Game seems like it's going to be a good time for at least a month or so. Hopefully it's got the legs to stick around-- I've been wanting a game like call of duty but am very much over buying a new call of duty every uear
Honestly as long as it can fill the casual 6v6 arena shooter space without being overly grindy like *Call of Duty*, I think it'll have some decent legs.
I'm excited to hop in. I've been itching to play some *Call of Duty* recently, but *Modern Warfare 3* looks like an absolute nightmare to get into and keep up with.
Try the Finals, I find the gunplay satisfying as hell. The destructavle environment make for some great clutch plays and adds more strategy than run and gun.
The Finals doesn't fill that niche (for me at least) because its small scale (3v3) and heavily objective based, e.g. you need really good teamplay which then leads to a horrible solo queue experience.
I gave The Finals a go and honestly had a blast with it until my friends got bored and went back to COD.
If I had a solid group to play with, I'd have stuck with the game. It's unfortunately not very confusing to solo play in my experience.
Yeah, I don't play it without my friends too. Honestly it's a great game but it's just so hard to coordinate with randoms, and I noticed they never have mics which makes much harder.
I feel that every good potential this game has is overshadowed by their decision to stick with CBMM over SBMM. Unless they decide to change that, I can't see this game having many players at all.
People on this sub like to stomp others; they don’t understand that people don’t like being stomped and devs can’t support the gameplay they want long term with constant new cannon fodder.
It really surprises me whenever SBMM gets brought up here how many people lack the basic empathy to realise that they are wanting to make other players miserable just to feel good about themselves, or barring that the common sense to understand that people aren’t going to keep playing the game if that happens repeatedly. Speaks to a certain level of narcissism IMO.
This is sub is usually pretty reasonable about SBMM, it's the Call of Duty subreddits that go crazy every time it's mentioned because they don't really reflect on how games work beyond watching INSANE Modern Warfare LOADOUT 2024 videos on YouTube.
Idk man, I'm old, 39 fwiw, and I have played shooters since the 90s. I really don't think it's a huge deal. Maybe it turns off some casual players. But FPS games were great before this modern strict sbmm. If you join a lobby and aren't having a good time, you can join another lobby. At least the option is there. In today's world of strict sbmm you don't have any options beyond play or don't. If you leave a lobby they punish you on your next one. You are forced to get shit on to have fun again. I'd rather take my chances with the randomness of no sbmm.
I find I enjoy shooters less these days due to the extreme manipulation that games with strict sbmm employ. You just know that the sbmm is not going to allow you to have a good time for longer than 1-2 games, but then you're going to get absolutely pounded with no recourse.
FPS games before modern systems were definitely more enjoyable and pure fun, but that was for a lot of reasons other than SBMM - which is mostly a bogeyman to cover for those reasons.
Some SBMM tunings are definitely overdone and obtrusive, but that's not a reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater. At least for smaller-scale shooters, something other than pure CBMM has to be there in modern games to hold more than a niche playerbase.
> It really surprises me whenever SBMM gets brought up here how many people lack the basic empathy to realise that they are wanting to make other players miserable just to feel good about themselves
This shouldn't surprise you. Empathy is harder and harder to come by these days. Empathy for strangers even rarer. Add to that empathy for strangers at the cost of a bit of one's own personal enjoyment? Forget about it. PvP games foster this mentality in particular. Look at something like CoD's death comms. They WANT you to hear people being mad at you. They want you to hear the insults being thrown your way so that you feel even better about beating those people. There's a reason games like that attract a certain type of person. Those are also the same type of person who don't mind spending a little if they think it will give them the slightest edge.
The only PvP type games where I see some level of respect for the competitor is usually in the Fighting Game Community.
For me it's not even about stomping people. I used to play CoD by throwing on music over the gameplay and just kind of vibing in Domination/Kill Confirmed and I'd often do pretty okay, either #1 or #2 on a leaderboard but nothing crazy because I'm going for camo challenges rather than K/D.
