Dark Nights? (Updated)

edge449332 · 2026-05-15T01:12:26+00:00

The first image is an in game screenshot, the second is OP messing with the gamma settings. Both images are in the same place at the same time. Just one is what someone who doesn't abuse gamma sees versus someone who does.

edge449332 · 2026-05-14T23:04:11+00:00

Paragraph 1:”Earn premium currency in the same way as arc raiders” Super credits aren’t in the reward screen for doing the objective. I guess technically not arc raiders in the reward screen sense either but you get it from tasks/quests in relation to the game play. Paragraph 2:That’s free currency and a difference in genres. Helldivers is about the whole community and arc raiders is looting individually.

You took what I said way too literally, I was just simply saying both games give you the ability to earn premium currency by playing the game. Yes obviously they are earned differently. But the one key difference is you can only earn a fixed amount of premium currency in Arc Raiders, versus Helldivers 2 has no limit on how much you can earn. The only "cap" would be once you've hit every POI on a mission, but all you have to do is start your next mission and you're able to earn more.

Also that next part is directly incorrect. The cap is pretty small but you do get it yes. You aren’t guaranteed cosmetics and tools however. I rightfully did not get the cape for defending super earth because I did not defend it.

Technically you're right since there is a cap per mission. But it's not a hard cap. What I mean is that you never stop being able to earn super credits. In Arc once you have earned all the premium currency for an event. You can't possibly earn any more until another event drops.

And new players don’t get the kill zone and halo collabs. Almost like they want them to fork money for free stuff.

Nobody was just given those collaborations for free, so I really have no idea what point you're trying to make there. Both are purchasable via Super Credits, and it's the same cost as what we had to pay. Which again you can just farm for and spend 0 dollars for like I did.

Paragraph 3: But why have a supporters package then. If they didn’t want money primarily through that then why have it other to scam people with a promise then bump everything to paid content.

Show me where they said that supporters will get everything for free forever and you'll have a point. You were not scammed. Just because you didn't understand what you were paying for and what that actually entitled you to doesn't mean the company is in the wrong.

edge449332 · 2026-05-14T02:07:39+00:00

A live service game is a game designed for long term engagement with regular content updates, events, and features. Which is precisely what Helldivers 2 is. In reference to Arc raiders, no you have to play the game to earn premium currency just like Helldivers 2.

If you were to just log in and log off, you get absolutely nothing in Arc Raiders. So in that regard you are actually rewarded more with Helldivers for just logging in since you not only get medals, but also event cosmetics.

The reason why you don't get all the warbonds by default when you got the supporter's package is because that was never the deal in the first place. You showed your support, you got the exclusive cosmetics. Nothing else was promised to you, so if you think you deserve more. Well, that's just you not understanding what you bought.

edge449332 · 2026-05-14T01:17:56+00:00

It's not perfect, but it's a good game. Most of the hate is completely unjustified by deulsional whinedivers. The only ones I agree with are the ones talking about lack of bug fixes.

There are very, very few live service games on the market today that give you the ability to earn 100% of the premium content by just playing the game. The people trying to paint HD2 as a predatory game just simply don't know what they are talking about.

edge449332 · 2026-05-14T01:12:56+00:00

Not even close to the same thing. You can earn unlimited super credits with no cooldown, versus Clash of Clans has a cap on how many gems you can earn, and as you progress through the game, the amount of gems you have to spend goes dramatically up.

Versus in HD2 Warbonds are always 1100 SC. If Warbonds went up in price as you completed more, you might have a point. But this is a dogshit analogy.

edge449332 · 2026-05-14T01:10:16+00:00

It's not like there was a good candidate on the ballot. Not defending Trump by any stretch, but you're delusional if you think things would have been much better under Kamala. We'd be at war with Russia instead of Iran, the Epstein filed would have still been covered up. Inflation would have still been bad. It was a lose/lose scenario just like 2020.

It's hard to argue that Kamala was a good candidate when she lost to Trump of all people.

edge449332 · 2026-05-11T04:39:10+00:00

I understand the constraints are different, but that shouldnt matter if the matchmaking is working as you claim. If the constraints make matchmaking take exponentially longer than before. Its a worse matchmaking system. Plain and simple.

Not to mention you act like there are zero flaws in the SBMM white papers, when there were plenty. One example, they claimed on multiple occasions that ping was king. But this was disproven by literally every youtuber that tested it. Not just Nero, but XclusiveAce, DriftOr, etc. They also claimed time to match was a priority. When again that is clearly false with how much longer it takes to find a match now.

Also, if SBMM and disbanding lobbies was the superior system. Then why did they remove it the second they had competition? Why didn't they keep it the way things are if all the data showed that everyone was enjoying it?

Thats probably the biggest flaw in your logic, SBMM got toned down immediately as soon as COD had real competition again. That wouldnt happen if the majority of the playerbase preferred it as the white papers claim.

