Call of Duty is not a game <-- SERIOUS STATEMENT IS SERIOUS -_-

[Omega Pirate]

I read the whole thing, I always did wonder why after I unload a full clip into someone they stay alive and kill me.

This wall of text reminds me of that one other wall of text about Pokemon being Ash's dream. That one was longer, if you can believe me.

 

[rob_simple]

I can think of any number of games that fit this bill and only a few are FPS's. Most of the time it happens when I'm playing a game and I see what a mechanic is supposed to do or what the designer had in mind but, either because of bad design or user error it doesn't happen.

But I still prefer that type of game to the ones that flat out take your hand and lead you through the motions. At the end of the day, an online games functionality will always be affected by the people who play it, better known as the 'John Gabriel Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory.'

 

[Puzzlenaut]

SNIP

you make a good point about the large map thing, jungle is a gawd awful map, i will totally agree, the amount of times they spawn behind is incredible, and yes there is one side of the map completely unused most of the time.

the thing is, this is probably the only map where it is a problem, (although maybe the snowy satellite one too, just not as bad).

also, this will work both ways, whilst they may spawn behind you, once they gain the central part of jungle (where all the huts are), you will in turn spawn behind them, and therefore they have to repel your flank attacks.

but as you said before, these minor issues wont stop us from playing this addiction

Nuketown.

Although there are only really two places you can spawn, once your team starts losing they all become camped to shit.

And although Jungle has many problems, I don't think the spawning is really one of them -- it stops one team from gaining too much of an advantage and keeps the gameplay dynamic.

 

[EternalFacepalm]

CoD is a game, a casual game!

ownage

anyway, blops was a horrible experience. Until they fix the connection issues in the game, it is deemed casual.

That makes no sense. If a game is casual or "core" isn't based on whether it has bugs or not.
Anywho, CoD seems to appeal to mostly casual players. At least, that's what it seems like to me.

 

[WanderingFool]

My K/D in Black Ops on 360 is fucking (.23)... Im currantly level 19! Fuck this shit... If Treyarch didnt fuck over PC gamers, I wouldnt have a problem...

Oh, Im not sure where this stands in relation to the topic, but that should give you all an idea about my feelings towards COD, at least on the 360...

 

[CardinalPiggles]

Spoiler: what he said

Nuketown.

Although there are only really two places you can spawn, once your team starts losing they all become camped to shit.

And although Jungle has many problems, I don't think the spawning is really one of them -- it stops one team from gaining too much of an advantage and keeps the gameplay dynamic.

yeah thats what i kind of meant with the working both ways thing. once one team gains 'the hill' the other team can attack from all sides, and vice versa.

and i dont even play Nuketown because its such a piece of shit map, i always back out of it straight away. although when i first started playing BlOps it did frustrate me to no end so i see what you mean.

 

[Rewdalf]

I'm "butthurt" because while playing the game "skillfully" offers a momentary fun experience, it can instantly turn around and screw you over because of faulty mechanics and such.
I'm also "butthurt" because this game has a lot of potential, and that's what keeps driving me to play it even though from time-to-time it's impossible (if not very difficult) to turn a bad game around using you "special skill" to change the outcome or score.
In other FPS games, even when you're at your last resort, a skillfull move or crafty desicion can give you a step above the other players, while in Call of Duty, any crafty move I attempt to pull is instantly followed by me being killed by the player I had just downed because the game respawned him two feet away from me...

Maybe that's the difference between me and you, dying and losing does not bother me. When I became more skilled than I was I began to win more on average and get a better K/D. You will always sometimes be thwarted by random chance, just like in any game, and I don't think it's any more prevalent in COD. All you can do is increase the probability of succeeding, not guarantee it.

Luckily I don't care when I lose, even when it was down to chance. I guess that is the difference between me and you, but then why even play a multiplayer game if you're going to be upset by losing?

Also, I was quoting you when I said "butthurt", I wasn't the one to bring it up. I used "butthurt" because it was how you phrased what other people were saying about your opinion. There's no need to be sarcastic about my "special skill" either, I'm not good at CoD, and I wasn't trying to imply I was. I originally had a K/D ratio of about 0.80, and since I changed my tactics and became more "skillfull" I moved up to a bit above 1.10. Nothing major, but a definite increase, which shows skill does in fact have an impact.

I use broad statements so people are less encouraged to call me out and quote me saying something out of context.
I said "special skill" because every player plays differently, not to be sarcastic.
Anyway, I play multiplayer because, as I said before, this game has potential.
I do have fun when all goes well (and a few things still go wrong, yes) but it's when the game loses consistancy and starts to fluctuate so that you no longer feel as though you have control.
Yes, I did get pissed off at Call of Duty today. At the end of a game, my "nemesis" had killed me 14 times, while I had killed him 0 times. I certainly damaged him more than once, those 14 kills were out of an overall 20, meaning only 6 of his other kills were from other people...
That's pretty ridiculous to be honest.
Before and after said game, I didn't have an issue like this. It was one occurence where someone got lucky over and over again, and I started to get tired of seeing the same scenery over and over again because my spawn point only changed twice that whole game.
Yes, I tried different paths and strategies, I even tried not moving and digging in to wait for the enemy.
I know someone is going to try and say it was my fault for not playing well or being stupid, but I'd like them to explain how I did perfectly fine in the proceeding games playing with the same people.

This isn't the only occurence though, I'm just using it as an example.

