Call of Duty: Black Ops 4

The Sunset Limited said:
fsxKasn.jpg
Click to expand...
That made me laugh :laugh: I'm just saying there is definitely a group of people out there who just plain refuse to play Fortnite because they have to build.

I embraced it because it was something different. But for the people who didn't I think COD is exactly what they want.
 
CFogle21 said:
That made me laugh :laugh: I'm just saying there is definitely a group of people out there who just plain refuse to play Fortnite because they have to build.

I embraced it because it was something different. But for the people who didn't I think COD is exactly what they want.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif


I'm just messing around. But as a nerd who probably thinks about this more than anyone who doesn't work at Epic, Bluehole, Treyarch etc..., I think the main issue with the genre moving forward is path variety/uniqueness/interest. Cresting a hill, surveying the land in front of you, and making choices based on what you see is the key IMO. Right now, I don't think Blackouts combat supports that at all. I also don't suspect many people realize this. Visionaries are often ridiculed in the beginning. It's the cross willingly I bare.
 
The Sunset Limited said:
giphy.gif


I'm just messing around. But as a nerd who probably thinks about this more than anyone who doesn't work at Epic, Bluehole, Treyarch etc..., I think the main issue with the genre moving forward is path variety/uniqueness/interest. Cresting a hill, surveying the land in front of you, and making choices based on what you see is the key IMO. Right now, I don't think Blackouts combat supports that at all. I also don't suspect many people realize this. Visionaries are often ridiculed in the beginning. It's the cross willingly I bare.
Click to expand...

You do realize BR is still pretty new right? It is still early in its life cycle. Some people acting like BR already has to reinvent itself to keep it fresh. I understand this type of game doesn’t resonate with everyone but stop acting like COD and BF need to do something different already. Better feeling gunplay, movement, and graphics from a AAA dev is enough for right now. I am curious what devs will do with BR in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tentonhammer
I'm sure X looks the best but I noticed the framerate on Pro was much better than ps4 in one comparison, but also this:

 
lowdru2k said:
You do realize BR is still pretty new right? It is still early in its life cycle. Some people acting like BR already has to reinvent itself to keep it fresh. I understand this type of game doesn’t resonate with everyone but stop acting like COD and BF need to do something different already. Better feeling gunplay, movement, and graphics from a AAA dev is enough for right now. I am curious what devs will do with BR in the future.
Click to expand...

I categorically disagree with your assertion.

I think PUBG has been losing players for the past several months due to game design issues.

I suspect Fortnite is losing players, to a lesser degree, for the same reasons.

I don't think Blackout can come to the party more than a year late, copy the more traditional competitor, and expect to see similar levels of success. Blackout will be a big successful game, but I predict a quicker, sharper player drop off than we saw from PUBG and Fortnite.

I like the zombies, some of the gadgets, and I have hopes Treyarch will be aggressive with updates. I just think their combat is going to hold the game back long term.
 
I expect these big time developers to start doing something new with BR on their next run. They are dipping their first toe in the waters.

What I would like to see implemented into BR is some type of objective mode.
 
Over on neogaf they pointed out that the DLC exclusivity for PS4 is now only a week instead of a month and I'm glad to hear it. Hopefully soon that deal will be done completely and all DLC will show up on all platforms simultaneously.
 
My issue with Blackout illustrated...




- Match took 20:20 from start to finish.
- Player saw 8 enemies throughout the entire match, and engaged each time.

I calculated the amount of time each engagement started and ended. The start of the engagement occurred when our winner first knew he was within range of another player. This happened either by first spotting his enemy, or by him getting shot at by surprise. The engagement ended when one player was dead.

Engagement One: 20 seconds
Engagement two: 10 seconds
Engagement three: 2 seconds
Engagement four: 2 seconds
Engagement five: 15 seconds
Engagement six: 8 seconds
Engagement seven: 2 seconds
Engagement eight: 8 seconds

In a match that took 20:20 to complete, our winner was only interacting with the enemy for 01:07.

So 5.4% (67 seconds) of the match, he was actively reacting to an opposing player. Which means 94.6% (19 minutes and 13 seconds) of the match, he's running around in a static, lifeless world.

This is by no means scientific. Even though 8 kills is a lot for a winner, this was the first video that popped up on YouTube for me. I didn't go hunting for a specific type of match.

