Why ww2 is shit

[techno 3,511]

A few videos talking about pretty much the same thing, I said last night ww2 is so broken (like destiny 1 PvP) that it actually makes it fun, if it wasn't as broken it would be just plain dull.

 

 

 

 

 

So quickdraw useless attachment.

[NCA-Paendrag 2,758]

So is Gunslinger. 

[GazzaGarratt 11,059]

What I don't understand Gary, is when it's called 'broken'. I get people can say it's bad if they back it up but I'm just trying to understand how so.

Watched the first video and its more talking about how they just ripped off ideas and didn't have time to put depth into the MP side of things.

I suppose I don't think overall its a bad game. Not as good as BO3 but just behind it for me.

I also think with this game that it helps you realise why sometimes having the right jetpacks isn't always bad. The running and fatigue on this game is the most annoying thing and I wish could be changed.

[techno 3,511]

I find it way behind blops3. The thunder video the player swapped a shotgun for a sniper at close range and killed him before it was scoped in, im rubbish at sniping but not too bad infact I can look sometimes like im optic spratt..broken

Weapon balance is dire, combat shotgun godly others terrible. Gunfights are so random you hit people they turn and smash you with the same gun. No flinch or determent to.getting hit, look at killcams from someone you shot they turned and killed you, no red screen no flinch especially when you get insta-sniped. Perks that do nothing, now we find attachments that do nothing either.

That's just off the top of my head. Then there's the laughable killstreaks and 50 point dom.

However the game though sweaty as hell is at least playable thankfully they added war as a nice distraction from normal gamemode. I know I would play this a hell of a lot less if destiny would have been decent.

 

These are my thought and we all see things different, I do like CoD and would defend it against unnecessary hate when it's not justified.

 

Just noticed I posted same video twice @GazzaGarratt apologies. First one should have been this from thunder.

 

[TigerBurge 2,375]

See the problem with these people who make these videos are going for one thing, views. I watch two YouTubers when it comes to CoD games. Driftor and Exclusive Ace. They have both been critical when it comes to the game but also have good to say. And if you’re posting Thunder videos his reputation holds zero water. Sorry just saying. All these people say the exact same this,it’s broken,it’s the worst call of duty ever,can’t wait until the next CoD. Blops 3 was broken as fuck. They all are. It’s a fucking game where people try to find exploits. 

 

Most of of the people’s hate have to do with the sprint out time. No one would of never noticed it if Ace didn’t do a video about it. Plus in reality I would say 90% of people couldn’t notice it if it was reduced. What people are bitching about is a different between 300 milliseconds to 250 milliseconds. And QuickDraw isn’t broken. Does exactly what the attachment says. It allows you to ADS faster. Says nothing about ADS faster out of sprint. It has never did that in any CoD game. 

 

There is plenty of shit I would change in this game. There is also tons of shit I would change in every CoD game. People need to understand that they will never make a more perfect game that MW2. The most fucking broken game ever 

[J4MES OX4D 10,041]

WW2 is the buggiest and most broken AAA game I have ever played. I know morale and expectations are very low in the franchise but just like Destiny 2; this blockbuster brand has a all the resources possible in terms of personnel, technology and budget to be one of the best games possible in existence today. The end result is a very poorly executed game riddled with flaws and a community that is so forgiving it's baffling. It says it all when comparable games that are nearly a decade old are more enjoyable and better produced than games we see today. 

 

Sledegehammer also don't help themselves with their arrogance, ignorance and lies. 

[MrBiron 1,453]

3 reasons why I thought the game was shit:

 

1) The netcode/connections/whatevs is just awful. But this has been an issue with COD for years. And it's tied to the game engine as well. Out of all the AAA shooters I've played COD is the one where I have the biggest issues with the connections.

 

2) Limited loadouts and CaC. I honestly absolutely HATED the Division system. It's just too limited compared to the usual Pick 10 system.

