I haven’t seen this word being used in some time.
Oddly satisfying .
I haven’t seen this word being used in some time.
Oddly satisfying .
Just finished Perfect Dark with my son. Might start DK64 next.
Hard to get montages?
I know this is all the new rage, but I don’t see how it all the sudden became a problem.
Because Dr Disrepect said so?
While most devs have never admitted if it’s implemented or what it entails (if used in social) why would equalizing play be such an issue? I’ve been reading about both side’s viewpoints. The only thing I can see that actually creates a problem for either side of the topic is that streamers have trouble making good content when placed against equal skill.
I finished High On Life a few days ago. Easily the most fun game I’ve played in the past decade or so.
I even sat though the entire hidden Red Letter Media segment in the theater.
Gamepass….I’ll give it a go.
Because SBMM hurts bad/mid level players, and in every game other than gow I’m a bad/mid level player and always will be.
Why would I want to get content in any other game than gow?
SBMM hurts bad/mid players, it doesn’t hurt me in GoW so I never have a reason to complain about it. It 100% stops me from playing other games though — like Fortnite for example.
Because it doesn’t really equalize play — like ever. It doesn’t create the 300-280 games, or matches where everyone has similar stats. In situations where you’re an amazing player, it will give you horrible teammates(low elo) and put you against high elo. Imagine one person in masters, with 3 silver teammates playing against 4 onyxs — this is unironically exactly what the system does in GoW when you’re a good player. If you actually care about winning the game, this is infuriating — but if all you want is to get a bunch of kills and look good, it’s great. You get a sense of “The game isn’t going to let me win” which again isn’t that bad, which is why I don’t complain about it very much and can play ranked for hours at a time.
The bigger issue is for low elo players — when you’re a low elo player, the system will sometimes use you as cannon fodder. A very very common occurrence across every game including GoW, and something you can literally see in real time watching a bad/mid level skilled streamer is if they have one or two good games in a row, they’re almost immediately thrown into the meat grinder.
It instead essentially punishes you for success, and it gives you the feeling of going nowhere. If I go play a MW2 pub right now (because my elo is 0) I’ll do really well for the first like 3-4 games, and then after that I’ll be put into higher elo and do slightly worse, and if I progress out of that I’ll go into higher elo and do even worse. It’s literally the peter principle, where 99.9% of players will rise until their incompetence is shown and they’re unable to progress.
People will say — if you’ve read enough arguments about SBMM — people will say that some form of SBMM has always existed in every game, and while this is true, the strictness of it has been radically cranked up in the past 5-7 years. My K/D in Bo1/2 was like 2.9 or something. That’s simply not a thing today.
Streaming is about being entertaining more than anything. You can cheat the SBMM system by inviting three low elo viewers, and bam, now you’re playing against significantly worse players. You can also make smurfs. SBMM doesn’t hurt content creators most of the time — it hurts people who suck at games, and people who play them casually.
The loosening of SBMM restriction would allow low elo players to play even lower elo players more consistently — which is exactly what it used to do — and it would give everyone on average more chill games, and give the sense that there are way more ‘good’ players than there really are — which I would like. People at a certain point deserve to feel like they’re good at games, even if they aren’t. The counter argument is that high elo players would find their way into low elo games and stomp — there simply aren’t enough high elo players for this to be a real issue, and in the past it wasn’t a real issue at all.
The cranking up of SBMM has more to do with a focus on competitive gaming than it does trying to protect the casual player from failure.
edit: Also, something I figured out with my lancer challenge experiment is that GoW SBMM is extremely weird. I played like 54 games, won the majority, had incredible stats the whole time and I was never in a high elo lobby. Meanwhile I can make a smurf, get it to 30 and by my 5th ranked match I’ll be playing against the same exact players I do on my main account.
Good question. For me I will play Gears until all servers for all games are turned off, BUT if that happened, my multilayer games would be Titanfall, especially TF1 other than that SWBFII.
I think I spend 80% of my gaming time on Gears but the other 20% is spent on single player experiences like GoW Fragglerok, Spiderman, HD. I have Dead Space and Hazza Potter on preorder for example.
All tat said NO game comes close to our beloved Gears, it would be a black day indeed.