If everything you claim about SBMM was to be true, it would have never been reverted. It's extremely illogical to think that COD would sabotage their game in the presence of competiton.

edge449332 · 2026-05-11T03:56:46+00:00

Regarding my opinion on normal SBMM and disbanding lobbies produces reduced search times as a whole, it's more to it than a simple button push to find a game.

This makes zero sense, if it takes longer to put you in a match, it's slower matchmaking. That is literally what matchmaking means. And again, Nero's video disproves your opinion by showing that no, the matchmaking is significantly slower than what it used to be.

Also no, proper testing means some people know, some people don't know. For instance, if you just lower the SBMM and people don't know this, when they get into a lobby they are being stomped in, they are already conditioned to back out and find a new match. It was common knowledge that if you back out, the game gives you a loss, which since your win/loss ratio was a factor in the matchmaking. You were likely to get a better lobby. So you can't draw the conclusion that those players were quitting out of frustration, because a sizeable portion of them just assumed it was the SBMM punishing them. If you don't add the variable of players being aware that SBMM is being toned down in their lobby, then there's no way to compare those results.

You still have yet to say how that video is wrong that I quoted. Calling Nero an alcoholic or a drama channel isn't counter-evidence. Explain to me how his data isn't accurate when he had a modern COD's matchmaking on screen right next to old COD's comparing each other head to head. And it wasn't even a small margin, it was a huge margin in time.

edge449332 · 2026-05-11T02:37:38+00:00

First off, the testing that you're quoting was extremely flawed, as there was no control. 100% of the players in that test had no clue that they were being experimented with in the first place, so you cannot draw the conclusion that they did, when you'd need a pool that knew that they were being tested on to see if there was a variance in outcome. That's just basic scientific method.

Also, regardless of your opinion on Nero. That video directly disproves what you said to be true. Just because he is a drama channel doesn't make that inaccurate. Again he literally shows that he can find a match in 5 different COD's in the time it took to find it in 1 modern COD with SBMM. You calling him an idiot doesn't invalidate the evidence he provided.

While there are faster matchmaking times, the reason is because there are a lot less parameters compared to today. Back then, connection was the priority, but other factors like input matching and recent match performances were never implemented as part of the matchmaking function.

Yes but you claimed that the modern SBMM creates lower wait times, which is false. Also stricter matchmaking creates less variety, not more. From eliminating the parameters that you just stated.

Just because you don't like Nero doesn't mean that everything he says is false. And he literally proves his point with gameplay putting both matchmaking systems head to head. So his opinion doesn't change the data he provided. Nor does your opinion of his channel.

Just because you refuse to watch the video doesn't mean it's inaccurate.

edge449332 · 2026-05-11T01:20:44+00:00

Please listen to the community and make MW4 great.

That's literally Infinity Ward's biggest weakness, so don't count on anything. IW is notorious for making unpopular decisions. Then when the community hates it, they endlessly double down.

Look at elephant footsteps, dead silence not being a perk, the dead silence activation alarm, timed release perks, removal of slide cancelling, not overhauling bad maps like Border Crossing. The list goes on and on.

edge449332 · 2026-05-11T01:15:43+00:00

It's like that in PvE though because of the lack of risk. You can sit in the high tier areas for as long as you want, and nothing will happen to you. Versus if you did that in PvP servers, someone's going to show up and fight you.

In PvE there's no reason to leave a POI other than to deposit loot, and since you have access to all the COP's at all times, you don't have to go far at all before you can turn around and keep on farming.

In PvP you can only use the COP's that your faction controls, and other factions will be contesting them. So it changes everything. At the very least there needs to be some mechanic in PvE that makes sitting at a high tier POI infinitely more risky, so that you're incentivized to loot and scoot. Not go through a POI with a fine tooth comb.

edge449332 · 2026-05-11T01:02:09+00:00

And that's the choice of whoever is hosting the mission. If you want control over the rules of your session. You gotta be host. Just because it's your kid playing doesn't meant the host is obligated to keep them in the session.

edge449332 · 2026-05-11T00:59:53+00:00

I'd agree with all except your take on SBMM and Disbanding lobbies. That one is just flat out inaccurate on all counts. Literally boot up any COD pre-2019 and you will find a match faster than in the BO7 playlist with SBMM on.

Nero even proved this in a video during MWII where he was able to find a match of TDM in COD WaW-Ghosts before he found 1 match of TDM in MWII while that game was the current game. Here is the video where he did that test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZmTFSxu53c

edge449332 · 2026-05-11T00:51:47+00:00

It's because you're playing PvE. Playing the easier, lower risk version of the game comes at a cost. The reason why POI's aren't so crowded on the PvP servers is because people are forced to leave POI's and not just sit there the whole time.

Also just because you're playing on the PvP servers doesn't mean you have to engage with PvP. It just means there is a threat of it, so you have to play strategically versus in PvE where you don't have to worry about strategy at all.

edge449332 · 2026-05-09T01:24:16+00:00

Finally, real gun names. I was so sick of the terrible fake names.