 

3) 9 maps and they were mostly terrible. Not only did we get a pathetic amount of maps but the fact is that they're not even good maps. USS Texas, Flak Tower and that forest map are some of the worst COD maps I've ever played. I was surprised by how bad the maps were as I thought most of the maps in AW were actually very good.

 

*edit*

 

All in all I'm quite disappointed by how much I disliked the game. I was looking forward to it as I really enjoyed AW. But it's like somebody given me something I love but then taken a massive dump on it.

[Baabcat 1,646]

I honestly don't understand this hate for WW2.

 

Ok there are a few things that can be criticised but I find them minor issues compared to the fun I'm having:

 

sometimes you you end up on the wrong side of the lag, . I view lag as inevitable in a MP shooter, and if you can't cope with that you shouldn't play MP shooters. If I'm really struggling, I just back out, problem solved

 

onky 9 maps ad they are all crap apparently. I just disagree with the all crap comment, I play loads of different modes and different maps play differently in different modes. The only map I really don't like is Uss Texas but guess what loads of people do, as it's always voted for. Opinion on map is a very personal thing, I actually really like flak tower on Dom and hardpoint. Only. 9 maps is hard to defend, but mix your game modes up and it's less of an issue. I know it's sacrilege to suggest playing anything other than KC and Dom, but actually there's plenty to go at

 

Shotgun range is a bit shit on two of them , agreed, but the explosive sheets will help you rank them to get the single bullet attachment which I am hoping helps

 

Division system is a a bit limiting, agreed, but it was well flagged before game came out, and I don't find it that bad. Developer trying something different in a 12 year old franchise, what a bunch of twats lol 

 

weapon balance , peprsoanlly I can do pretty well with any assaults, smg, snipers, , and lmgs if I am patient, and the combat shotgun. Helll I've never done pretty well with the shovel. All of this in Core. Just don't understand the comments about lack of variety

 

This thing about ADS after running, it's nonsense, just hipfire with steadyaim the way smgs are meant to be used. Want to run round with an assault rifle, expect to get you ass handed to you, it's not their sweet spot.

 

 

[Baabcat 1,646]

Also forgot

 

Most buggy and glitched cod to date. I rember the launch of BO1, you had to take a degree in networking just to get a lobby. Can't pin that accolade on WW2. As far as I know they have had one game impacting issue, on point du hoc, and they fixed it in a week.

[NCA-Paendrag 2,758]

The sibgle bullet on Luftwaffe is poor. I don't use it. 

The problem with connection imo is that COD is very fast paced so it becomes more visible compared to Destiny, Battlefield or other shooters. 

 Maps are very personal taste and I actually like Ardenne Forest. USS Texas and Gustav not so much. Actually despise them. 

[J4MES OX4D 10,041]

39 minutes ago, Baabcat said:

Also forgot

 

Most buggy and glitched cod to date. I rember the launch of BO1, you had to take a degree in networking just to get a lobby. Can't pin that accolade on WW2. As far as I know they have had one game impacting issue, on point du hoc, and they fixed it in a week.

Black Ops 1 worked flawless for me but I am aware that the PS3 version had lots of connection and hit registry issues throughout. This is exactly comparable to what is happening now which is why it's not good enough. You may not have seen it on the PS4 but relentless bugs and glitches are rife on the likes of Xbox and Steam and that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Everybody deserves the same experience regardless of what system they are gaming on. 

 

Also there's been more than one 'game impacting issue' - the dedicated servers were switched off for weeks at launch because of the problems on ALL systems.  Many of those issues still exist today... 

 

It's 2018 and people still shouldn't be having differing experiences on videogames. Everyone should have the same quality no matter what system they are using or where they are in the world. Rainbow Six Siege, Overwatch, Paladins and even Battlefield 1 can manage this quite comfortably and that is the standard people should expect and deserve.  

[Baabcat 1,646]

1 hour ago, J4MES OX4D said:

Black Ops 1 worked flawless for me but I am aware that the PS3 version had lots of connection and hit registry issues throughout. This is exactly comparable to what is happening now which is why it's not good enough. You may not have seen it on the PS4 but relentless bugs and glitches are rife on the likes of Xbox and Steam and that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Everybody deserves the same experience regardless of what system they are gaming on. 

