Infinite Warfare: What's Wrong?

[SAMAS]

Okay, I do understand people getting pissed about Activision locking the remake of CoD 4 behind Infinite Warfare, but a lot of anger also seems to be pointed at the Early Sci-Fi concept of the game itself.

But having not played the series (not really a fan of modern shooters, also been relatively low of discretionary income for some time now), I don't see why people would be so upset, given that the CoD series started in WWII.

So stupid piggybacking practices aside, what do people hate so much about Infinite Warfare itself?

 

[Sniper Team 4]

I kind of wondered about that myself, but I will give it my best shot:

The Major Tom cover. With David Bowie's death still fresh in everyone's mind, the sheer idea that anyone else would dare to make a cover of his song, and that Activision would go with this "hardcore" version of the song rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. Personally, I didn't mind it, but whatever.

Not really sci-fi. People wanted a real sci-fi adventure, with like laser guns and whatnot, but this doesn't really look like sci-fi. It looks like Call of Duty in space. I think people are wanting a huge jump in tech and stuff, not these little steps. Or maybe that's just me.

Finally, it's C.O.D. There are always going to be people who are sick of it, and they are always going to yell and scream about how it has run out of ideas and people should stop buying in. Throw in the kind of sleazy move of locking Modern Warfare (a lot of people's favorite C.O.D.) behind not the regular edition, but the special one, and suddenly every little flaw the game has blooms into a nuclear explosion in people's minds.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

For me, it's the whole 'advanced movement' crap that keeps getting put in CoD these days. The moment they said it'd still be present in the game, I lost all desire to play it. I suppose that's not specifically an "Infinite Warfare" problem... but whatever.

Until they get rid of it, I won't be buying another CoD game... until CoD4's remaster becomes available as a standalone, because it will become a standalone.

 

[Hawki]

Copying and pasting a post I made on the subject:

-It's another CoD game. Even within the fanbase that might account for something.

-It's another future game in a series that started off in WWII, and found popularity in the modern era. So, coupled with Advanced Warfare, Black Ops 2/3, and Ghosts (to a lesser extent), that's 3-4 "future games" in a row. In a time previous, there was some alternation between time period (e.g. Infinity Ward got the Modern Warfare series, while Treyarch handled WaW/BO1), but now? It's all in the future. I think this is the single biggest reason.

Course that's a boon for me, since I'm a sucker for sci-fi, but I can understand why people don't like it. Certainly I'd be pissed with a 21st century Halo game for instance.

-Doesn't help that the reveal trailer isn't that good by itself, and it was announced in the shadow of Battlefield 1. Whatever you think of Battlefield, it's never covered WWI, and few games, FPS or otherwise, have done so, at least in comparison to the wars that came afterwards. So, you have CoD apparently stagnating on one hand, Battlefield innovating on the other hand, and thus, Infinite Warfare looks worse by default. Same reason how Paladins has existed in Overwatch's shadow for instance.

-That Modern Warfare Remastered is locked behind it is seen as a ploy (correctly) to get people to buy the game, in order to get access to MW1. That's going to sour a lot of people.

 

[Worgen]

It looks pretty good to me, but I suppose its because its another kinda future setting which we have gotten in the last few cod games. Plus the lock mw behind it which will piss of some people I guess. All I know is that Im looking forward to it, although I wish they did away with the wall run system and just went with the jets like AW had.

 

[Zhukov]

My "problem" is that it's CoD in space. Same shit, new wallpaper.

Imagine how fun a space age military game could be.

You start out looking at a blueprint of the target enemy ship with your objective(s) and ship subsystems marked. Then you have to identify the best place to breach and plan a route through the ship that will get you where you need to be before their defenders can respond with overwhelming force.

Then you pilot a boarding craft through a big ol' space battle, avoiding enemy fighters and point defense. You reach the planned breach point, hopefully, or maybe it was too well defended or you just misidentified it and now you have to improvise. You cut/blast your way in (maybe multiple breach options, some are faster but more likely to draw a response, some will kill anything immediately beyond the breach but are limited use) then shoot your way through the interior. You can beeline for your objectives and try to outpace the response or you can detour to sabotage subsystems like oxygen, lighting or gravity, making your progress slower but less risky. You kill/capture/rescue/destroy whatever you're therefor and then have to bail, either by fighting your way back to the breach, making a new one or commandeering an enemy escape pod/small craft.

That sounds like fun to me.

But what does Infinite Warfare offer me in their version of a comparable scenario? Barebones scripted piloting section that will likely never be used again, a press-X-to-breach-here-and-only-here sequence and then some of the same linear corridor shooting they've been peddling since 2007. Except this time you get a new grenade! (Which is functionally the same as any grenade, just with a different visual effect.)

