TREYARCH Has Responded to the DLC outcry

Call of Duty Black Ops 4 General Discussion Forum

You have every right to question them and be concerned, is everyone forgetting Treyarch was the first ones to sell in game content that wasn't DLC or is everyone forgetting about the $4.99 camo in Black Ops 2

Rivet_Skull
Likes: 334
Posts: 773
Registered: ‎13-11-2016

I@MurkBeserk wrote:

@Goingdeep747 wrote:

The thing about the "stat changing guns" we hear so much about? They are not really stat changing. The mystery is when you don't have them, you don't know "really" how they perform. So your EAGER to get one out of the box. Most of the time I'm excited for the first day or so with the SD weapons, but they get old because they really don't perform as well as a few of the standard weapons. 

 

In your mind you're thinking "that guy is only stomping me because he has the new __________", but in reality he's stomping you because he's better and he would do the same with most of the original guns. 


Apparently you never used the VPR in Infinite Warfare but at least in IW, you could get the base weapon, much better than Treyarch BS version. Out of the box, I just mowed people down with that until they nerfed it. It was quite ridiculous on how good that was so even though that wasn't Treyarch, the potential for a huge imbalance is there and as long as guns are locked behind a lottery or paywall the game is not balanced, across all players. It may not be a true Pay to Win model but it kind of is, if you can't earn the weapon in some fashion other than luck of the draw.

And of course how quickly we forgot about the patent that they had which drew a big question mark on whether or not they could or possibly were matchmaking based around supply drop weapons in order to encourage people to spend money based off of in game manipulation making players believe certain supply drop weapon were more powerful but it really was a result of providing matchmacking advantages to those that had supply drop weapons. So yes, there is a ton of reason to question Activision and Treyarch's integrity on their business model.


I will admit I didn't play IW very long, it just felt like a generic off market version of BO3. 

 

But lets be honest, even the standard guns have to be buffed or nerfed over the life of a game. 

 

As far as the matchmaking, that's a big "who knows??".  But like I've said, I've had a huge amount of time on BO3. And it's pretty rare ( like 1 in a 100 games ) I see anyone doing much that impresses me with supply drop guns. And again, when I look at their stats or in theater, they are evenly as good with other standard weapons, if not better. 

 

The myth is the SD guns make a bad player better or a great player unstoppable, and that is just not true. 

Goingdeep747
Likes: 788
Posts: 1377
Registered: ‎06-11-2015

@Goingdeep747 wrote: 

The myth is the SD guns make a bad player better or a great player unstoppable, and that is just not true. 


It might not make a bad player better or great player unstoppable but it could create an imbalance or provide an advantage to one over another, and in some cases it has, giving an advantage too one player between two equally skilled players and not offering the other players the option of countering with the same loadout. That wasn't an issue in IW since everyone got the base weapon so anyone could equip it leveling the playing field. However, if they followed the Treyarch supply drop model or even WW2 with their timed events, it is an issue, a big issue.

Trusting the DEVS to balance weapons correctly is a bit foolish out of the gate so the only way to keep things on the same level is to allow all players to have access to the same weapons, attachments, perks and equipment. The Vesper and VMP were good examples of this in BO3, they couldn't get these correct and they kept overbuffing and nerfing those two weapons during the games main life cycle.

As far as the patent, your right, there is no way to know if that is a thing in reality. However, the fact they put this in writing, in a legal written patent and went to the trouble to file it. The idea that they were even considering it is enough to never trust their intentions and enough to call them out on it until they provide some effort to show there is no possible way it exists. The only way I will ever believe there is not a manipulation of matchmaking or any other kind is if there is no stat changing factors that are not 100% available or earnable to all players. These DEVS have done nothing to earn our trust when it comes to supply drops or micro-transactions.


MurkBeserk Level 75
Likes: 1670
Posts: 3991
Registered: ‎12-10-2016

I like how Treyarch has supported BO3 with more content... especially zombies. It just sounds like instead of getting 4 map packs with BO4, we will be getting 4 season passes. Smiley Very Happy

iHattoriHanzo0 Level 75
Likes: 7451
Posts: 7446
Registered: ‎08-10-2013

@iHattoriHanzo0 wrote:

I like how Treyarch has supported BO3 with more content... especially zombies. It just sounds like instead of getting 4 map packs with BO4, we will be getting 4 season passes. Smiley Very Happy


4 season passed? Just the black pass has less mp maps than normal. And probably half will be remakes

Roll the dice. Life is a gamble
GRaS is OP. Green Stars are OP
SaND get's everywhere
dtuchpunk Level 75
Likes: 4180
Posts: 14386
Registered: ‎09-06-2011

There is no "outcry"

Just cry babies. 

What i just read was amazing. They will pump out updates frequintly and its amazing! I can't wait to get it!

I didn't see anywhere in his speech saying "We listened to the concerns about the dlc pass" He never said anything about that.

So why are you fake news trying to say "Black ops has finally responded"? No they didn't. They just stated about the frequint updates

Dark Ryu
Likes: 14
Posts: 45
Registered: ‎03-09-2011
It's the old business model that pissed ppl off only that you have to buy the black ops pass for all maps you can't choose what dlc pack you want to purchase was the gripe and the dlc 6 that PS got but PC and Xbox users got shafted. There's a lot of Money grabbing going on here with this game but that's business because they have shareholders.

I can see two sets of season passes being released for BO4 but to be honest I'm not a fan of the MP this year from everything I've seen. Love the zombies so far and blackout haven't seen any game play so if that's a flop I'll be waiting for Xmas time for half off sale. Kind of let down but there's a lot of good games coming out so putting cod on the back burner isn't a let down because I'll get to it after the others. Though the last two releases were unfinished and buggy on release let's see how the launch goes this year for trey arch.
Beno49
Likes: 71
Posts: 133
Registered: ‎18-11-2017

Feed the sheep and they will follow. This is all COD developers buisness model.

ukoldgit
Likes: 48
Posts: 201
Registered: ‎04-06-2011

Activision needs to include DLC with the base price of the game like Overwatch, Titanfall, and BFV. DLC devides the community making a small group even smaller. It is a failing business model and needs to be revised. Raise the price of the game to $79 and include everything other than bonus cosmetics and perhaps in store currency. It will produce more money overall while keeping the community together for quicker matches in content everyone can play. Whats worse is that this game costs much less to produce/develope than previous titles because there is no single player game included. DLC should be inlcuded period and we should be getting cross platform. 

Volt615
Likes: 5
Posts: 25
Registered: ‎13-11-2013

Paid shill Smiley Tongue

"Being Human totally sucks most of the time.

Videogames are the only thing that make life bearable."

-Anorak's Almanac, Chapter 91, Verses 1-2
NiceDrewishFela Level 75
Likes: 15416
Posts: 26294
Registered: ‎02-09-2011

Studios