 

Also there's been more than one 'game impacting issue' - the dedicated servers were switched off for weeks at launch because of the problems on ALL systems.  Many of those issues still exist today... 

 

It's 2018 and people still shouldn't be having differing experiences on videogames. Everyone should have the same quality no matter what system they are using or where they are in the world. Rainbow Six Siege, Overwatch, Paladins and even Battlefield 1 can manage this quite comfortably and that is the standard people should expect and deserve.  

 

BO launch on PS3 was a total shambles, WW2 had some issues on the first weekend but other than that the ability to actually get into a match has been 100% fine. They are just incomparable.

 

I can't believe you said everyone should have the same experience no matter where they are in the world, this comes down to everyone having exactly equal internet infrastructure. It's just not going to happen, even if super fast is available people might not have it. You can't really blame Sledgehammer for that!

 

i had plenty of lag deaths in R6, maybe less noticeable as TTK seemed faster, but lag is always there. 

[J4MES OX4D 10,041]

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

 

BO launch on PS3 was a total shambles, WW2 had some issues on the first weekend but other than that the ability to actually get into a match has been 100% fine. They are just incomparable.

I'm not comparing those games - I'm comparing YOUR opinion on how WW2 works fine for you so it must be fine for everybody else. BO1 was fine for me back in the day on the 360 but I at least I can respect and are aware that it didn't work well for everyone on PS3 at the time. That's like me telling you now that I cannot believe you had problems on BO1 as it ran perfectly for me.  You may not experience the wealth of problems the WW2 has even though they are widely known but that doesn't mean other users haven't and that they aren't a problem for them. 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

I can't believe you said everyone should have the same experience no matter where they are in the world, this comes down to everyone having exactly equal internet infrastructure. It's just not going to happen, even if super fast is available people might not have it. You can't really blame Sledgehammer for that!

Most of WW2's issues aren't even connection-related. Not sure why you keep referring to connection in all honesty. A persons experience on a game isn't just down to connection - it's down to a variety of things and it's a variety of issues that WW2 has for many users which is the problem. 

[Baabcat 1,646]

James of course my opinion is based on how it works for me, you are the one who seem to have a handle on how it is working for the rest of the planet. 

 

If if it's not connection that is the problem what are the other issues then? I posted a list aboive of the non issues that people whine about . We have had two threads recently of Ww2 is shit, ww2 is terrible, with whiny you tubers whinging about the game, and they come up with total non issues like

 

The UI is bad ( get used to it, it fine)

HQ is like the tower in Destiny ( actually is way much better with loads of stuff to do)

theres only 9 maps ( yep, loads of dev time went into war mode which most people seem to think is a good addition. personally I don't but I'm not entitled enough too think they should make the game just exactly the way I like it)

, but that is why there is only 9 maps

 

You talk about glitches, the only one I know is point du hoc ( fixed), so tell me what else is glitched

 

What else don't you like about the game? Really I'm interested cos I think they've done a pretty bloody good job, as I said earliier I' honestly don't understand the hate people give it. Dig deeper and just get statements like ' oh there's lots of well known issues' , well I don't know them😄

 

[techno 3,511]

Everyone's experience is.differenf but it seems a more love and hate relationship.

I've played 3 days so far and I find it more enjoyable knowing it's broken so I can mess about on it and not get too annoyed which used to be the case. The argument for play different modes if you think maps suck is just as silly as saying go play zombies, I don't play them because I don't like them, however I do think Dom plays better than KC which is a little odd.

As.for thunders reputation domyou think driftor and exclusive ace don't do it for views? I think he's been more fair on the game that I expected tbh..but snipers are dumb can't even deny that in the.game this time.

[Baabcat 1,646]

8 minutes ago, techno said:

Everyone's experience is.differenf but it seems a more love and hate relationship.

