Black Ops 4 dev explains why they don’t always act on professional players opinions - Dexerto
Call of Duty

Black Ops 4 dev explains why they don’t always act on professional players opinions

Published: 21/Feb/2019 12:10 Updated: 21/Feb/2019 13:05

by Calum Patterson


The ruleset for competitive Call of Duty always seems to be a battle between the wants of the developers and the professional players, and Treyarch senior designer Matt Scronce has explained why the process isn’t always straightforward.

With a new title released each year, competitive Call of Duty players must adapt to a new game come every November, and after a few weeks, an initial ruleset is put in place.

The ruleset attempts to turn an otherwise casual shooter into more competitive experience, by limiting the amount of ‘cheap’, overpowered or generally less skill-based elements of the game.

Ajax’s ultimate ability was controversial, but has since been removed from competitive play.

In the past, this has included certain scorestreaks, perks, weapons, attachments like rapid fire or high caliber, and of course maps, with maps which are deemed less ‘competitive’ in their structure or balance, removed from the pool.

For Black Ops 4, the ruleset has been a particular point of contention, largely due to the new specialists and their abilities. Ajax for example, was a major concern, due to his Riot Shield ultimate, which has since been restricted in the competitive rules.

But often, professional players will highlight issues with the ruleset, and go as far as to ‘GA’ (gentleman’s agreement) those items, but these changes are not always reflected in the official ruleset – at least not right away.

Scronce explained in a Reddit post why they do not simply make changes immediately, as soon as pro players and the community voice a concern.

There has already been a number of updates to the initial ruleset, most of which is based on feedback from professional players and the competitive community at large.

The complaint is often that it can either take too long for these changes to be put in place, or that changes are made at inconvenient times – right before a major event for example – not giving teams time to adjust.

For example, during the CoD: WWII season, pro players made a gentleman’s agreement not to use the M1 Garand, but it was some months before the weapon was finally added to the official list of restrictions.

Treyarch just released a major balancing update to Black Ops 4 on February 19, along with the Grand Heist operation, which made major adjustments to various weapons, just as Division B of the CWL Pro League begins.

Thankfully, they quickly reversed the changes to the Maddox RFB, which pro players quickly noticed had been overly-nerfed – so it’s a sign that the developers are still listening, and are becoming more responsive.

Call of Duty

Dr Disrespect calls out Activision & Warzone tourney admins for hacker drama

Published: 23/Jan/2021 0:41

by Theo Salaun


Following scandal over a disqualified cheater in a Warzone tournament, Dr Disrespect is calling out Activision’s lack of an anti-cheat and Twitch Rivals’ lack of a formal process for investigating hacks.

In hours of drama that rocked the competitive Call of Duty: Warzone community, a smaller streamer, ‘Metzy_B,’ was accused of cheating during the $250K Twitch Rivals Doritos Bowl tournament. Prior to the final match of the event, his team was disqualified by tournament admins and stripped of any chance at tournament earnings.

Twitch Rivals have remained relatively quiet on the issue, practically ignoring it during the broadcast and offering up a minimally worded explanation over Twitter. In their explanation, the admins simply explained that Metzy “was ruled to be cheating” and subsequently “removed from the event.”

With that lack of transparency, rumors and accusations flew. Former Call of Duty League pro, one of the highest Warzone earners currently, Thomas ‘Tommey’ Trewren spent hours interrogating the accused and having a friend take control of Metzy’s PC to dive through his logs for any proof of hacks. This all leads to Dr Disrespect asserting that, with or without an Activision anti-cheat, tournament organizers need to do better.

As shared by ‘WickedGoodGames,’ the Two-Time has a clear perspective on this issue. If the developers can’t institute an effective anti-cheat, then every single tournament must “define a process in finding out if he is [cheating] or not … obviously outside of the whole Call of Duty not having an anti-cheat kind of software built in.”

The drama was obviously divisive, as most participants in the tournament believed Metzy (and others) to be cheating, while others weren’t so sure. With no one knowing precisely how Twitch handled the situation, the community was left to investigate themselves.

As Dr Disrespect has heard, the “purple snakes” disqualified Metzy based on “a couple suspicious clips” and without asking to check his computer. This is echoed by the accused himself, who has since commended Tommey for trying to figure out what the admins had failed to.

That account goes directly against others, as fellow competitor BobbyPoff reacted by alleging that Metzy was, in fact, originally reluctant to display his task manager logs.

While the truth may be impossible to find at this point, as Twitch Rivals have given no explanation of their process and any number of files could have been deleted by the time Tommey got access, Dr Disrespect’s point is proven by the drama.

If Activision can’t deliver a functioning anti-cheat and tournament organizers don’t have a strict, transparent policy for hackers — then community infighting over a “grey area” is unavoidable.