"There has been a battle raging over the last few years between the first person shooter games with two names sticking out as the leaders of the pack; Call of Duty and Battlefield. " | Explosion.com
Erina writes: "Brandon Herrera, a well-known YouTuber and firearm expert, has claimed that the creators of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III used his custom-designed firearm, the AK-50, in the season 5 of their latest game without his permission."
Most likely, they steal other ideas on a regular whether it be game modes, character concept designs etc and now they're likely going to start utilizing ai to put less work in for maximum profit.
"Did Call of Duty Steal"
Is there anything Microsoft won't steal for a buck.....anything?
Activision has shut down two major Call of Duty cheat providers, with one company issuing a statement about it.
Get rid of all of them. I played a little cod mw2 today and there's still a few cheaters here and there. Their Superman split second reactions to everything is the biggest giveaway that they're cheating.
I played against a cheater a while ago, who went like 100 kills to 15 deaths. I, and my teammates, reported him. He entered our next game, and we all said we would report him again, and his gameplay was entirely different. Not only was he in the negatives, but his split second, Superman reactions, went away. No perfect shots from across the map. No diving, proning, and quick aiming super fast. His aiming wasn't as perfect, and he wasn't able to spam his gun and shoot as fast as before.
The cheating is so obvious, it's not even funny.
On MW3 I was seeing a cheat that highlighted all players on my team in an outline regardless of where we were. We could easily be detected through walls.
I guess Activision can do something right for once.... like a broken clock can be right twice a day.
The best thing would be to move everything mp related to the server so the game would be 100% stremend no local files to mess with and add a controller/keyboard mouse checker.
The cheating will always be there sadly until they remove local mp files
One goes down another will replace them. Unfortunately if there money to be made it will be there.
While cheating in online games is just wrong, the way to get around any legal trouble with games, fan remakes etc. your site on the dark web and accept crypto, you will be fine.
Discover the impact of Microsoft's decision to include Call Of Duty in Game Pass. Explore the pros and cons and speculate about future changes.
Most folks that have a Gamepass subscription will not spend the $70, they will use Gamepass instead to play COD. MS will most likely make their money from some solely PC players & some solely PS5 owners. Even some PC players may opt to use Gamepass instead of spending $70. I would think MS would want to make every dime they could from retail sales. As long as they put new releases of COD day one on Gamepass, MS will lose out on some sales of COD.
COD makes truck loads of money on microtransactions. That's likely the play. Get more people in the door through Game Pass and sell more microtransactions. Have a steady stream of events to keep people interested so they keep their sub, and then just the sub alone would double the revenue from that player each year.
Buying the game at $70 a pop including the deluxe versions is much better than people subs for a dollar to $15 a month. Die hard fans that usually buy the game also buy into the transactions. Again putting any new COD day one on Gamepass is definitely a sure loss of making some retail money for every copy of COD. With the last iteration of COD being bad most likely people are going to sub to Gamepass to play COD basically saving themselves $70, that is a loss of retail sales.
Most that don't have Gamepass will just buy the game and he done with it. People that do will just result in a retail sale being lost. Some will buy the subscription for the month then be done. This is lose lose. Casuals aren't going to pay almost 300 dollars a year for COD.
The reality is that Microsoft already knows the answer as stated by them in their documents. PlayStation gamers have built up an ecosystem of games and they aren't migrating over and dropping what they have to buy an Xbox to play one game in a service you have to pay monthly for. Cheaper to just buy the game. And, I'd bet many casual COD players don't know or care about the acquisition.
Which is why Jim Ryan pushed to make sure that that one game continues to be sold as usual on Sony's platform to keep the status quo. Every other IP owned by Activision are worthless. And Activision has shown they don't care about other IP like Tony Hawk by cancelling them.
Sales WILL be lost on Xbox. That's for certain. Microsoft can only hope that Xbox gamers continue to buy up those micro transactions to make up for those lost sales. Only positive for Microsoft is that they get to dip into PlayStation game sales that we all know from history and NPD, that Sony's console sells more games. But increase subs from Sony fans for game pass? Not happening in any way that matters.
Sony, on the other hand, can have their cake and eat it too. They get COD and they can continue dropping more content for their fastest selling GaaS game which is Hell Divers 2. As the game passes 12 million sales and doesn't beat you over the head with micro transactions, Sony has a win win situation and can support the game getting more content to keep players engaged.
As a side note, COD is probably going to turn into some version of Sea of Fortnite Duty. Games as a service sitting in game pass being milked dry with micro transactions and constant updates making you feel you're playing an unfinished game that keeps going and going with no soul.
I'm not sure why everyone is acting like COD is a surprise. That was always the plan. They said in court during the FTC case they were doing this. They have said repeatedly and recently all first party games are going to Gamepass.
gamepass like PS Plus are rental services. Games like COD you buy not rent. So in my case unless I plan on keeping gamepass for 2yrs minimum than the benefit of adding cod is pointless.
With all due respect, but Battlefield is now taking the route that Call of Duty has been taking for the past decade or so.
It's way too soon for a sequel to Battlefield 3, yet at our doorstep we can find Battlefield 4. It's even in the same era. What is it going to offer?
I would've rather had Bad Company 3.
Hi all
Well i think it´s not too soon for BF4 because everybody complains about the Limited Players in Consoles, so BF4 will bring 64 Players to Consoles and More to PC, better graphics and many more..and for me i´m very excited because in the BF4 first Picture there is a China J20 covered by the letter "E", but we can see clear the Horizontal Stabilizers in the Right - Front of J20.. so what this means is Welcome F22 :)) and T50 to the Dogfights of BF4 with F35 too i Think.
See You in Sky ::RR::
ok.
I hope we see PS4 gameplay of the game.
Just because you don't like cod, doesn't mean other people feel the same way. Why is everyone so intent on cod failing, battlefield is a great game in its own right and doesn't need to be compared to cod as I think they too different.
Gaming is becoming very sour indeed. With constant releases of the same game innovation is becoming few and far between. Let me elaborate, games coming out soon that are follow-ups to fairly recent games:
• AC4
• BF4
• SR4
• COD (it's inevitable)
• Any many more, that I'm sure of.
Thank goodness for Beyond, The Last Of Us, Soul Sacrifice, Killzone: Mercenary & GRAND THEFT AUTO V.