1 10 11 12 13 14 Previous Next 137 Replies Latest reply: Mar 2, 2013 6:49 AM by M3NT4L_SH0T_ Go to original post RSS
  • 110. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation

    They're not "punishing" anyone, they're making it more fair to everyone. Treyarch has long said their first priority is a good gaming experience for all. That means taking from some to benefit others. Look at the range of stats in Treyarch games compared to Infinity Ward. You get everything diluted in Treyarch because they put these shitty little feature in to take away and possible advantage.

  • 112. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation
    Noctis Everto

    Id like to pose a Counter Argument over lag compensation. I think it is 'unfair' for the developer to decide who their game is 'unfair' to.

     

    The world is unfair, if you dont believe something, why should anyone else?

    I have been studying behavioural psychology, sociology, and soon-to-enroll in microexpression training.

     

    I dont claim to know it all, but I know A LOT about what I do.

  • 113. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation

    i just happen to be one of the people that have the "priviliege" of playing in the past agains the future dwellers

     

    this was made blatantly obvious when a dude walked around a corner and put 2 shot in my head from long range before my brain even registered he was there

     

    turns out on his kill cam he walked around the corner and looked around before spotting and shooting me

     

    but the game decided i could skip the "looking around part" and go straight for the "2 shots to head part"

     

    i simply dont have patiance nor tolerance to learn divination so what is a poor player suposed to do?

     

    and im on PC cant imagine its any better on console

  • 114. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation
    Jlassabe

    Hello everyone and fellow gamers. I play this game because I love it yes the good the bad and the ugly of this game. I play with my wife and we always split screen. I have cable Internet with the fastest connection possible. I do support lag comp. I feel that it does make the game more even. How are everyone suppose to play league and make the stats worth something if it is not an even playing field. However, what i do not support and everyone will possible agree is the host disadvantage. Since i do have one of the fastest Internet the game thinks i should always be the host. This is not a problem. However, when i am playing the game and no one will die at all even with a shotgun to the face. This is an issue. This happens because not only am i the host i am also split screening causing a double disadvantage.I do want the lag connection, I like the lag comp. I just want it to be fair to all even the host. Please understand that I am not a stats junkie I have a k/d of .69. So thanks for reading and please lets at least get this one little problem fixed for the fairness of the game. Thanks.

  • 115. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation

    No it isn't and you completely don't understand the point.

     

    The point is the game just doesn't use nor need much speed to run fluently. Anyone with a bog standard adsl/cable connection could play  CoD4 / WaW / MW2 on a good 3 bar and usually a 4. Hell, i played up to MW3 on a 2 meg connection, never got host, and usually came out on top against your average to good player.

     

    I'm not too bothered if they want to give some guy in the amazon rain forest a slight advantage. What worries me is that Treyarch may be crippling high speeders for no reason, when the so caled 'low pingers' don't even need it. I know I never did.

     

    The difference between fighting a 30 ms guy with a 10ms is negligible and doesn't need changing

     

    When the roles are reversed and the 10ms guy is imposed a severe synthetic latency penalty, it's unplayable.

     

    All you have to look at is which CoD game throughout history was the smoothest to play. The answer is MW2. Sure, the game was stupid for other reasons, but it ran as smooth as a babys bum, with no BS like this ever needed. Ever since then, the games have been changing the recipe and getting it sourer and sourer every year.

  • 116. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation
    danielbondnz

    OP I get what you say, and your right, yet 99% of people on this forum are clueless to what Lag comp dose for them. I dont agree with your play to win ruins the game, but not enough lag comp certainly dose.

     

     

    Even if you had the worlds fastest internet speed, you would still be at a disadvantage to another player who was closer to the host if there were not enough lag compensation.

     

     

    But you cant tell this forum, because nearly everyone on here knows nothing about what lag comp really is, and when they get BS on by a player closer to the host they blame that instantly on lag comp, when in fact the real blame was lack of enough lag comp to have evened out the distance between them and the host.

