why is snapchat discover so bad
Snapchat, the popular multimedia messaging app, has become a staple for many young adults and teenagers since its launch in 2011. With its unique features such as disappearing messages and filters, it has gained a massive following and has become an integral part of the social media landscape. However, one aspect of the app that has received significant criticism is its “Discover” feature.
Introduced in 2015, Snapchat Discover was intended to be a platform for media outlets to share their content with the app’s users. It offers a curated selection of news, entertainment, and lifestyle content from various publishers, including BuzzFeed, ESPN, and CNN. But despite its initial buzz and promise, Discover has been widely panned by both users and experts. So, what exactly makes Snapchat Discover so bad? Let’s dive into the reasons why this feature has failed to live up to expectations.
1. Overwhelming and Cluttered Interface
One of the main issues with Snapchat Discover is its cluttered and overwhelming interface. Unlike the rest of the app, which has a clean and simple design, Discover is filled with a plethora of content from different publishers. As a result, users are bombarded with a never-ending stream of articles, videos, and advertisements, making it difficult to navigate and find what they are looking for.
Moreover, the content is displayed in a vertical grid, which means users have to scroll down to see more. This can be tiresome and time-consuming, especially when there is a lot of content to sift through. The lack of an effective search function also makes it challenging to find specific content, making the overall user experience frustrating and unengaging.
2. Lack of Personalization
Another major issue with Snapchat Discover is the lack of personalization. Unlike other social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram , which use algorithms to curate content based on users’ interests and behavior, Discover offers a one-size-fits-all approach. This means that every user is presented with the same content, regardless of their preferences or browsing history.
As a result, users are forced to sift through a sea of articles and videos that may not be relevant or interesting to them. This lack of personalization makes Snapchat Discover feel impersonal and disconnected, ultimately leading to its unpopularity among users.
3. Limited Content Diversity
Snapchat Discover was initially marketed as a platform for media outlets to share their content with a younger, tech-savvy audience. However, over the years, the content on Discover has become increasingly repetitive and commercialized. Many users have criticized the platform for featuring mostly entertainment and lifestyle content, with little to no representation of hard news or current events.
This lack of diversity in content not only limits users’ exposure to different topics and opinions but also feels out of touch with the app’s demographic. As a result, Discover has failed to live up to its promise of bringing fresh and diverse content to its users.
4. Intrusive Ads
As with any social media platform, advertising is an essential part of Snapchat’s revenue model. However, the ads on Discover have been a major turnoff for many users. Unlike the rest of the app, where ads are presented in a non-intrusive manner, Discover ads are often disruptive and obtrusive, making it difficult to consume content without constant interruptions.
Moreover, many users have complained about the repetitive nature of the ads, with the same ones being shown repeatedly, making them feel like they are being bombarded with advertisements. This not only hampers the user experience but also makes Discover feel like a platform solely designed for advertisers rather than users.
5. Lack of Transparency
Another significant issue with Snapchat Discover is the lack of transparency. Unlike other social media platforms, which have strict guidelines and policies for content creators, Snapchat has been criticized for its lack of oversight on Discover. This has led to several instances where controversial content has been featured on the platform, causing backlash from users.
Moreover, many publishers have also been accused of repackaging and reusing content from other sources without proper attribution. This lack of accountability and transparency has raised questions about Discover’s credibility and the quality of the content being presented to users.
6. Difficult for Small Publishers
One of the initial goals of Snapchat Discover was to provide a platform for smaller publishers to reach a wider audience. However, this has not been the case. Due to the high costs involved in producing content for the platform, only a handful of big publishers have been able to establish a presence on Discover. This has left smaller publishers struggling to gain a foothold on the platform, further limiting the diversity of content available.
7. No User Feedback
Unlike other social media platforms, Snapchat does not provide users with the option to like, comment, or share content on Discover. This means that users have no way to provide feedback to publishers or engage with the content in any way. This lack of interaction between users and publishers makes Discover feel like a one-way street, which can be unappealing for users who are used to more interactive platforms.
8. Lack of Original Content
Another major issue with Snapchat Discover is the lack of original content. Many publishers have been accused of repackaging and sharing content from their other platforms, such as their websites or YouTube channels. This not only makes the content feel stale and unoriginal but also makes users question the value of consuming it on Snapchat when they can access it elsewhere.
9. Time-Sensitive Content
One of the unique features of Snapchat is the disappearing messages and stories, which are automatically deleted after 24 hours. However, this feature does not bode well for the content on Discover. As users are unable to save or share the content, it makes it difficult for them to revisit it later, ultimately reducing the value of the content.
Moreover, this also puts pressure on users to constantly check the platform for new content, which can be overwhelming and time-consuming. As a result, many users have opted to skip Discover altogether.
10. Limited Reach
Lastly, one of the main reasons why Snapchat Discover has failed to live up to its potential is its limited reach. Unlike other social media platforms, which have a global user base, Snapchat has a smaller user base, mainly consisting of younger demographics. This means that the content on Discover is only accessible to a limited number of users, reducing its overall impact and reach.
