|
Real hurthling! posted:Respawn was hosed by contract. If ea offered a bigger number than a competitor for purchase they had to agree How is this poo poo even loving legal?
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 05:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 04:29 |
|
|
Desperate people will sign anything 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:lol I happened to play WWE18 while visiting my little siblings over the vacation. Lo and behold, making a CAW nowadays grants you like four moves to begin and the rest are locked behind crates. The hell  That is so loving bad. It's been a long rancid diarrhea strewn road from the days of No Mercy on the N64. Truga posted:Desperate people will sign anything And you can make them desperate by releasing their only product in the same week as Battlefield / CoD specifically so they don't meet sales projections and become completely dependent on an emergency cash injection for survival 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 07:11
|
|
|
s.i.r.e. posted:How is this poo poo even loving legal? Right of first refusal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 08:32
|
|
|
My man, the most engaging gameplay is when you have to play over and over to get things. Or you can just pay some money to skip that. Extremely engaging.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 12:18
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:lol I happened to play WWE18 while visiting my little siblings over the vacation. Lo and behold, making a CAW nowadays grants you like four moves to begin and the rest are locked behind crates. The hell Whelp, we had a good run, WWF games. *dusts off No Mercy and Here Comes the Pain* Not like anything else really did it better than these two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:Right of first refusal. I've been reading too much Battletech stuff and this registered as "Trial of refusal" at first, Vince Zampella's (Respawn CEO) gotta fight Andrew Wilson (EA CEO) to the death. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
Skoll posted:Whelp, we had a good run, WWF games. *dusts off No Mercy and Here Comes the Pain* Yeah that's the same as UFC
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
There's always Fire Pro.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
Figure it's worth resurrecting this thread for something related - Yong Yea dug up a few interesting journal articles from EA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC19cGJa-xw In Jim Sterling form if you prefer  to  :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_QaTtvI2tg The tl;dr version: EA has live-tested and is in the process of patenting a form of matchmaking that is deliberately skewed. It works by preventing a player from losing or winning too often in order to maximise engagement and reduce "churn" (putting the game down and not playing for a while/forever). The system uses calculated metrics to match players based on skill, but skewing in favour of less/more experienced players to increase the chances of the desired result. Players who lose two or three games in a row will be matched with lower skill players, while players who win too often get thrown to the 420quickscope crowd. This is all done without the player's knowledge, and is designed to be undetectable. In case that doesn't make your skin crawl, the conclusion to the second paper offhandedly states that the framework is flexible enough to maximise any desired metric, from play time to, you guessed it, spending.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:00
|
|
|
Sometimes I swear that’s whats going on with my overwatch queues
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:02
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Sometimes I swear that’s whats going on with my overwatch queues would not surprise me for a second.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
Ignoring that last paragraph, that's what matchmaking systems are supposed to do. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
Yeah that seems pretty normal to me, and is what I want to have happen when I play a multiplayer game  edit: The part about tuning it toward pushing people to buy stuff or spend longer playing is lovely, but as a whole the system seems like something totally standard, except peoples' perception of it has been twisted by the spooky monetization boogeyman. CJacobs fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Jan 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Ignoring that last paragraph, that's what matchmaking systems are supposed to do. no, it's supposed to set up fair matches. in the long run, fair matches should arrive at a fair win rate, and in the short run it's a crapshoot since all participants have a real shot at winning. what's described is setting up unfair matches to counter - or create - streaks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:24
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Ignoring that last paragraph, that's what matchmaking systems are supposed to do. CJacobs posted:Yeah that seems pretty normal to me, and is what I want to have happen when I play a multiplayer game thread suddenly invaded by retards, call the cops guys
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
The introduction to the second paper states that standard industry practice/conventional wisdom is geared towards "fair" matchmaking - trying to match you against players of similar enough skill levels that the outcome of the match is not easily predictable. If it's dynamic or clever enough, it'll spot when you're either having a bad day or are on a roll, and put you up or down a bracket accordingly. The aim is to put you in a match you can win. EA's method is to tip the scales so that the results of your next match are as predictable as possible. Instead of pitching a player with a .95 w/l ratio in with others in roughly the same boat, it chucks them in with the .60 scrubs so they can feel like a king for a few games before pitting them against the 2.5 god-kings so they don't get too big for their boots. Instead of making a system where you're likely to win or lose matches based on the law of averages, it's designed to plan out your win/lose streaks to keep you from putting the game down. Murderion fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Jan 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
how is that even going to work? if your ELO/win ratio/KD/whatever is collecting what is effectively useless data because you've skewed the odds, how will it even know your actual skill level so as to match you against lovely players to keep you playing? in my experience at least, my buddies and I will keep playing while on a streak but the moment we lose a few after that we are changing gametype or game altogether, unless the games are incredibly close (and therefore, well matched on skill level). if we lose a few then get an easy win we usually call it a day then also.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
Laserface posted:how is that even going to work? if your ELO/win ratio/KD/whatever is collecting what is effectively useless data because you've skewed the odds, how will it even know your actual skill level so as to match you against lovely players to keep you playing? I imagine it's not concerned with actually knowing your skill level but just making sure you get matched up against chumps periodically to bolster your ego. How exactly they would do that would probably have to do with other data rather than just basic win ratios, which makes it doubly problematic, but I imagine they aren't too concerned.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:12
|
|
|
Jokes on EA, I’m terrible no matter who I play against
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:15
|
|
|
Laserface posted:how is that even going to work? if your ELO/win ratio/KD/whatever is collecting what is effectively useless data because you've skewed the odds, how will it even know your actual skill level so as to match you against lovely players to keep you playing? Elo handles uneven matches. adjusting the rating change based on the expected win rate of the match is built into the formula. picking players to create a likely outcome doesn't make the data of the outcome useless. except maybe if you set it to create extremely lopsided games, but, well, just don't do that. i suspect that it wouldn't be good for optimal manipulation to be too blatant anyway. Prav fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Jan 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
Great, game matchmaking is already mostly dogshit and now these chumps want to make it even worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:I imagine it's not concerned with actually knowing your skill level but just making sure you get matched up against chumps periodically to bolster your ego. How exactly they would do that would probably have to do with other data rather than just basic win ratios, which makes it doubly problematic, but I imagine they aren't too concerned. I suppose it just tracks actual skill and if you start a losing streak it dumps you into babbys first FPS for a round with all the mouth breathers so you can clean up and hit the top of the leaderboard, get that dopamine and then plonks you back into the actual skill level mmaking?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
Laserface posted:I suppose it just tracks actual skill and if you start a losing streak it dumps you into babbys first FPS for a round with all the mouth breathers so you can clean up and hit the top of the leaderboard, get that dopamine and then plonks you back into the actual skill level mmaking? Well, who knows if they've even implemented it successfully yet, but I'm sure they'll find a way (to gently caress it up).
