FullyGrimFully Fing Grim22m
Why would it get worse? Balance right now is pretty even overall. Most of the issues are due to map design and matchmaking taking time to figure out peoples Hidden Elo score. No one complains in Black Ops 3 when a balance patch comes that the nerfed weapon can no longer be used effectively in the Campaign.
Sorry, I clearly didn’t explain what I meant by “worse” adequately, the OP was covering PVP nerfs affecting PVE. There will be more changes in the future due to feedback from PVP, these will inevitably increase once the competitive aspect comes into play. People will become more vocal, and aggressive in their complaints, this would be a by product of there being more at stake when playing. If you lose a hand of poker where no money is involved, who cares, if you lose a hand of poker where money is involved, you care, that’s what I mean by more at stake, not money per se (before you latch onto that.).
Balance being pretty even overall…this would be your opinion I think, not one shared by many others. I don’t PVP, so I couldn’t say. But given the inconsistency throughout the PVE content, I find it hard to believe they have managed to perfectly balance 25 characters for PVP play, and from the posts I have read, it would appear they haven’t.
As for the call of duty thing, I don’t see this as being relevant. Call of duty is a completely different kettle of fish, how many playable characters do you have in the campaign? How many different game style approaches are there to cater for? Did they make these changes within the first fortnight of the games release, or after 12 months when hardly anyone played the campaign anymore? Are you sure no-one complained, not a single person, coz I find that extremely hard to believe.
Re. Your second paragraph, you raise some interesting points, I might start another post as it is something I have been pondering over the last day or so.
Reply as linked Topic
To continue the discussion regarding other people saying X is weak or Overpowered, in most Multiplayer games you have the majority of people sitting within a Bronze to Gold rank in a ranking system. Why? Because most people are average. Average in life, average in thinking, average in whatever they do. That is not a bad thing at all because vast majority lay there.
Then you have the people who excel and understand whatever the game/sport/activity/job is at a much much higher level. These people of course are a minority compared to the Bronze/Silver/Gold players (basing off of a Bronze/Silver/Gold/Plat?Diamond/Master ranking system used in most games) but they understand the nuances of the game, the characters, weaipons, abilities, map. All of that.
As a game developer, who do you listen to? The Majority of people who are getting steam-rolled by easy to play characters like Galelia and Rath because those characters are easy to carry a team with against average players or do you listen to the people who are at the highest of the skill brackets who understand the game you have created?
Bases the question: Do you listen to the English professor who has a PHD when he gives feedback about your paper or do you listen to the student who has a C in English and use their feedback? Seems easy to me about who you listen too.
Reply as linked Topic
FullyGrimFully Fing Grim1m
Can you pull this off onto a new post? I tried, but am on iPad and couldn’t work it out. It kinda detracts from the OP but I’d like to discuss further.