  • 117. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation
    Ss78_

    chibistevo32 wrote:

     

    No it isn't and you completely don't understand the point.

     

    The point is the game just doesn't use nor need much speed to run fluently. Anyone with a bog standard adsl/cable connection could play  CoD4 / WaW / MW2 on a good 3 bar and usually a 4. Hell, i played up to MW3 on a 2 meg connection, never got host, and usually came out on top against your average to good player.

     

    I'm not too bothered if they want to give some guy in the amazon rain forest a slight advantage. What worries me is that Treyarch may be crippling high speeders for no reason, when the so caled 'low pingers' don't even need it. I know I never did.

     

    The difference between fighting a 30 ms guy with a 10ms is negligible and doesn't need changing

     

    When the roles are reversed and the 10ms guy is imposed a severe synthetic latency penalty, it's unplayable.

     

    All you have to look at is which CoD game throughout history was the smoothest to play. The answer is MW2. Sure, the game was stupid for other reasons, but it ran as smooth as a babys bum, with no BS like this ever needed. Ever since then, the games have been changing the recipe and getting it sourer and sourer every year.

    Oh I completely understand the point. I've been ******* about being put at a disadvantage for months on the mw3 forums. I've got the cheapest internet I can buy which because I stay in Holland means I have 50/50 fibre with amazing latency and uncontested internet with ftth.

     

    You're misleading people by saying lag comp isn't needed. It is, get over it. It's how they implement it that's the problem. The current matchmaking system for the xbox 360 is making us get games quickly by hooking us up with a too wide spread of latency and location. Without dedis and using the listen server protocol that they use the lag comp they use is just not able to give everyone a fair fight.

     

    I've backed out at least 50 if not more times since tuesday because the game is way out of sync for me and nearly every time I was host. Currently the matchmaking isn't helping me. I use best. My connection is open. I have a switch that splits the vlan so I can use a different router than my Isp's. That router has the xbox hard wired and in the dmz. I suffer badly because my connection is good and when people are too far away get in my pot or people that have low latency or both I lag behind when hosting.

     

    If you're going to moan then at least see everyone's point. This game is good, the matchmaking is bad.

  • 118. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation

              

    No it isn't and you completely don't understand the point.

     

    The point is the game just doesn't use nor need much speed to run fluently. Anyone with a bog standard adsl/cable connection could play  CoD4 / WaW / MW2 on a good 3 bar and usually a 4. Hell, i played up to MW3 on a 2 meg connection, never got host, and usually came out on top against your average to good player.

     

    I'm not too bothered if they want to give some guy in the amazon rain forest a slight advantage. What worries me is that Treyarch may be crippling high speeders for no reason, when the so caled 'low pingers' don't even need it. I know I never did.

     

    The difference between fighting a 30 ms guy with a 10ms is negligible and doesn't need changing

     

    When the roles are reversed and the 10ms guy is imposed a severe synthetic latency penalty, it's unplayable.

     

    All you have to look at is which CoD game throughout history was the smoothest to play. The answer is MW2. Sure, the game was stupid for other reasons, but it ran as smooth as a babys bum, with no BS like this ever needed. Ever since then, the games have been changing the recipe and getting it sourer and sourer every year.

     

     

     

    This hundred times over, I live in Iceland so I'm almost always at 3 bar, in MW2 it didn't matter, there everything goes awesome, and besides that game had some serious issues, it's still my faviroute game even though the other ones had a potential at being better, just because playing it felt right, playing mw3 and bops2 does NOT feel right at all, especially since I'm now on a 100mb down and 50mb up connection, it bothered me less when there was only one person in mw2 who had an advantage on me (the host) then in this game where I practically have to sit in a corner and camp my ass off to be able to kill anyone, being forced to camp is humiliating, because it's lame and boring...

  • 119. Re: Why Treyarch Did The Right Thing With Lag Compensation
    Sandman777

    What pisses me off is the game'll have you think you're actually killing someone... until they turn around and down you in 2 shots.