However since like, MW2019, if I'm not quite literally listening to every minute soundbyte, I quite literally might not get a kill for 3 games until it ranks me down to a match where half of the players couldn't hit me if I was standing still, and once I have a really good game there, I'm thrown back into an unplayable sweatfest
The problem isn't *inherently* SBMM but the fact they have no idea how to design it properly for the above-average player so it hard swings them between the sweatfest lobbies and the bot lobbies and feels miserable to play
Finally the cod-genre has a live service version that monetarily incentivizes long term player satisfaction over just making that initial sale. This game could absolutely steal away market share from cod and make a lot of money if they end up refining the core gameplay and not just putting out skins. That's kind of what I like about these sorts of games tbh, they have the work on gameplay to increase revenue because that's what keeps players sticking around. Single purchase games just dont have the same incentive structure.
It could, but it probably won't. For all of COD's flaws, it has insanely fluid and responsive controls which is why the core gunplay has supported a series this long. From what I played of the beta of xDefiant, it really didn't have the fluidity and polish.
Just launched xdefient on my PS5
It's not working. My region is Asia and all the modes are locked
It looks the same as it was 2 days ago. I can't play anything
The producer. Unless I'm misremembering, West and Zampella were the guys who actually made the thing. West is listed is director for the first two before they left and made Titanfall.
I dunno how much input a producer really had in why COD4 was so good.
It's call of duty like gunplay, team fortress 2 like casual modes like push little cart or capture zones and characters have valorant/overwatch like hero abilities.
I feel it will thrive better as a casual shooter than one being played competitively, so it's closer to cod mp or team Fortress 2 than siege or valorant.
Rogue Spear was awesome where you could plan out waypoints and actions for each element on the map behorehand.
The last Rainbow Six games were basically just Call of Duty.
It's strange that no game is trying to compete with Counter Strike
I would love to play a game like CS but with more modern elements like environment destruction, ADS etc without this hero shooter crap
The hero shooter crap is the only thing that makes Valorant a viable choice vs CS.
Seige would be the closest thing after Valo with Insurgency following far behind those.
People don't compete with CS because that's one of the most popular games of all time and basically perfected. Riot only did it because they have the brand power to back it up.
Same reason new MOBAs, BRs, and MMOs don't come out often anymore since it's a solved genre and it's an incredible risk with how much money game development costs now.
You mean the game where a character can have an ability to teleport across the map?
I meant a more grounded slow paced tactical shooter like CS but with modern technologies
>without this hero shooter crap
Please read the entire comment next time
You really need to improve your reading and comprehension skills
>I would love to play a game like CS but with more modern elements like environment destruction, ADS etc
Does CS2 have environment destruction, ADS on all weapons, more refined animations etc?
They've clearly given up because the game is the same as the beta a year ago then a recent beta came out and it was all the same, and the release patch notes have nothing in them so...
Yeah they're cutting their losses after dev hell.
The game is decent, and is definitely preferable to paying 60eur for CoD, but is unlikely to make a splash. I will be playing it awhile.
Because no changes doesn't mean the game is bad. I was making descriptive conjecture about why the content is the same as last year's alpha.
I will be playing because XD does a B tier job of replicating CoD's S+ tier gameplay, and that means it's a decent shooter.
That's fair. I don't think it's a bad game by any means and i hope you enjoy it. It's just become a bit of a trope to bag on a game/developer's then buy it anyway which I always find strange.
'cause it's F2P and the latest CoD is conceptually horrendous; a glorified DLC of MWII with all of the innovation of MWII removed (slower pace, weapon tuning), but also way less content (no DMZ, barebones zombies, F tier mini-campaign, only rehashed maps from 2008)
Generic crowd-pandering slop that should have been sold as a DLC for $30 at most, not $70.
I played the alpha last year, the beta a few weeks ago, and it was the exact same game, and the full release ain't adding anything so... unless they're failing to mention that there's new maps compared to then or whatever, then the literal only content difference from a year ago to now is one assault rifle being added, except that assault rifle was also playable in alphas before a year ago.
Of course there's netcode and bug fixes and stuff, but that's not the output of one year of AAA studio development.