I've played 3 days so far and I find it more enjoyable knowing it's broken so I can mess about on it and not get too annoyed which used to be the case. The argument for play different modes if you think maps suck is just as silly as saying go play zombies, I don't play them because I don't like them, however I do think Dom plays better than KC which is a little odd.

As.for thunders reputation domyou think driftor and exclusive ace don't do it for views? I think he's been more fair on the game that I expected tbh..but snipers are dumb can't even deny that in the.game this time.

 

I didn't say play different modes if you think the maps suck, I said play different modes if your bored of playing only 9 maps, it mixes it up a bit.

[techno 3,511]

 

I didn't say play different modes if you think the maps suck, I said play different modes if your bored of playing only 9 maps, it mixes it up a bit.

You say potato etc same out come. Im actually not bored of the maps, I played war on two maps for quite some time, I just think they're bad. Not one memorable map amongst them, I never think oh cool London docks or Ardennes forest which I think are 2 of the better ones I think oh thank fuck it's not ...well any of the others.

I think this game for me closely resembles ghosts, I can play it and enjoy some of the time but overall it's not going to be high on my list.

 

I will add headquarters more of an annoyance than anything else but can be ignored so no biggy.

Via the FG App

 

 

 

[Baabcat 1,646]

I disagree on the potato thing Gary ( how weird does that sound). I’ll give you an example, I like Gustav on TDM , and fucking hate it on Hardpoint

 

Also some maps are pretty good, Point du hoc, Gibraltar , Ardennes forest , but maps are a very personal opinion , 9 is a bit few I agree, but would you give up War mode for 4 more maps. I probably would but most people wouldn’t and that’s probably the decision sledgehammer made. 

[techno 3,511]

4 minutes ago, Baabcat said:

I disagree on the potato thing Gary ( how weird does that sound). I’ll give you an example, I like Gustav on TDM , and fucking hate it on Hardpoint

 

Also some maps are pretty good, Point du hoc, Gibraltar , Ardennes forest , but maps are a very personal opinion , 9 is a bit few I agree, but would you give up War mode for 4 more maps. I probably would but most people wouldn’t and that’s probably the decision sledgehammer made. 

I can see your point Bob , it's why I play KC but think Dom plays better on most of these maps. Gustav and USS Texas are terrible Dom maps.

 

I would swap less maps for more war maps as long as they're not like bloody Neptune. 😃

[J4MES OX4D 10,041]

23 minutes ago, Baabcat said:

You talk about glitches, the only one I know is point du hoc ( fixed), so tell me what else is glitched

 

What else don't you like about the game? Really I'm interested cos I think they've done a pretty bloody good job, as I said earliier I' honestly don't understand the hate people give it. Dig deeper and just get statements like ' oh there's lots of well known issues' , well I don't know them😄

 

I'm pretty sure I covered most of the issues in couple of threads and last time I was accused of beating a dead horse for repeating myself so at the risk of being accused of that once more, I'll mention a few fundamental and technical problems I have with the game off the top of my head whether that being from my personal experience or something that is community wide among a number of players:-

 

Firstly, the back-end design of the game is shambolic and makes way for unreliable and unstable central server connections. SHG are the only company in the franchise that users server-sided fetch data rather than having partial profile data stored locally. This means potentially long loading times simply connecting to the main server. You could get to the IWNet MP menu in 15 seconds on MW2 and in BO1 you could boot into it from starting the console. Xbox users in particular have seen excess loads in over 10 minutes. It's been reported and acknowledged but wont be fixed or improved.

 

Next up is embarrassing animation glitches where player models are doing 360's and walking off the map - this means that what you are seeing and what is actually happening is not aligned and can leave you at a massive disadvantage. This problem has never been seen before and despite being brought to SHG's attention; they have chosen to ignore it despite being a glaring issue.

 

HQ is not needed whatsoever. The game ironically ran much better when it was removed. It's only being retained in a bid to push supply drops. Until they add some purpose, it's not really required and not worth the excess strain on what already is a server savage title. 