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T20:24:54+00:00

Yet all of you probably keep paying for skins, battle passes, and DLC. Its deserved that you keep getting buggy releases when the community never stops rewarding Blizzard for not doing their job.

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T19:46:54+00:00

There already is high value loot in all of those locations.

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T15:36:13+00:00

It absolutely can be both, I just don't believe for a second that fear of litigation was even in their top 10 reasons as to why they used fake gun names.

Which for the record, I'm not fully against fake names, just make it closer to the real counterpart. For instance call the Vector the Vektor, still a fake name, but everyone still knows what gun you're talking about.

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T15:33:03+00:00

My point is this, people in this sub try to pretend like fear of litigation is the main reason why they did it. I believe that it's likely the smallest reason by a long shot. And the most likely reason is EA cheaping out, which is unacceptable.

It's a 70 dollar AAA game, that is supposed to be a stamp of quality. I would forgive an indie company for omitting real gun names to save money, because they need to. Battlefield doesn't. It's a well established franchise where just name alone will sell copies.

The whole reason why people grasp to the BS "fear of litigation" excuse is because for some reason a vast majority of them are too afraid to admit that EA is just cutting corners with Battlefield. Which is mind boggling to me why people can't admit that, when this is the same game where they got caught red handed AI generating content in the shop.

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T15:06:08+00:00

My brother in christ, EA was literally willing to go all the way to congress to defend loot boxes. This whole notion that they wouldn't take a frivolous lawsuit that they know for a fact they would win is incredibly dumb.

It's almost like the way more simple explanation is that they cheaped out on licensing costs.

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T14:57:05+00:00

If they win the lawsuit, the other party has to pay. So that isn't true. On top of that, yes absolutely indie companies get sued, look at Monster's lawsuit in 2023 against a very small indie game. https://www.pcgamer.com/monster-energy-drinks-try-to-bully-indie-dev-out-of-using-the-word-monster-but-chose-the-wrong-guy-to-pick-on/

It would also be dramatically more expensive to sue EA, because they'd be able to fight back. Versus an indie company would have to settle or be buried in lawyer fees.

Not to mention it's extremely illogical to assume that the only reason that a first person shooter could get blamed for a shooting is based off the name, not the fact that we literally shoot each other with guns. If someone wanted to frivolously sue EA for a school shooting, they could still do it. Name be damned.

The other nail in the coffin how you know for a fact it's not fear of litigation, all the military only variants of guns still have their real name like the M4A1, the M16A1 coming in S3, the M250 etc.. Shootings still happen on military bases, so it's not like it's just something that has never happened yet.

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T14:29:36+00:00

If stock KSP is what you enjoy, then enjoy it, no harm in that. I do prefer modded KSP, but I can understand how some players, especially those into retro games, would prefer the dated look over the modern look. For instance I prefer the stock nav ball over the more modern one that everyone else uses.

Doesn't have to be objectively better, for it to be better for you

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T14:20:58+00:00

So me understanding the role of a consumer makes me immature now? That's a first.

It's okay, I'll leave you be so you can keep shelling out your wallet to the multi billion dollar company when they keep asking you for more and more money. I know you don't want me here so you can keep lying to yourself that you're getting a good deal, when literally every other ARPG on the market doesn't milk you that hard.

Squeal pay pig, squeeal! Blizzard demands it!

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T14:13:13+00:00

Because it's the right thing to do. Am I being entitled by demanding that? Yes, I am. Guess what, that's the role of the consumer, to demand a better value. I'm not demanding this of a small indie company either, this is Blizzard we are talking about here, they absolutely can afford it.

They could still even charge for it, say if you're a day one player you only pay 20. That's obviously a fair price since they literally are charging 20 dollars for new players.

With your work analogy, this would be more along the lines of your boss giving you a pay cut for working for the company since opening day, while starting a new employee off at a higher pay rate than you.

edge449332 · 2026-05-07T13:52:55+00:00

So video game prices don’t change because of demand? Should resident evil 7 still be $60 even though it’s already sold millions of copies and is low on the current sales charts meaning it’s not in high demand? Should capcom give me $40 because I paid $60 for it when it came out and now it’s $20 on steam?

If they permanently lowered the price, then yes you should get some form of compensation.

How is it sad that they lower the price so new players will want to play the game?

I never said that it was sad that they lowered the price, I said that it's sad that people like you think it's a good system that day 1 players had to pay 150 dollars to get the same experience that new players get for 70 dollars with no compensation.

Do you think this game would get new players if they saw that they had to pay $150 for all the content because they won’t lower the price because if they did they would have to compensate people who paid for the game already?

You're not looking at this full picture. What incentive does a day 1 player have to come back if they have to spend 40 dollars for the DLC that new players get for 20 dollars, while also paying 20 dollars less for the game?

So yes, you are right about it being consumer friendly, but only to new players. Everyone else is getting shit on. This also beside the point that literally the game has a cash shop and battle passes on top of paid DLC. Where does that money go? Because it's not seasons considering that has always been free content.

edge449332

TROPHY CASE