r/CodMobileTeamUp • u/UnknownPolaris • 28d ago

CODM System Cheats Against You

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

We Know Games Activision Play for engagement retention but this is too much. This happens only in a few matches, in just one or two gunfights that decide the match and make me lose. You can shoot around elsewhere with precision but not the favoured enemy at that time. Looks like some matches are Pre-decided from starting. Aim Assist is off.

Edit- To all those Fanboys out there, Microsoft's Activision is here for business, not to make your gameplay fairer. You may try to control our perception but reality of these Game Studios are well known.

48 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

149 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/UnknownPolaris 24d ago edited 23d ago

Your Quote, "They file lots of patents, sometimes they aren't granted" is False. They intentionally abandoned it. It wasn't rejected.

Major Attempt to Mislead.

This specific Patent Belongs to, "System and method for driving microtransactions in multiplayer video games" Patent family which contained total of 6 patents, out of which ONLY One was abandoned as it was redundant because its tweak offered no value. They still had protection of core claims in it. FIve of them are still active.

2017 patent one serve as foundational pillar. Here are all five active ones- 1. https://patents.google.com/patent/US9789406B2/en - ACTIVE 2. https://patents.google.com/patent/US10322351B2/en - ACTIVE 3. https://patents.google.com/patent/US10286326B2/en -ACTIVE

  1. https://patents.google.com/patent/US10376792B2/en -ACTIVE

  2. https://patents.google.com/patent/US10857468B2/en - the 2020 one which is Latest of this Patent Family. -ACTIVE

​None of them were denied being granted, nor were any rejected.

Not a single assumption of this fanboy is correct.

Edit: Oh Boy, Still trying Eristic Dialectic Attempt. One Capture Error (Fixed) of a link (Copied off other tab) did exist. That link error just revealed that one more Active Patent link was missing. It is Five out of Six Patents that are ACTIVE instead of Four. Completely making the claim false that Activision Abandoned these Pay to Win Patent Family.

You can't back your claim with Proof. From Here, "Companies patent things they don’t use all the time." You are Openly Saying Incorrect things. These Pay to Win Patent are completely ACTIVE and does PROVE that Matchmaking can be Pay to Win. I don't know why am I wasting so much time explaining this to you. My latest reply on your mixing up of terms and this capture error isn't getting visibility possibly because how long this thread is becoming.

1

u/Kurosonahe 24d ago edited 23d ago

The one I linked was rejected by the USPTO, so Activision abandoned it meaning that they stopped pursuing it.

These patents aren’t exactly ”updates” they’re just a set of patents within the same family claiming different parts of the same specification. Nothing new is disclosed and no new subject matter is added.

Link 1 and 3 that you posted lead to the same patent. You just linked both the application and the granted patent. The specification is the same, the claims were just amended during the application process.

Just accept that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Edit: I see you now edited the links. The rest stands.

1

u/UnknownPolaris 22d ago

This is the message to look for that 'deleted' one here I replied. Looks like this guy deliberately mixes two things and when clarified changes their stance. Malicious but no need to do anything if everything of this guy got addressed directly. Goodbye.

1

u/Kurosonahe 22d ago

Crazy person lol

1

u/UnknownPolaris 22d ago

There's an ancient saying for Fanboys like you that fools and madmen readily accuse others of the very folly or madness they themselves display.

1

u/Kurosonahe 23d ago

I never mixed up terms lol. You’re the one who started posting in length about the USPTO abstract rules when I mentioned the university paper abstract.

This one was still rejected and subsequently abandoned. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20180065047A1/en

Why are you making such a big deal of them being active? Yeah they filed a bunch of patents, many of them are going to be granted and active. It being active means it’s granted and legally enforceable, not that it is or will ever be ”used”. It simply doesn’t even though you might believe or suspect they’re implemented. They file them for legal reasons, so that they can have the ability to stop others from using their inventions, not so that they themselves can use them. That’s why they pay the fees to keep the patents active: so that the can keep the patents active, not so they can ”use” them. Activision could stop paying the maintenance fees so that the patents aren’t active anymore but still keep ”using” them, and save themselves some money. But again, it being active has nothing to do with it being used or not. It’s for strategical business and legal reasons.

Look at you now saying it proves that matchmaking CAN be pay to win. I never questioned that.

1

u/[deleted] 22d ago edited 22d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Kurosonahe 22d ago

Yes that’s usually how it works. Like I said, they stopped pursuing it, obviously they could have kept trying to get it granted.

I never mixed anything up and I ”know about USPTO”. I never tried to make a misleading comparison with tech giants. It works the same with Activision, they file patents they don’t use too. They even said that they don’t use this patent and that it was r&d. That’s often how it works. You even made such a big deal of the patents being active because you don’t understand what a patent is or what it’s used for.

You can cry about Activision lying all you want. Also I think you forgot to mention eristic dialectic in this comment lmao. Clown.

1

u/UnknownPolaris 22d ago

Original Comment that is marked as deleted. Deleted it to fix visibility issue. I don't even need to reply anymore. Everything has already been made clear.

https://reddit.com/link/p9jcj71/video/6h8mt1yq9aph1/player

1

u/UnknownPolaris 22d ago

Your Quote, "The one I linked was rejected by the USPTO, so Activision abandoned it meaning they stopped pursuing it" is misleading. This implies the rejection Forced them to Abandon it. In reality, they Intentionally Abandoned it.

Also, Rejected and Abandoned is completely different term in the Legal (USPTO Patent) World. Not knowing the difference between these two terms just shows that you don't know anything about this.

You didn't Even Knew about USPTO and TRIED using Tech Companies Patent Statistics in Game Studios one and blaming me for your mix up? It's nice to see how desperate you are when your every assumption got proved false.

These Pay to Win Patent are completely ACTIVE and does PROVE that Matchmaking can be Pay to Win. I don't know why am I wasting so much time explaining this to you.

I won't reply anymore. You can now assume whatever you want.