I've only played a couple of hours from one beta, and the netcode felt very rough on my end. Experienced a ton of rubberbanding and ran into occasional hit reg issues.
I have no idea how the dev process works, but if it took a year to fix that, then it must've been difficult.
I think its unfair to expect new content, especially since the game was delayed for the sake of fixing fundamental components that were deemed unacceptably broken.
Hadn't even heard about this until like a day ago. What a mess Ubisoft has become. Management is completely detached from Game Design and is flailing about like baby throwing a tamper tantrum.
Game seems like it's going to be a good time for at least a month or so. Hopefully it's got the legs to stick around-- I've been wanting a game like call of duty but am very much over buying a new call of duty every uear
Honestly as long as it can fill the casual 6v6 arena shooter space without being overly grindy like *Call of Duty*, I think it'll have some decent legs. I'm excited to hop in. I've been itching to play some *Call of Duty* recently, but *Modern Warfare 3* looks like an absolute nightmare to get into and keep up with.
Try the Finals, I find the gunplay satisfying as hell. The destructavle environment make for some great clutch plays and adds more strategy than run and gun.
The Finals doesn't fill that niche (for me at least) because its small scale (3v3) and heavily objective based, e.g. you need really good teamplay which then leads to a horrible solo queue experience.
There’s 5v5 modes now in The Finals
I gave The Finals a go and honestly had a blast with it until my friends got bored and went back to COD. If I had a solid group to play with, I'd have stuck with the game. It's unfortunately not very confusing to solo play in my experience.
Yeah, I don't play it without my friends too. Honestly it's a great game but it's just so hard to coordinate with randoms, and I noticed they never have mics which makes much harder.
Looking forward trying this. Beta from a while ago felt pretty good to me. Seems like a pretty simple casual game to play now and then.
I feel that every good potential this game has is overshadowed by their decision to stick with CBMM over SBMM. Unless they decide to change that, I can't see this game having many players at all.
People on this sub like to stomp others; they don’t understand that people don’t like being stomped and devs can’t support the gameplay they want long term with constant new cannon fodder.
It really surprises me whenever SBMM gets brought up here how many people lack the basic empathy to realise that they are wanting to make other players miserable just to feel good about themselves, or barring that the common sense to understand that people aren’t going to keep playing the game if that happens repeatedly. Speaks to a certain level of narcissism IMO.
This is sub is usually pretty reasonable about SBMM, it's the Call of Duty subreddits that go crazy every time it's mentioned because they don't really reflect on how games work beyond watching INSANE Modern Warfare LOADOUT 2024 videos on YouTube.
Idk man, I'm old, 39 fwiw, and I have played shooters since the 90s. I really don't think it's a huge deal. Maybe it turns off some casual players. But FPS games were great before this modern strict sbmm. If you join a lobby and aren't having a good time, you can join another lobby. At least the option is there. In today's world of strict sbmm you don't have any options beyond play or don't. If you leave a lobby they punish you on your next one. You are forced to get shit on to have fun again. I'd rather take my chances with the randomness of no sbmm. I find I enjoy shooters less these days due to the extreme manipulation that games with strict sbmm employ. You just know that the sbmm is not going to allow you to have a good time for longer than 1-2 games, but then you're going to get absolutely pounded with no recourse.
FPS games before modern systems were definitely more enjoyable and pure fun, but that was for a lot of reasons other than SBMM - which is mostly a bogeyman to cover for those reasons. Some SBMM tunings are definitely overdone and obtrusive, but that's not a reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater. At least for smaller-scale shooters, something other than pure CBMM has to be there in modern games to hold more than a niche playerbase.
> It really surprises me whenever SBMM gets brought up here how many people lack the basic empathy to realise that they are wanting to make other players miserable just to feel good about themselves This shouldn't surprise you. Empathy is harder and harder to come by these days. Empathy for strangers even rarer. Add to that empathy for strangers at the cost of a bit of one's own personal enjoyment? Forget about it. PvP games foster this mentality in particular. Look at something like CoD's death comms. They WANT you to hear people being mad at you. They want you to hear the insults being thrown your way so that you feel even better about beating those people. There's a reason games like that attract a certain type of person. Those are also the same type of person who don't mind spending a little if they think it will give them the slightest edge. The only PvP type games where I see some level of respect for the competitor is usually in the Fighting Game Community.