 

Other calamitous issues is team balance - I've been in matches where it's 4v8, 5v7 and one match I even spawned on the enemy team side. This simply should not be happening. 

 

The netcode is simply woeful. The engine may be extremely old but the inconsistent way the data has been coded onto it demonstates sloppiness that you wouldn't expect from even amateur developers let alone a COD one. Bad netcode ruins the experience even if the connection is amazing. If the netcode and the connection is solid like you see on Overwatch; you get a perfect and fair experience. 

 

Other issues I pretty much echo what is said above - 9 core maps is ludicrous. MW2 had 15 at launch. 3 of which were REMOVED from the game between the beta and the gold branch which means Activision are charging people on withheld content. Just because War is a new mode doesn't mean players should receive any less from the central aspect of the game.  The first DLC contains 2 new maps (lol) 1 remake (that was released last year as a remake) 1 war mode (not everyone plays War) and 1 zombies map (not everyone plays zombies) I got bored of the beta maps before release and that was 33% of the entire rotation. I hated 3 maps which was another 33% meaning I only had 33% maps that I enjoyed playing. 

 

The points system is a mess too - 34 kills in DOM to earn the top killstreak and 10 for a bloody UAV? SHG changed this for the beta but then had to lie about a privately conducted poll to justify why they wouldn't chanage it in the main game. 

 

No anti-cheat on PC despite SHG promising both VAC and manual review support. Developers lied again. 

 

Restrictive loadout system. 

 

League play is laughable.

 

Killstreaks are shite. 

 

Pistol grips. 

 

 

That's all I can think of off the top of my head. SHG didn't even want to make this game - they were making Advanced Warfare 2 before Activision told them to switch.  Although I enjoyed the camapign and other parts of the game; it is clear it is rushed, incomplete and riddled with funamental flaws that I wouldn't expect from the brand these days. This is why it's being patched relentlessly rather than being improved and moving forward. I just hope it doesn't affect future developement as the more time they have to waste on this; the worse prepared they'll be on the next game which is exactly what happened with Bungie on Destiny 2 and why that game released with sod all content and depth. 

 

[Sennex 1,903]

I haven't seen a single issue any of you all are talking about so far. I only play Hardcore TDM though, so IDK

 

The Game plays fine for me, not a single connection issue, but then again I get about 150-200 mbps down and about 50 mbps up.

 

 

[Sennex 1,903]

[Baabcat 1,646]

14 hours ago, J4MES OX4D said:

I'm pretty sure I covered most of the issues in couple of threads and last time I was accused of beating a dead horse for repeating myself so at the risk of being accused of that once more, I'll mention a few fundamental and technical problems I have with the game off the top of my head whether that being from my personal experience or something that is community wide among a number of players:-

 

Firstly, the back-end design of the game is shambolic and makes way for unreliable and unstable central server connections. SHG are the only company in the franchise that users server-sided fetch data rather than having partial profile data stored locally. This means potentially long loading times simply connecting to the main server. You could get to the IWNet MP menu in 15 seconds on MW2 and in BO1 you could boot into it from starting the console. Xbox users in particular have seen excess loads in over 10 minutes. It's been reported and acknowledged but wont be fixed or improved.

 

Next up is embarrassing animation glitches where player models are doing 360's and walking off the map - this means that what you are seeing and what is actually happening is not aligned and can leave you at a massive disadvantage. This problem has never been seen before and despite being brought to SHG's attention; they have chosen to ignore it despite being a glaring issue.

 

HQ is not needed whatsoever. The game ironically ran much better when it was removed. It's only being retained in a bid to push supply drops. Until they add some purpose, it's not really required and not worth the excess strain on what already is a server savage title. 

 

Other calamitous issues is team balance - I've been in matches where it's 4v8, 5v7 and one match I even spawned on the enemy team side. This simply should not be happening. 

