Post: My rant on any online gaming.
08-02-2011, 07:02 AM #1
ULG Poison
You talkin to me?
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Today I actually went into 5 Black ops games on domination were my team was losing by atleast 120 points in a row. I have never raged so hard in my life. They had black birds up, chopper gunners, & dogs. Then I said well Ill play some team tac. Atleast I could take on a 4 man team with ease. I join a ctf on nuketown & guess what it already started the team was on the first round 0-2. Their flag runner was camping in there spawn while the other 3 players just set some c4s on spawn & forced us to spawn in one spot. I immediately turn my ps3 off & nearly threw it out my window.

now here comes the rant/my idea of a perfect way to test a online multiplayer game.

I believe that socom fireteam bravo had the best idea for joining games. If the game already started you had the choice of joining it mid game, wait for the match to be over or leave without effecting your stats in any way or form. Now why can't new fps games have that. --__-- this is another reason why gaming companies should increase the gap on any new fps multiplayer games least every 3 years & release pay to play betas. 20 bucks a year would get you in every beta for all future online multiplayers. This would not only give the community a say before the final release. It would also provide with extra currency for the company.

Image if MW2 had this. IW could have fix the care package glitch, barrier breaches, & even tweaked weapons & perks before release. Maybe OMA wouldn't resupply any form of explosives, commando could have had a different. It could have been were it would be able to hack sentry guns, clay mores, tac & the pro version would be no fall damage.

Hate me if you want. Groan if you want Im pissed off & I don't want to release my anger on a person or a object so Instead Ill just rant.

if you want you can post you rants & ideas on what a company should have done to improve a game that could have been the best.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The following 2 users say thank you to ULG Poison for this useful post:

-O-Z-Z-A-8-8-, SAMCRO
08-02-2011, 11:26 AM #2
viper44
Gym leader
all I can say is I hate hosts sometimes, if you play zombies you know what i mean
08-02-2011, 12:26 PM #3
ULG Poison
You talkin to me?
Originally posted by viper44 View Post
all I can say is I hate hosts sometimes, if you play zombies you know what i mean

feelsforyoubro.jpg That is the reason why I never play online with randis on zombies. Its rather private match or Im out.
08-02-2011, 12:52 PM #4
The Rangers
At least I can fight
when its zombies mate i only play online if a am host because if you don't revive them they leave if there host and game ends
08-02-2011, 07:30 PM #5
Yup that is one reason that call of duty is getting boring. People dont like to play alone because they get stuck with noobs, and even worse your win ratio will be affected. Simply retarded
08-03-2011, 03:04 AM #6
lol ! bit to much info here shorten it down abit but good anyway Upside Down Happy
08-04-2011, 12:35 AM #7
ULG Poison
You talkin to me?
Originally posted by nathzlobbz View Post
lol ! bit to much info here shorten it down abit but good anyway Upside Down Happy

gaming companies should increase the gap on any new multiplayer games least every 3 years & release pay to play betas. 20 bucks a year would get you in every beta for all future online multiplayers. This would not only give the community a say before the final release. It would also provide with extra currency for the company.

Basically what I think gaming companies should do.

Copyright © 2026, NextGenUpdate.
All Rights Reserved.

Gray NextGenUpdate Logo