963 replies to this topic

[TehKiller]

Shirou, on 18 Nov 2010, 17:38, said:

Chyros, on 18 Nov 2010, 14:58, said:

i c wot u did thar

This all the more confirms my suspicion that they balanced and tested the whole game using offline Combat Training mode and not against real people .

How can you just assume that, how does this confirm your suspicion about Treyarch not testing their game in multiplayer mode. That is the most ridiculous statement ever. This is the most anticipated game franchise in the entirety of online shooters and you think they do not test it in multiplayer mode? Oh what the hell :s

I think I'd say they havent tested it with more than 4-6 players and actually tested the PC build. At least thats what I understood from all those videos theyve been showing us

[Shirou]

Chyros, on 18 Nov 2010, 18:26, said:

I think it's either they tested a lot in Combat Training, or John From Activision balanced the whole game, or both .

I'm not from Activision so we can rule out that last option

I just find it a ridiculous idea to have a 200 employee studio make a high impact game like this that is almost completely made for multiplayer and subsequently neglect said multiplayer part in testing completely. If that were to be true then the attention given to PC gaming has truely sunk down in the deepest pit.

I find it more acceptable that they didn't look further than the tests on their own high-end PCs and thus didn't feel any of the performance hits. I know Chyros has a low end PC which results in unplayability in contrary to the other CoD games, which made Black Ops lose one of the major staples that the CoD series always had, namely accessibility.

Edited by Shirou, 18 November 2010 - 19:07.

[Stalker]

Shirou, on 18 Nov 2010, 20:05, said:

I know Chyros has a low end PC.

IIRC he hasn't.

The problem was, it didn't run properly on PCs that reached the minimum requirements by far.

This + the lag issues + the fact that 99% of the servers are 18 player servers and the game is complete chaos with more than 12 players (They actually said it was optimised for 12 IIRC) make me think they didn't test properly at all.

[Shirou]

Stalker, on 18 Nov 2010, 21:42, said:

Shirou, on 18 Nov 2010, 20:05, said:

I know Chyros has a low end PC.

IIRC he hasn't.

Look better please

While the definition of low end may be a disputable point I dare say it is not among what we would call high end. Thus my argument still stands.

[Chyros]

Shirou, on 18 Nov 2010, 21:05, said:

Chyros, on 18 Nov 2010, 18:26, said:

I think it's either they tested a lot in Combat Training, or John From Activision balanced the whole game, or both .

I'm not from Activision so we can rule out that last option

No, "John From Activision" was a particular nooby guy featured in the one-hour interview with Vahn before the game released. He was demonstrating the game while Vahn talked, but he did so badly that Vahn had to replace him after a while for another player that Vahn called better, who was actually also a moron. John From Activision kind of became a term for a moronic player among some of us after that vid.

Quote

I just find it a ridiculous idea to have a 200 employee studio make a high impact game like this that is almost completely made for multiplayer and subsequently neglect said multiplayer part in testing completely. If that were to be true then the attention given to PC gaming has truely sunk down in the deepest pit.

Give me one piece, just ONE piece of evidence that they have tested the multiplayer part to any acceptible degree. The balance is unbelievably stupid, there is no fluid gameplay and a spawn system so bad Vahn actually took a negative stance on it in person, and the game runs poorly on PCs at best. I'd say in the face of the rather overwhelming evidence that they haven't tested properly, your suspicions stand little chance to be honest, and you haven't even played the game as far as I know . And exactly why wouldn't the attention given to PC gaming have sunk to the deepest pit? PC development has been declining substantially for years - none of this is new to any of us, I'm sure.

Stalker, on 18 Nov 2010, 22:42, said:

Shirou, on 18 Nov 2010, 20:05, said:

I know Chyros has a low end PC.

IIRC he hasn't.

The problem was, it didn't run properly on PCs that reached the minimum requirements by far.

This + the lag issues + the fact that 99% of the servers are 18 player servers and the game is complete chaos with more than 12 players (They actually said it was optimised for 12 IIRC) make me think they didn't test properly at all.

Exactly. My comp's really not that bad, I go well above the minimum requirements. It's just not that it's a super duper awesome mega beta titanium avatar of computing power, and therefore it can't handle the game very well.

If you think I'm alone in having this problem, John, you're wrong - many many people have unacceptible framerates and even high-end computers are affected indirectly. How could this have happened with any testing?

Shirou, on 18 Nov 2010, 23:09, said:

Look better please

While the definition of low end may be a disputable point I dare say it is not among what we would call high end. Thus my argument still stands.

No, it doesn't. Why do you think it looks that bad? Indeed, because I put it that low. Why did I put it that low? Oh yeah, that's it .

[Stinger]

After 13 years, you would expect there to be a greater difference.

[SquigPie]

I can't really see your point, they look very different if you ask me...

[Stinger]

For an FPS model in 2010, it is low poly and nowhere near the same standard as Infinity Ward's Chopper Gunner models.

Edited by Stinger, 19 November 2010 - 20:44.