 

The netcode is simply woeful. The engine may be extremely old but the inconsistent way the data has been coded onto it demonstates sloppiness that you wouldn't expect from even amateur developers let alone a COD one. Bad netcode ruins the experience even if the connection is amazing. If the netcode and the connection is solid like you see on Overwatch; you get a perfect and fair experience. 

 

Other issues I pretty much echo what is said above - 9 core maps is ludicrous. MW2 had 15 at launch. 3 of which were REMOVED from the game between the beta and the gold branch which means Activision are charging people on withheld content. Just because War is a new mode doesn't mean players should receive any less from the central aspect of the game.  The first DLC contains 2 new maps (lol) 1 remake (that was released last year as a remake) 1 war mode (not everyone plays War) and 1 zombies map (not everyone plays zombies) I got bored of the beta maps before release and that was 33% of the entire rotation. I hated 3 maps which was another 33% meaning I only had 33% maps that I enjoyed playing. 

 

The points system is a mess too - 34 kills in DOM to earn the top killstreak and 10 for a bloody UAV? SHG changed this for the beta but then had to lie about a privately conducted poll to justify why they wouldn't chanage it in the main game. 

 

No anti-cheat on PC despite SHG promising both VAC and manual review support. Developers lied again. 

 

Restrictive loadout system. 

 

League play is laughable.

 

Killstreaks are shite. 

 

Pistol grips. 

 

 

That's all I can think of off the top of my head. SHG didn't even want to make this game - they were making Advanced Warfare 2 before Activision told them to switch.  Although I enjoyed the camapign and other parts of the game; it is clear it is rushed, incomplete and riddled with funamental flaws that I wouldn't expect from the brand these days. This is why it's being patched relentlessly rather than being improved and moving forward. I just hope it doesn't affect future developement as the more time they have to waste on this; the worse prepared they'll be on the next game which is exactly what happened with Bungie on Destiny 2 and why that game released with sod all content and depth. 

 

 

James thats an awfully long list, which makes it a bit hard to reply to but I will do my best

 

Connections , you told me to stop going on about connections, then first point in your list is connections. I think of this as lag, I maybe wrong, but every MP will have lag. Unavoidable. Loads fine for me, maybe there are issues on Xbox, but seeing as I hate Microsoft with a passion I see that as a good thing. Buy Sony, don't support the evil empire

 

Animation glitches, I don't think this has ever happened to me, really can't think of an example, maybe I am just too foregiving and unobservant but I haven't seen this. If this is all the glitches then please can we stop saying this is a glitchy CoD.

 

HQ, like I said earlier people post ' ww2 is shit' and then cite HQ as one of the reasons, no effect on game play, just a social space, and actually stuff to do. Actually a positive. Game runs fine with it.

 

Team balance, very occassiionaly you get 6v4 but potentially due to party composition which you can't see ( actually I would like to see this). Back out, problem solved.  Can no way be considered game breaking

 

Netcode, tbh not qualified to comment, but in my opinion game runs fine. It's CoD, it's 12 years old and nobody has changed much. Buyer beware!

 

9 maps is skinny but like I said above, they put War in as well with three big maps, so a lot of development went there. Probably accounts for 4 to 5 maps. Most people seem to like war,  a lot. Not realistic to expect war plus 15 maps perhaps?  It's obvious there is a trade off in this area, but the critics don't seem to be able to connect these dots. 

 

dom points system. If it's taking you 10 kills to get a UAV get your ass on B. Seriously this change penalises those scrubs who run round the edge of the map shooting people who are actually playing the objective. Very positive change in my opinion.

 

no anti cheat on PC, I can't comment, to me CoD is a console game and I suspect any pc player should be a bit wary of any console port, look at the shambles of D2 launch on pc for example

 

Restrictive load out, I actually don't find it that restrictive, and don't have a problem with a developer experimenting in an old franchise

 

league play I haven't tried

 

killstreaks , I have heard this before and don't really get it, it's WW2 remember, no attack helicopters, no jump jets, what actually would you want in

 

Pistol grips, really. A cosmetic item that appears in loot boxes to pad them out. How this makes a list of issues with WW2 is totally beyond me. No impact on game play, no reason to hate.

