it's best to take these bits of info with a grain of salt. Remember, anyone can make that stuff up, and it's in Activision's best interest to spark excitement for their games. Don't put lying to do it above them.

That being said this is a solid list of improvements.