[Chyros]

It doesn't even have an axle connecting the rotor blades to the helicopter. Even the 1997 model has that .

[Camille]

okay that's just a pointless thing to argue about. you can't possibly compare this situation and all technical opportunities and limitations it bears.

[Stinger]

Why so serious? On a modding forum of all places I thought it would be normal to discuss something like this.

[Pav:3d]

Im sure its purely for poly/time saving, if the player isnt going to see the chopper up close then there is no point wasting time/polies on it. Im pretty sure the ones in cut scenes and the campaign arent that low poly.
Also:
A) you never see it from that angle anytime in a normal multiplayer game
B) As the gunner you never see anything around you, just the gun barrel and sights.
C) from the ground you can barely make the chopper out, its not like MW2 where sometimes you were really close to the choppers.

edit: while im here, here is my emblem, going for a lightning strike kinda thing...

Edited by Pav:3d, 20 November 2010 - 01:07.

[BillyChaka]

that's like going into third person in half life 2 and saying "why doesn't gordon freeman have a body?" he's just a disembodied hand.

Edited by Paradise, 20 November 2010 - 20:07.

[Stinger]

It's not like that at all.

The model is so low poly that it looks like it could be from an RTT/RTS, like World In Conflict, and not an FPS.

Must be my high standards again.

[Kalo]

Stinger, on 20 Nov 2010, 22:34, said:

It's not like that at all.

The model is so low poly that it looks like it could be from an RTT/RTS, like World In Conflict, and not an FPS.

Must be my high standards again.

Are you serious? You're mad that they skimped out on a model you wouldn't actually see? GENERALLY, you're trying to get the game to run as smoothly as possible, not slowed down to a crawl. (But they somehow messed that up in MP it seems).

[Chyros]

Kalo, on 21 Nov 2010, 2:11, said:

Are you serious? You're mad that they skimped out on a model you wouldn't actually see? GENERALLY, you're trying to get the game to run as smoothly as possible, not slowed down to a crawl. (But they somehow messed that up in MP it seems).

You don't need to skip out on every model to make the game run smoothly. MW2 has huge high-detail helicopters straight in your face yet it runs as smooth as silk. Treyarch simply have no experience dealing with PCs - their very first CoD game wasn't even released for the PC at all. They didn't make use of IWs, let's be frank, pretty awesome PC optimisation and didn't test the PC version for one bloody second. They could have a super-good looking helicopter in the game if they didn't fail at PCs so much.

Not that helicopter models matter that much or anything, but optimisation is just no excuse, especially not from Treyarch.

[Kalo]

It boggles my mind that you're upset about something so trivial.

[deltaepsilon]

That's his "shtick", so to speak.

[Camille]

Kalo, on 21 Nov 2010, 3:20, said:

It boggles my mind that you're upset about something so trivial.

pretty much this.

this kind of optimization has been done ever since 3d graphics first existed. you can't IMO argue about assets that you can't even see in game. in short: there is absolutely no reason to bitch about this.

[Destiny]

SWR's models don't have bottoms

[Stinger]

I think part of the reason they have it flying so high is to conceal its ugliness. It's just mini fail in a series of larger fails.

Once you get over the honeymoon period with this game, you'll begin to notice that there are so many things wrong with it. It has reached the point for me where I almost hate every little thing about it. The latest patch causes my game to hang and give me Steam connect fail error messages. I wouldn't be so sodding annoyed if I'd gotten my money's worth out of this shit.

[Kalo]

Stinger, on 21 Nov 2010, 4:24, said:

I think part of the reason they have it flying so high is to conceal its ugliness. It's just mini fail in a series of larger fails.

Once you get over the honeymoon period with this game, you'll begin to notice that there are so many things wrong with it. It has reached the point for me where I almost hate every little thing about it. The latest patch causes my game to hang and give me Steam connect fail error messages. I wouldn't be so sodding annoyed if I'd gotten my money's worth out of this shit.

There's no fail involved, Stinger. This is normal procedure in video game development.

[amazin]

yeah seriously, i have plenty fun with this game whether or not the helicopter model that i occasionally see the bottom of, while it is hundreds of feet up, through the sights of my strela, has a rotor axle.

[Chyros]

Kalo, on 21 Nov 2010, 4:20, said:

It boggles my mind that you're upset about something so trivial.

Well, not that it compares to not silencing ADS footsteps or making battlechatter team-only or not having a system adapted for playing with friends or lack of idling or lack of balance or lack of a stable performance or shittiness of hit detection or lack of lag compensation or lack of good visuals or crapness of hardpoints or lack of tact in tactical gameplay modes or level-fagging the shit out of weapons and perks making the game even more unplayable for new players or damageviewkick still going strong and ruining balance or the CP point system taking most of the fun out of leveling or how unbelievably retarded the spawn system really is, but other than dedicated servers and being able to slap an emblem on a gun exactly WHAT does this game give us?

To be frank the game bores me out of my mind. I'd rather go back to a Call of Duty game where I can at least play with my friends .

[TehKiller]

They just havent learn a thing. I bet you its gonna take at least 5 more updates to make it playable