 

This game must be running totally differently on pc than it is on PS4, in which case we will never agree, but stuff like pistols grips, hq, loadout, killstreaks, Dom points, number of maps v war mode, are just design decisions that some people will like and some people won't like, and the majority will just get on with it. 

[J4MES OX4D 10,041]

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

Connections , you told me to stop going on about connections, then first point in your list is connections. 

My first point is to do with the back-end connection - not in-game connection and lag. 

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

Animation glitches, I don't think this has ever happened to me, really can't think of an example, maybe I am just too foregiving and unobservant but I haven't seen this. If this is all the glitches then please can we stop saying this is a glitchy CoD.

 

There's 43,000 YouTube videos on this. It's the most common glitch in the game which has been acknowledged by the devs but wont be fixed. 

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

HQ, like I said earlier people post ' ww2 is shit' and then cite HQ as one of the reasons, no effect on game play, just a social space, and actually stuff to do. Actually a positive. Game runs fine with it.

It's a proven resource hog. COD survived over 15 years without an HQ and it's not needed now. It's nothing more than something to push in-game purchases dressed up as a 'cool' feature.  

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

Team balance, very occassiionaly you get 6v4 but potentially due to party composition which you can't see ( actually I would like to see this). Back out, problem solved.  Can no way be considered game breaking 

Matchmaking errors shouldn't be happening these days. Too much algorithmic strain resulting in wayward lobbies. Only happens on SHG's SBMM-heavy games mind...

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

Netcode, tbh not qualified to comment, but in my opinion game runs fine. 

Netcode is nothing to do with performance. 

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

9 maps is skinny but like I said above, they put War in as well with three big maps, so a lot of development went there

War maps are no different to core maps and just because they may have a few more pixels doesn't mean everyone should be shafted of a quantity especially when it's already proven that Activision withdrew 3 maps from core to be sold in the first DLC.  12 maps and 3 war would have been ideal at the very least.

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

dom points system. If it's taking you 10 kills to get a UAV get your ass on B. Seriously this change penalises those scrubs who run round the edge of the map shooting people who are actually playing the objective. Very positive change in my opinion.

If you already hold the flags whereby the only points you can really obtain is through kills; your dominant performance can't be further rewarded. Still also doesn't explain why the developers agreed with the community and upped the points rate during the beta and then openly lied to justify why they wouldn't change it after they got people's money. Even if the points is acceptable; devs bullshitting customers isn't. 

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

killstreaks , I have heard this before and don't really get it, it's WW2 remember, no attack helicopters, no jump jets, what actually would you want in

Black Ops was set in the 60's yet that had an array of entertaining killstreakes. Time doesn't not equate to providing elements that are fun. 

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

no anti cheat on PC, I can't comment, to me CoD is a console game and I suspect any pc player should be a bit wary of any console port, look at the shambles of D2 launch on pc for example

COD is on PC and was born on PC and that doesn't mean people should be shafted the same way you were on Black Ops 1 with an inferior version. Developers lying again is the point here. Also Destiny 2 on PC was an astonishingly good port, just a crap game. COD games aren't console ports either. 

 

1 hour ago, Baabcat said:

Pistol grips, really. A cosmetic item that appears in loot boxes to pad them out. How this makes a list of issues with WW2 is totally beyond me. No impact on game play, no reason to hate.

It's a silly inclusion especially when you can't even see it in-game. 

[Baabcat 1,646]

James have it your way I give up, I will just keep enjoying the hell out of this thoroughly shit CoD that works pretty damn perfectly for me

 

Oh and by the way the 60s was like 20 years after WW2, we had developed like loads of shit between then and the end of the War. Like helicopters and space rockets, cool kinda kill streak stuff. 

 

My actual guess is you are suffering CoD fatigue and probably need to move onto another game, I had this after BO2 and hated them all except BO3. Coming back to the franchise now has reminded why it was they only game I bought from about 2010 to 2015, it is awesome.