 

[Nannernade]

I agree on some of your points mostly because well Treyarch made Black Ops and they were lazy with spawn points and only put in like three. I've experienced the "what really happened" scenario many... many... many times most times at crucial moments like when I'm about to get Attack Dogs or a Care Package etc etc. I still see it as a game though since I'm not really about strategy I just go on to goof off with my best mates usually just smack talking each other etc etc.

 

[KenzS]

If your saying Call of Duty is all luck, you must be playing the wrong game.

 

[Knight Templar]

You understanding of what is and is not a game is very lacking.
Because even if I accepted your version of what the game is like, it would still be a game.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Just because I'm denounceing 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.

Anyway, my explaination.

Many things influence this, and there are arguments on both sides (those who choose to [/B]beleive[/B] me and those who will not)

I beleive I've played long enough to at least be right in some areas.

Not trying to sound assholeish (Failed), but I noticed some spelling errors...


denounceing = denouncing

explaination = explanation

beleive = believe

Anyway, I think you're right on most points...but just because something doesn't fit the exact definition of a word doesn't mean it doesn't fall under that category. (MMO and RPG are two terms that are wonderful examples of this).

I can't say for sure if CoD falls under that, though, as I've never played a CoD game.

 

[crop52]

just because it involves chance doesn't make it any less of an enjoyable experience,

 

[Chad Brumfield]

Pretty much only play Call of Duty for the campaign anymore. I don't see the multiplayer aspect of it as a game or a broken toy so much as a meat grinder in Hell in which you are reformed only to be ground up again. Enjoyed it for awhile until I got through MW1, WaW and on to MW2 to realize it's just the same thing over and over, with a bit of reskinning. Which is why I didn't pick up Black Ops. I may pick up MW3 to see how the story goes but I agree with a lot of other people that the single player campaign in MW2 felt unfinished, like they wanted to get it over with so they could focus on the multiplayer.

BTW, it's still a game.

 

[funguy2121]

Wow. OP sounds very very pissed off. A post that long usually means 1 of 2 things - the poster is very bored or not very succinct (that would be me), or has a lot of emotion invested in the post.

It's Call of frickin' Duty. You know we're involved in 3 wars right now, right? I'm unemployed, as surely are several people you know. Are there not more things to be frustrated with than the (correct me if I'm wrong here) 7th iteration of a franchise that the majority of gamers have already associated to some degree with the homogeny of the genre?

Just don't play the, um, erm, ahem, game. Seriously, this is like walking down the street and telling the people playing Craps there that it's not actually a game.

 

[DEAD34345]

I use broad statements so people are less encouraged to call me out and quote me saying something out of context.
I said "special skill" because every player plays differently, not to be sarcastic.
Anyway, I play multiplayer because, as I said before, this game has potential.
I do have fun when all goes well (and a few things still go wrong, yes) but it's when the game loses consistancy and starts to fluctuate so that you no longer feel as though you have control.
Yes, I did get pissed off at Call of Duty today. At the end of a game, my "nemesis" had killed me 14 times, while I had killed him 0 times. I certainly damaged him more than once, those 14 kills were out of an overall 20, meaning only 6 of his other kills were from other people...
That's pretty ridiculous to be honest.
Before and after said game, I didn't have an issue like this. It was one occurence where someone got lucky over and over again, and I started to get tired of seeing the same scenery over and over again because my spawn point only changed twice that whole game.
Yes, I tried different paths and strategies, I even tried not moving and digging in to wait for the enemy.
I know someone is going to try and say it was my fault for not playing well or being stupid, but I'd like them to explain how I did perfectly fine in the proceeding games playing with the same people.

This isn't the only occurence though, I'm just using it as an example.

Alright, so some games you lose. Some games really improbably things happen, like being killed 14 times by the same guy. But you still maintain a Kill/Death ratio of 1.92. If the game were truly chance-based, you would not be able to have a ratio like that, and everyone's K/D would barely fluctuate from 1.00. How well you do on average is the only possible measure of how chance-based a game is, and since you and others like you have very high or very low K/D ratios it shows that it isn't about luck (It's lucky that CoD records these kinds of statistics). You are in control of how well you do overall, but no-one can be in control of how well they do in a specific match. There is too many random elements, like in almost every other multiplayer game there is.

 

[funguy2121]

so any game that implicates bullets hitting something is controlled by the game and not by the person? keep in mind that there is someone pulling the trigger and aiming the weapon.

Silly The Tim, you're not taking Neo and The Architect into account. Only OP and I know that the Matrix has you.

 

[funguy2121]

Your thread is bad and you should feel bad.

I want to be angry at you for being so mean, but I just can't. Loved it.

 

[blaize2010]

i am not going to say that you are butt hurt because you suck at call of duty. i am, however, going to say to quit being such an existential dumbass. a game is a game, whether or not you enjoy it. the campaign, to me, wasn't that bad, and actually had some decent innovations. when i shoot people in the multiplayer, they fall over. you may just have a bad connection, mate. i'm tired of people hating on call of duty, they do it all the time. though it's refreshing to see a reason that's not "it cannot be an interactive entertainment work, because it is a silly game about shooting people, and games are meant to explore your inner self." listen, i've met my inner self, he's a bit of a dick. i don't want to spend an hour hanging out with him, i want to spend an hour killin bitches, and making teenagers cry cause they just got shot. again.

 

[funguy2121]

Game = fun, if its not fun then its not a game, get what I mean here?

I agree with you that call of duty plays you, you don't play it. Yeah, thats about it.

I promise to quit yakking, but first, I found this (only obliquely) pertinent: