Yes, Call of Duty IS A GAME. I just personally don't consider it one myself when I "play" it. Just because I'm denouncing it as a "fun experience" due to some errors on its part, doesn't mean I'm asking everyone to stop thinking of it as a game.
Indeed.
It seems that I have finally found out.
Call of Duty is not a game.
I'm sure some would agree, while others will not.
Let me explain.
I discovered "this" quite awhile ago, but I've decided to finally post it today.
Anyway, my explanation.
A game is something that one plays for enjoyment. Something you willingly do and have certain control over. Games can be won or lost depending on how you play. Some games are easier than others, and some games are quite hard.
Call of Duty fits some of this criteria, but here are its flaws.
First off, you do not play Call of Duty. Sure, you have control over your virtual self, and you can choose your classes and perks, but you still have minimal control over the game. Call of Duty plays you. The most important aspects of the game, spawning after death, and hit detection, is controlled by the game itself. Most other games control the spawn system and certain aspects of its virtual world as well, but they aren't as intrusive or "broken" as Call of Duty. More than once I've glanced over at my minimap while a team Blackbird was in the air, only to notice that the red arrows weren't limited to one area of the map, but could just as easily respawn behind my team as in one of the less active areas, thus thwarting a more experienced player's attempts at staying out of the open or trying to control his contact with the enemy.
You can't control your contact with the enemy
How much or little you see of the opposing team is controlled by the game itself, giving you less control over the final outcome and your own score.
Hit detection plays a huge role as well. While you aim and fire your weapon accordingly, you still don't have control over what you're doing. The game decides whether or not you're going to get the kill, regardless of which player dishes out more damage. This is true in most FPS games, but their goal is a realistic and/or fair playing field. Obvious connections and other things factor in here, but more than once I've noticed faulty hit detection, and rash decisions in the game engine which preference one player over another in a straight one on one firefight. This is to have less "draws" between players so that only one would die, but most of the time it's the "wrong" person who comes out on top. Killcams display this quite clearly, when you fire a clip into an enemy and receive hit markers for most of your bullets, you assume that your enemy will die, only to find out that you were the one that suffered. On your enemies killcam, the game reveals what actually happened, which was you firing your weapon directly around the enemy, landing one or two hits before spearing your bullet trail miles away from your target. At certain times, I found myself predicting the ending to more than one firefight depending on the games actions around me, regardless of who was at an advantage, who did more damage, and who was closer to death. Arguable accusations, but they are partly true...
2. Your actions don't influence the outcome of the game.
"But they do. If you get enough kills, you win."
While that is true, the above statement regarding the fact that you don't play the game means that you don't decide when you get kills or if you even get them. Hit detection, spawn points, etcetera. You can be a "good player" in Call of Duty, and still receive a crushing defeat. And I'm not talking a minor loss, I mean a massive turn around, sometimes even in the middle of the same game. Many things influence this, and there are arguments on both sides (those who choose to beleive me and those who will not) such as connection issues, other player's skill levels, strategies, classes, perks, killstreaks, and all that. While they do influence this, I'm brought back to spawn points and hit detection. You can start a game doing perfectly fine, with a respectable K/D ratio (just using this as an example) and by the midpoint start to lose it all, even though no one players playstyle has changed throughout the game. This proves that players have minimal control over what happens in the game world. If the game "decides" that you are going to lose, you are going to lose. You will be respawned in front of enemies multiple times, have bullets magically seek you out and kill you, and find that your efforts to kill or even damage your enemies are futile, regardless of how accurate you are.
I believe I've played long enough to at least be right in some areas. Some of what I wrote I do stand by, while other things I admit may or may not be possible and/or ridiculous.
Regardless, in my books Call of Duty is not a game, because you cannot play it.
Am I still going to "play it"? Yes. I'm just not going to look at it as a game any longer, since I never feel a sense of enjoyment or accomplishment once I've finished a session...
It's a time killer at least, even if it does piss off even the best of us.
Is this a joke? If you want it to be, yes. Otherwise I'm being marginally serious.
In the end though, I'm just another pissed off Call of Duty player among millions.
*IMPORTANT EDIT*
I anticipated the large amount of you coming in here stating that "you're just butthurt because you suck at call of duty."
Well, while I am butthurt about playing a broken game that has a lot of potential, I'm not complaining because I lack the skill to do well.
I just didn't want to include my stats, because then people would accuse me of being a "show-off"...
My current OVERALL K/D is at 1.92, and my weekly K/D (last time I checked) was around 2.41.
These numbers aren't exaggerated, and if you really want to go check, my gamertag is Rewdalf, same as it is here.
You don't have to do bad in Call of Duty to get fucked over by its hit or miss mechanics. In fact, it's even more frustrating, as a "good" player, to have an enjoyable game destroyed because all control over the outcome is taken away from you...
It seems that I have finally found out.
Call of Duty is not a game.
I'm sure some would agree, while others will not.
Let me explain.
I discovered "this" quite awhile ago, but I've decided to finally post it today.
Anyway, my explanation.
A game is something that one plays for enjoyment. Something you willingly do and have certain control over. Games can be won or lost depending on how you play. Some games are easier than others, and some games are quite hard.
Call of Duty fits some of this criteria, but here are its flaws.
First off, you do not play Call of Duty. Sure, you have control over your virtual self, and you can choose your classes and perks, but you still have minimal control over the game. Call of Duty plays you. The most important aspects of the game, spawning after death, and hit detection, is controlled by the game itself. Most other games control the spawn system and certain aspects of its virtual world as well, but they aren't as intrusive or "broken" as Call of Duty. More than once I've glanced over at my minimap while a team Blackbird was in the air, only to notice that the red arrows weren't limited to one area of the map, but could just as easily respawn behind my team as in one of the less active areas, thus thwarting a more experienced player's attempts at staying out of the open or trying to control his contact with the enemy.
You can't control your contact with the enemy
How much or little you see of the opposing team is controlled by the game itself, giving you less control over the final outcome and your own score.
Hit detection plays a huge role as well. While you aim and fire your weapon accordingly, you still don't have control over what you're doing. The game decides whether or not you're going to get the kill, regardless of which player dishes out more damage. This is true in most FPS games, but their goal is a realistic and/or fair playing field. Obvious connections and other things factor in here, but more than once I've noticed faulty hit detection, and rash decisions in the game engine which preference one player over another in a straight one on one firefight. This is to have less "draws" between players so that only one would die, but most of the time it's the "wrong" person who comes out on top. Killcams display this quite clearly, when you fire a clip into an enemy and receive hit markers for most of your bullets, you assume that your enemy will die, only to find out that you were the one that suffered. On your enemies killcam, the game reveals what actually happened, which was you firing your weapon directly around the enemy, landing one or two hits before spearing your bullet trail miles away from your target. At certain times, I found myself predicting the ending to more than one firefight depending on the games actions around me, regardless of who was at an advantage, who did more damage, and who was closer to death. Arguable accusations, but they are partly true...
2. Your actions don't influence the outcome of the game.
"But they do. If you get enough kills, you win."
While that is true, the above statement regarding the fact that you don't play the game means that you don't decide when you get kills or if you even get them. Hit detection, spawn points, etcetera. You can be a "good player" in Call of Duty, and still receive a crushing defeat. And I'm not talking a minor loss, I mean a massive turn around, sometimes even in the middle of the same game. Many things influence this, and there are arguments on both sides (those who choose to beleive me and those who will not) such as connection issues, other player's skill levels, strategies, classes, perks, killstreaks, and all that. While they do influence this, I'm brought back to spawn points and hit detection. You can start a game doing perfectly fine, with a respectable K/D ratio (just using this as an example) and by the midpoint start to lose it all, even though no one players playstyle has changed throughout the game. This proves that players have minimal control over what happens in the game world. If the game "decides" that you are going to lose, you are going to lose. You will be respawned in front of enemies multiple times, have bullets magically seek you out and kill you, and find that your efforts to kill or even damage your enemies are futile, regardless of how accurate you are.
I believe I've played long enough to at least be right in some areas. Some of what I wrote I do stand by, while other things I admit may or may not be possible and/or ridiculous.
Regardless, in my books Call of Duty is not a game, because you cannot play it.
Am I still going to "play it"? Yes. I'm just not going to look at it as a game any longer, since I never feel a sense of enjoyment or accomplishment once I've finished a session...
It's a time killer at least, even if it does piss off even the best of us.
Is this a joke? If you want it to be, yes. Otherwise I'm being marginally serious.
In the end though, I'm just another pissed off Call of Duty player among millions.
*IMPORTANT EDIT*
I anticipated the large amount of you coming in here stating that "you're just butthurt because you suck at call of duty."
Well, while I am butthurt about playing a broken game that has a lot of potential, I'm not complaining because I lack the skill to do well.
I just didn't want to include my stats, because then people would accuse me of being a "show-off"...
My current OVERALL K/D is at 1.92, and my weekly K/D (last time I checked) was around 2.41.
These numbers aren't exaggerated, and if you really want to go check, my gamertag is Rewdalf, same as it is here.
You don't have to do bad in Call of Duty to get fucked over by its hit or miss mechanics. In fact, it's even more frustrating, as a "good" player, to have an enjoyable game destroyed because all control over the outcome is taken away from you...