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:45
|
|
|
If you're not keen on listening/reading these videos, here's it in a nutshell: 1) A research paper that proposes dynamic difficulty if player telemetry starts indicating they're getting bored or frustrated. They've got 9% improvement in "engagement" with this. 2) A research paper that says that fair matchmaking is not the way to maximize player engagement. They did this by making triplets of match outcomes (LLW, WWL, LWL, etc), and figuring out which triplets cause players to drop out. The easy way is to make sure player's last match of the session (which they can figure out) is a win, which creates "significant improvement" in retention. There's other ways too. They then verified their predictions with a live database and...yup, they were right. It's definitely not good that we've got entire research teams successfully able to hack people's brains to get them to play longer so that they can sell them more poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 02:14
|
|
|
So first there was handholding in SP now there is this poo poo. Of course you lost a ton at first in CS back in the late 90s but we had fun in getting better. It took some work but that was also rewarding. Ahh the scout, so nice to do double hs with it. People would get so mad. Nowadays my old man reflexes can't keep up with the kids...
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 02:31
|
|
|
I’m not sure how to feel about this. The optimist in me wants to believe this could be used to help with frustrating losing streaks that leads to a rage quit and that “engagement” = “fun playing the game” But the realist/pessimist knows that companies can combine this with Activision’s patent to pair people who are on a roll with a winning streak against a whale, get crushed, and tempt them to spend more money to “even the playing field”
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 04:20
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:If you're not keen on listening/reading these videos, here's it in a nutshell: I mean, that's why literally every game genre has you leveling up, even if it doesn't mean anything. It's why when you play an FPS, there's always a number when you kill someone telling you how much XP or whatever you're getting. I'm fairly sure someone researched that, too, and figured out that that kind of thing improves retention. And dynamic difficulty's been there since Max Payne (2, I think). RE4-6 all had dynamic difficulty, too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Sometimes I swear that’s whats going on with my overwatch queues actiblizz already has a patent on that 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 06:13
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:And dynamic difficulty's been there since Max Payne (2, I think). RE4-6 all had dynamic difficulty, too. Goes back to Unreal/Tournament in 1998 even.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
There's a bit of difference between matchmaking based on skill and matchmaking based on "what's more likely to get this person to buy poo poo from us", because, well: This is a patent by activision.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 06:32
|
|
|
Might be a good way to suppress cosmetic sales, warn people that if they buy they'll be teamed with bad players.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 06:43
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:I mean, that's why literally every game genre has you leveling up, even if it doesn't mean anything. It's why when you play an FPS, there's always a number when you kill someone telling you how much XP or whatever you're getting. I'm fairly sure someone researched that, too, and figured out that that kind of thing improves retention. Games have had dynamic difficulty since like, very early shmups. Though then it was mostly there to make the games even harder for better players so they'd spend more quarters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 09:50
|
|
|
Joke's on you nerds. I don't have friends so don't ever play multiplayer. A few people in here describing games/lootboxes as "loving you in the rear end": Dudes, your problem isn't lootboxes or games you don't like...
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 10:27
|
|
|
SgtSteel91 posted:The optimist in me wants to believe this could be used to help with frustrating losing streaks that leads to a rage quit and that “engagement” = “fun playing the game” Bad news. Player "engagement" is a term that actually means "player who has been converted into a revenue source". It has nothing to do with actually playing the game or having fun. Notice how the word is used in comparison to "retention". https://venturebeat.com/2016/03/08/engagement-is-the-new-arpdau-and-dau/ EA & Activision's plans to increase player engagement via dynamically manipulated match making has nothing to do with improving the player experience but everything to do with opening wallets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 11:27
|
|
|
Mr Scumbag posted:Joke's on you nerds. I don't have friends so don't ever play multiplayer. Merely, it's their own blind ignorance as to how pleasurable getting hosed in the rear end can actually be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 11:45
|
|
|
DisDisDis posted:Games have had dynamic difficulty since like, very early shmups. Though then it was mostly there to make the games even harder for better players so they'd spend more quarters. That's true- i forgot about rank in arcade games and the old 1cc strategy of strategically using up lives to get it down for things like final bosses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 12:13
|
|
|
You know what MMOs need? Gear advancement via a system that looks like a slot machine. https://www.arcgames.com/en/games/star-trek-online/news/detail/10764734
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
posting that gif from the link here
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 04:29 |
|
|
Doesn’t elite have that except you can’t even buy the stuff?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 20:45
|
|