In conclusion, the Snapchat Discover feature has been widely panned for its cluttered interface, lack of personalization, and limited content diversity. With its intrusive ads, lack of transparency, and limited reach, it has failed to live up to its promise of providing a platform for media outlets to reach a younger audience. Unless Snapchat addresses these issues and makes significant changes to the platform, Discover is likely to remain one of the app’s least popular features.
cod ww2 graphics are bad
Call of Duty: WWII Graphics – A Disappointing Step Backwards
Call of Duty: WWII, released in November 2017, was one of the most highly anticipated games of the year. The franchise, known for its high-octane action and intense gameplay, was returning to its roots with a World War II setting. Fans were excited to experience the classic boots-on-the-ground combat that the series was known for. However, upon its release, many players were left disappointed, especially when it came to the graphics. In this article, we will delve deeper into the reasons why the graphics in Call of Duty: WWII were considered bad by many and how it affected the overall gaming experience.
Before we begin, it is important to note that graphics are a crucial aspect of any video game. They determine the look and feel of the game, and in a first-person shooter like Call of Duty, they play a significant role in immersing the player into the game world. With the advancements in technology, gamers have come to expect high-quality graphics from their games. And with the previous installment in the Call of Duty franchise, Infinite Warfare, boasting stunning visuals, the bar was set high for WWII. However, it failed to deliver, and here’s why.
One of the first things that players noticed about the graphics in Call of Duty: WWII was its lack of detail. The environments and character models appeared to be flat and lacking in texture. This was a major disappointment, especially considering the game’s historical setting. World War II was a time of chaos, destruction, and devastation, and the game failed to capture the gritty and realistic atmosphere of the era. The lack of detail also affected the immersion factor, as players were constantly reminded that they were playing a video game instead of being transported into a war-torn world.
Another issue with the graphics was the lack of variety in the environment. The game is set in various locations across Europe, from the beaches of Normandy to the streets of Paris, and players expected to see a wide range of environments. However, the game’s environments felt repetitive and lacked diversity. The same dull and muted color palette was used throughout the game, making the environments look bland and uninteresting. This monotony was a major turn-off for players who were expecting a visually stunning experience.
The lighting in Call of Duty: WWII was also a major letdown. The game’s lighting system appeared to be outdated, with unnatural shadows and lighting effects. This made the game look flat and unappealing. Additionally, the game’s lack of dynamic lighting meant that the environments felt static, further adding to the game’s lack of immersion. In a game that relies heavily on creating a realistic and immersive experience, poor lighting is a major drawback.
One of the most significant issues with the graphics in Call of Duty: WWII was the lack of optimization. The game suffered from frequent frame rate drops and stuttering, especially on consoles. This made the gameplay experience jarring and affected the game’s overall performance. The frame rate drops were particularly noticeable during intense action sequences, which is when players expect the game to run smoothly. This lack of optimization was a major concern for players, as it affected the game’s playability and enjoyment.
Another aspect that affected the graphics in Call of Duty: WWII was the game’s resolution. The game was released in a time when 4K displays were becoming increasingly common, and players expected the game to support this resolution. However, the game was limited to a maximum of 1080p resolution, even on powerful gaming rigs. This was a major disappointment for players who wanted to experience the game in its full visual glory.
One of the reasons why the graphics in Call of Duty: WWII were considered bad was due to the game’s engine. The game uses the same engine as its predecessor, Infinite Warfare, which was released in 2016. This was a major letdown for fans who were expecting an upgrade in graphics and visuals with the new installment. The game’s engine, while capable of producing stunning visuals, was not optimized for a World War II setting, resulting in the lack of detail and variety in the environments.
The lack of innovation in the graphics department was another issue that affected the game’s visuals. Call of Duty: WWII’s graphics felt outdated and did not offer anything new or groundbreaking. In a time when other games were pushing the boundaries of graphics and visuals, Call of Duty: WWII felt like a step backward. Fans expected to see a significant improvement in graphics, especially with the game’s return to a classic setting, but were ultimately disappointed.
The lack of attention to detail in the game’s graphics was also a major concern for fans. In a game that prides itself on its realism and authenticity, the lack of attention to detail was puzzling. The weapons in the game, which are a crucial aspect of gameplay, lacked detail and looked generic. The same can be said for the character models, which appeared to be generic and lacked individuality. These small details may seem insignificant, but they play a significant role in creating an immersive and believable game world.
Another issue that affected the graphics in Call of Duty: WWII was the lack of post-processing effects. The game’s visuals felt flat and lacked depth, which is where post-processing effects come into play. These effects, such as motion blur, depth of field, and bloom, add realism and depth to the game’s visuals. However, in Call of Duty: WWII, these effects were either absent or poorly implemented, further adding to the game’s lackluster graphics.
Finally, the lack of support for high-end PCs was a major concern for players who wanted to experience the game at its best. Call of Duty: WWII was developed with consoles in mind, and as a result, the game’s PC version lacked many features that are standard in PC games, such as support for higher resolution and frame rates. This was a major disappointment for PC gamers, who were expecting a visually stunning experience, but were ultimately let down by the game’s graphics.
In conclusion, the graphics in Call of Duty: WWII were a major disappointment for fans and critics alike. The lack of detail, variety, and optimization, along with outdated technology and lack of innovation, resulted in a step backwards for the franchise in terms of visuals. While the game did offer an engaging and intense gameplay experience, the lackluster graphics were a major letdown. With the upcoming installment in the franchise, Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War, set to release in November 2020, fans are hoping for a significant improvement in graphics and visuals. Only time will tell if the developers have learned from their mistakes and will deliver a visually stunning game that meets the expectations of fans.