Yeah i know about that nest, but whats the point in me having one🤔
Yeah, it was a pretty fun game but the whole Justin Roiland bit kind of ruined it. What a P.O.S. It’s hard to enjoy while thinking about that.
pvp shooters kind of died after gears 3 /cod advanced warfare, sure shooters were released but virtually none have been good, i main rpgs when not playing pvp , mass effect etc
Pvp shooters have quite literally not fallen off as a genre, but certain franchises definitely have.
They are still extremely popular and I can name plenty, gears 3 released in 2011 and AW released in 2014, that’s quite a time jump. A better comparison would’ve been gears 3/mw3
Fortnite, Apex, Valorant all came out after the games he said as well. Lol
when gears 3 came out i played it every day, only played cod aw cause couldnt play gow 3 on my xbox one and didnt like the input delay plugging both consoles in, and to befair with the booster jumps on aw you could outplay people almost as smooth as wall bouncing,
thats also what i mean, infinite warfare, vanguard a terrible etc, battlefield games after battlefield 4 pretty terrible, 1 and ww2 and 2042, infinite is terrible compared to o.g halo games, even epics new unreal tournament is terrible compared to o.g games,
shooters are popular yeah, but the new games would get dropped instantly if a good shooter came out, people playing them cause they have to ,
Yeah. Thing is, pretty much all IPs experience fluctuations over time in terms of popularity. Genres and sub-genres tend to remain static for periods of time before there is an event which causes a change in it. In terms of shooters, we’ve had the likes of Fortnite, Overwatch and PUBG come about since which have been massive. COD is still popular and big despite a drop-off in popularity.
The main shift in the last decade or so is the whole “games-as-live-service” model which alot of games have adopted. I guess this was primarily motivated by the increasing cost of games development.
Also Game Pass has become popular, and you kinda wonder if this has made games a much more transitory hobby - where players pick up a game, play it for a month and then move on quickly to other things, and it’s rarer for people to stick with games for longer periods? So in essence people player more games, but put less time on average into each one.
But just to add, most IPs experience fluctuations in their popularity and eventually players move on to other things. It’s no surprise really.
would have quoted fortnite as it is a good shooter with a high skill gap and apex is pretty smooth, but being a battle royale only having 1 mode where unless your semi decent you die once reload to menu search new match constantly slightly different ball game, i was just talking generic shooter games with a few modes average multiplayer etc
i remember gow4 entering the gambling realm and paying £50-100 for a kim skin once
yeah its a shame the genre’s envolved this way, hopefully the quality single player games coming out pull them back a bit to how it used to be,
Nobody has to play anything they don’t want to lol. Nobody is holding them hostage.
Unfortunately, Halo: Infinite recently had campaign DLC cancelled due to apparent high costs. 343 basically said that the costs out-weigh the benefits. If that is anything to go by, it may lead to games which feature online multiplayer will focus more on these aspects and microtransactions because this is where the money is.
Obviously as a trend it won’t last forever.
With single player games, I’d expect campaign DLC will still be a thing.
One thing that I’ve noticed, is that developers seem to be leaning toward creating more new IPs now, which is nice. The last 10 years or so have in my opinion, been oversaturated by sequels and existing IPs. I guess alot of this came down to new IPs being a bit of a gamble whereas existing IPs were a bit of a gaurantee of making money back. The gaming industry has never had a strong culture of directors, so alot of time it seems hard for new IPs to get much promotional mileage out of statements like “coming soon from the creator of [insert big name director]”. I know there are some big names in gaming like Hideo Kojima and Shigeru Miyamoto, but they’re nowhere near the same levels as top-end directors in the movie industry like Speilberg, Tarantino or Cameron who are basically household names, whereas Kojima is only really well-known in gaming circles.
Anyway gamers soon got bored and tired of this and to an extent drifted away from some of the older IPs and we’re now seeing more new IPs, which is nice. Also I’ve noticed directors in gaming getting more of a mention, which I hope will take off more.
Although I should also highlight that another area that has been getting alot of traction in recent years, seems to be remakes/remasters of popular games from around 10-20 years ago.
Give me modern warfare 2 from the 360 era over the new modern warfare 2 any day of the week. Mw 2 360 was hella fun. This new one, not for me.