Developers playing it safe doesn't annoy me like it used to. They have a business to run, shareholders to please and families to feed. I get it. They've found something that sells well and reliably and they're going to keep making it for a long as it continues to do so. They don't owe me innovation or whatnot. But I don't owe them a purchase, nor a free pass on bitching about them on the internet.

 

[Saelune]

My "problem" is that it's CoD in space. Same shit, new wallpaper.

Imagine how fun a space age military game could be.

You start out looking at a blueprint of the target enemy ship with your objective(s) and ship subsystems marked. Then you have to identify the best place to breach and plan a route through the ship that will get you where you need to be before their defenders can respond with overwhelming force.

Then you pilot a boarding craft through a big ol' space battle, avoiding enemy fighters and point defense. You reach the planned breach point, hopefully, or maybe it was too well defended or you just misidentified it and now you have to improvise. You cut/blast your way in (maybe multiple breach options, some are faster but more likely to draw a response, some will kill anything immediately beyond the breach but are limited use) then shoot your way through the interior. You can beeline for your objectives and try to outpace the response or you can detour to sabotage subsystems like oxygen, lighting or gravity, making your progress slower but less risky. You kill/capture/rescue/destroy whatever you're therefor and then have to bail, either by fighting your way back to the breach, making a new one or commandeering an enemy escape pod/small craft.

That sounds like fun to me.

But what does Infinite Warfare offer me in their version of a comparable scenario? Barebones scripted piloting section that will likely never be used again, a press-X-to-breach-here-and-only-here sequence and then some of the same linear corridor shooting they've been peddling since 2007. Except this time you get a new grenade! (Which is functionally the same as any grenade, just with a different visual effect.)

Developers playing it safe doesn't annoy me like it used to. They have a business to run, shareholders to please and families to feed. I get it. They've found something that sells well and reliably and they're going to keep making it for a long as it continues to do so. They don't owe me innovation or whatnot. But I don't owe them a purchase, nor a free pass on bitching about them on the internet.

Sounds like you want a Battlefield/Rainbow Six in Space game, not a CoD in space game.

 

[Dragonlayer]

I think it's a combination of having to fight for attention against Battlefield: Fuck the Central Powers and a certain, unfounded fatigue of near-future settings. Not to suggest that anyone displeased with Infinite Warfare for the latter reason is objectively wrong and should be made to see the light, but the biggest complaints I've seen are: A) it's now "pew-pew space lasers" (despite the abundance of kinetic weaponry in-game) and B) it's more of the latter Black Ops (despite being more black and white, space warfare then morally grey cybernetic conspiracy evils). Personally I can't wait, though I will admit it was completely overshadowed by Battlefield 1 upon announcement. Having learned more details, I'm more interested then ever, particularly by the notion of a somewhat non-linear campaign, flying the Normandy Retribution to various parts of the solar system and blowing things up.

I kind of wondered about that myself, but I will give it my best shot:

The Major Tom cover. With David Bowie's death still fresh in everyone's mind, the sheer idea that anyone else would dare to make a cover of his song, and that Activision would go with this "hardcore" version of the song rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. Personally, I didn't mind it, but whatever.

That just sounds really odd to me, like people are aghast at such wanton DESECRATION. I think you're entirely right, but it's still weird.

 

[sXeth]

The people who enjoyed COD's gameplay are irked at gadgets and techs, and weird movement stuff that they find interferes with the basics of the gameplay.

The military enthusiasts aren't sucked in because there's no sense of realism or meat to the stuff to appeal to them. Its just fluff in some writers head.

The people who want sci-fi superpower shooters already have a plethora of existing (and generally more committed) options. Halo, Overwatch, Titanfall, DOOM, Destiny. You even have Lawbreakers and Unreal Tournament coming up in the not-too-distant future.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

Couple of things (that do not necessarily reflect my own opinions):

1. Sci-fi. Some people just hate it, some prefer the realistic (well, more of "authentic") settings, some hate how IW is doing the sci-fi, and some are just fucking tired of it. We have had futuristic CoDs since, technically, Ghosts. That's 4 games in a row. Honestly, if I didn't semi-regularly follow the going-ons of the franchise, if someone smashed together BLOPS 3 and IW footage, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

2. The "advanced" movement mechanics. People want boots on the ground, and IW literally just copy and pasting BLOPS 3's movement system pours salt on the wound.

3. Whatever engine they are using is showing its age. Even more, I mean. The game upon closer inspection looks like a prettied up 50 year old hooker. This just contributes to what most see as the CoD franchise's samey-ness.

 

[pookie101]

personally i thought they should of embraced the infinite warfare concept and just gone the whole hog and introduce time travel with battlefields through history