This is terrible Battle Royale game design and can not sustain itself long term.
 
Last edited:
The Sunset Limited said:
My issue with Blackout illustrated...




- Match took 20:20 from start to finish.
- Player saw 8 enemies throughout the entire match, and engaged each time.

I calculated the amount of time each engagement started and ended. The start of the engagement occurred when our winner first knew he was within range of another player. This happened either by first spotting his enemy, or by him getting shot at by surprise. The engagement ended when one player was dead.

Engagement One: 20 seconds
Engagement two: 10 seconds
Engagement three: 2 seconds
Engagement four: 2 seconds
Engagement five: 15 seconds
Engagement six: 8 seconds
Engagement seven: 2 seconds
Engagement eight: 8 seconds

In a match that took 20:20 to complete, our winner was only interacting with the enemy for 01:07.

So 5.4% (67 seconds) of the match, he was actively reacting to an opposing player. Which means 94.6% (19 minutes and 13 seconds) of the match, he's running around in a static, lifeless world.

This is by no means scientific. Even though 8 kills is a lot for a winner, this was the first video that popped up on YouTube for me. I didn't go hunting for a specific type of match.

This is terrible Battle Royale game design and can not sustain itself long term.
Click to expand...


Don’t you have Fortnite to go play.
 
yankeessuck said:
Running around doing nothing? Sounds like Battle Royale.
Click to expand...

I did the same thing with Fortnite. The first video that popped up when I punched in "Fortnite 8 kill victory".




Using the same criteria to measure engagement duration (seeing an enemy or getting shot at until enemy dies) there was 06:32 minutes of action in a 20:50 second match. Engagements looked like this, in order from first to final kill...

9,19,56,48,70,66,43,76 (seconds)

Almost 31% of the Fortnite match was action compared 5.4% of action in Blackout.

This is a major issue that no one seems to be talking about. If Treyarch doesn't fix this, Blackouts population will plummet mere months after release. They need to get players interacting more often.

lowdru2k said:
Don’t you have Fortnite to go play.
Click to expand...

No! We have Blackout/BR to discuss!
 
Last edited:
The Sunset Limited said:
I did the same thing with Fortnite. The first video that popped up when I punched in "Fortnite 8 kill victory".




Using the same criteria to measure engagement duration (seeing an enemy or getting shot at to death) there was 06:32 minutes of action in a 20:50 second match.

Almost 31% of the Fortnite match was action compared 5.4% of action in Blackout.

This is a major issue that no one seems to be talking about. If Treyarch doesn't fix this, Blackouts population will plummet mere months after release. They need to get players interacting more often.
Click to expand...


One game has a building mechanic that allows players to drag out firefights to annoying levels. The other has fast paced, fluid gunplay that allows quick to the point firefights. I’ll take Blackout.
 
lowdru2k said:
The other has fast paced, fluid gunplay that allows quick to the point firefights. I’ll take Blackout.
Click to expand...

5.4% of the gameplay in Blackout is action. I'm not sure if I would call that "fast paced". I'd rather have a discussion on how Treyarch can fix/if they need to fix this rather than devolve the discussion into flaming other games in the genre. Let's be better than that.
 
The Sunset Limited said:
5.4% of the gameplay in Blackout is action. I'm not sure if I would call that "fast paced". I'd rather have a discussion on how Treyarch can fix/if they need to fix this rather than devolve the discussion into flaming other games in the genre. Let's be better than that.
Click to expand...

Or you could just go back to the Fortnite thread and keep talking to yourself. That would be great.

Blackout looking to be a hit with gamers, he mad.
 
and I wasn’t calling the match fast paced I was calling the movement/gunplay fast paced.

Sunset talking about maturity lol dis guy.
 
Watched a lot of the beta streams more than i played it and was having as much fun watching as i did playing. Blackout is going to be a huge hit. Fortnite was the flavor of the month and while i'm sure it will live on for a long time i can see Blackout surpassing it in popularity easily. Let's remember now, Call of Duty was king before the battle royal craze even came about. Now you pair the king up with that? Good luck.
 
I'm going to try dropping Fortnite for a couple of weeks to focus on this game. I think putting some space between the two might allow me to appreciate this more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back