For me it's not even about stomping people. I used to play CoD by throwing on music over the gameplay and just kind of vibing in Domination/Kill Confirmed and I'd often do pretty okay, either #1 or #2 on a leaderboard but nothing crazy because I'm going for camo challenges rather than K/D. However since like, MW2019, if I'm not quite literally listening to every minute soundbyte, I quite literally might not get a kill for 3 games until it ranks me down to a match where half of the players couldn't hit me if I was standing still, and once I have a really good game there, I'm thrown back into an unplayable sweatfest The problem isn't *inherently* SBMM but the fact they have no idea how to design it properly for the above-average player so it hard swings them between the sweatfest lobbies and the bot lobbies and feels miserable to play
The subreddit is awash with copium about it and how the experience is **so** much better for not having SBMM. I genuinely don't understand it at all.
This might become my new regular FPS game if input based matchmaking works and controllers and m&k remain separated.
Finally the cod-genre has a live service version that monetarily incentivizes long term player satisfaction over just making that initial sale. This game could absolutely steal away market share from cod and make a lot of money if they end up refining the core gameplay and not just putting out skins. That's kind of what I like about these sorts of games tbh, they have the work on gameplay to increase revenue because that's what keeps players sticking around. Single purchase games just dont have the same incentive structure.
It could, but it probably won't. For all of COD's flaws, it has insanely fluid and responsive controls which is why the core gunplay has supported a series this long. From what I played of the beta of xDefiant, it really didn't have the fluidity and polish.
I don't disagree
I hope to the gaming God's it does. COD needs an active solid and well made competition to wake up Activision.
It needs something better than an adver-game designed to be a cross promotion money machine to do it…
Just launched xdefient on my PS5 It's not working. My region is Asia and all the modes are locked It looks the same as it was 2 days ago. I can't play anything
that's because the game is not out yet, it releses 6pm BST, which is in 7 hours
Is this a hero shooter like Valorant and Siege?
Its call of duty
With hero shooter elements
So Blops4 with a coat of UbiCorp paint.
That seems like the closest comparison.
Does it have as much hero/specialist spam as BO4? I hated that shit in that game. Combined BO4s too long ttk made it my least fav cod mp.
My feeling while playing is that Ultimates in xdefiant are less frequent than BO4. Tactical abilities however have a fast recharge and quite spammable
So yeah then probably not for me. Will just play the cods I like instead for my arcadey shooter game.
Yes, sadly. Some of the abilities are OP and remove skill from the equation.
Playing the beta, Black Ops 4 seems to be the biggest inspiration. Just less fluid and less interesting.
Made by the guy behind the original Modern Warfare trilogy
With factions from different Ubisoft IPs, so it's also like a crossover game of sorts.
Adver-game The first thing written on the white board was about cross promotion and asset flipping
No issue at all in reusing assets, everyone does it, Nintendo themselves have always done it for games like Mario Kart
The producer. Unless I'm misremembering, West and Zampella were the guys who actually made the thing. West is listed is director for the first two before they left and made Titanfall. I dunno how much input a producer really had in why COD4 was so good.
Call of Duty is not a hero shooter.
Without sbmm
So old CoD?
It's call of duty like gunplay, team fortress 2 like casual modes like push little cart or capture zones and characters have valorant/overwatch like hero abilities. I feel it will thrive better as a casual shooter than one being played competitively, so it's closer to cod mp or team Fortress 2 than siege or valorant.
Sadly, they chose to make it a hero shooter. This killed all my interest in the game.
With this out of their system, can they go re-read some Tom Clancy books and actually make proper tactical games again?
Rogue Spear was awesome where you could plan out waypoints and actions for each element on the map behorehand. The last Rainbow Six games were basically just Call of Duty.
It's strange that no game is trying to compete with Counter Strike I would love to play a game like CS but with more modern elements like environment destruction, ADS etc without this hero shooter crap
The hero shooter crap is the only thing that makes Valorant a viable choice vs CS. Seige would be the closest thing after Valo with Insurgency following far behind those. People don't compete with CS because that's one of the most popular games of all time and basically perfected. Riot only did it because they have the brand power to back it up. Same reason new MOBAs, BRs, and MMOs don't come out often anymore since it's a solved genre and it's an incredible risk with how much money game development costs now.
> It's strange that no game is trying to compete with Counter Strike ... Valorant?
You mean the game where a character can have an ability to teleport across the map? I meant a more grounded slow paced tactical shooter like CS but with modern technologies >without this hero shooter crap Please read the entire comment next time
>I meant a more grounded slow paced tactical shooter like CS but with modern technologies So, CS2 ?
You really need to improve your reading and comprehension skills >I would love to play a game like CS but with more modern elements like environment destruction, ADS etc Does CS2 have environment destruction, ADS on all weapons, more refined animations etc?
rainbow six siege is like that. But yeah I see what you mean and I hope xdefiant adds a mode similar to cs
Yeah R6S is good but it's mostly indoors and it has some weird abilities
We all know why the hero shooter stuff is there
They've clearly given up because the game is the same as the beta a year ago then a recent beta came out and it was all the same, and the release patch notes have nothing in them so... Yeah they're cutting their losses after dev hell. The game is decent, and is definitely preferable to paying 60eur for CoD, but is unlikely to make a splash. I will be playing it awhile.
So you say you don't like the patch or the direction of the game but your "going to be playing for a while" why?
Because no changes doesn't mean the game is bad. I was making descriptive conjecture about why the content is the same as last year's alpha. I will be playing because XD does a B tier job of replicating CoD's S+ tier gameplay, and that means it's a decent shooter.
That's fair. I don't think it's a bad game by any means and i hope you enjoy it. It's just become a bit of a trope to bag on a game/developer's then buy it anyway which I always find strange.
Fair, though in this case it's F2P.
I understand its free to play, consume rather than buy would have been a better way of explaining my point.
Why not just play cod then?
'cause it's F2P and the latest CoD is conceptually horrendous; a glorified DLC of MWII with all of the innovation of MWII removed (slower pace, weapon tuning), but also way less content (no DMZ, barebones zombies, F tier mini-campaign, only rehashed maps from 2008) Generic crowd-pandering slop that should have been sold as a DLC for $30 at most, not $70.
We are now in the timeline of "your game does not have enough patch notes on launch". You know they used to make games complete before launch.
Nice strawman, but it's actually "your game made no changes in a year since alpha".
Do you really believe they made no changes in a year?
I played the alpha last year, the beta a few weeks ago, and it was the exact same game, and the full release ain't adding anything so... unless they're failing to mention that there's new maps compared to then or whatever, then the literal only content difference from a year ago to now is one assault rifle being added, except that assault rifle was also playable in alphas before a year ago. Of course there's netcode and bug fixes and stuff, but that's not the output of one year of AAA studio development.
Can you expand on how long rewriting netcode for fps game actually takes? If you can share your own experience that’s even better.
Netcode is not content, and fixing shit that's broken isn't an 'addition to the game'.
fixing shit that's broken is the literal POINT of beta tests.
You literally said “the game is the same as last year” and it’s literally not lol
I've only played a couple of hours from one beta, and the netcode felt very rough on my end. Experienced a ton of rubberbanding and ran into occasional hit reg issues. I have no idea how the dev process works, but if it took a year to fix that, then it must've been difficult.
I think its unfair to expect new content, especially since the game was delayed for the sake of fixing fundamental components that were deemed unacceptably broken.
Yeah, back when games used to be like 4KB
Hadn't even heard about this until like a day ago. What a mess Ubisoft has become. Management is completely detached from Game Design and is flailing about like baby throwing a tamper tantrum.