Let's talk about Call of Duty

[MiskWisk]

I'm surprised no one has said this but

OT: COD just doesn't appeal too much to me. I think it is because I don't actually like MMS's like COD or Battlefield too much. As such, I just find most things about that genre distasteful and generally ruin the genre for me.

Captcha: she loves him

 

[Pink Gregory]

done been snipped

Well that is true, but to me it just seems like shooting each other in a a few specified areas, rather than in random places around the map.[/quote]

I get what you mean, I can sort of understand from a design standpoint why they'd want to create points with no distinct advantage for one side; but in theory it just makes it a little bland.

I 'unno, I don't think I've played it enough for it to get over-familiar (that and I haven't played many more tactical FPSes), I can see that happening, though.

I think the general opinion of CoD would be that, for all the money it makes and the market share that it has, it should be more than it ultimately is.

 

[Product Placement]

If there's one thing I don't like about the recent CoD games, it's all those scripted events.

And it's becoming so frigging predictable too, at least when playing the modern warfare series. Oh, what's that? I have to go and run to this helicopter and mow down Communists (Note: I know Russians aren't communists anymore)? Surely this means the helicopter is not gonna crash, right?

Oh, a truck just arrived to save the VIP that I've been protecting? Game won't continue until I open the back door? Well, let me just go and... well, I'll be! The big bad guy just surprised and killed me. How many times do I have to watch through a scene where the guy I'm playing is helplessly killed? On the other hand, how many times can you realistically survive a helicopter/car/train crash or fall down ludicrously tall distances.

Spoiler: Even more rant about the storyline

I also full heartily agree with Yatzee's opinion about the ridiculousness of Russia being able to invade all of Europe after just finishing a failed campaign to take America. How the hell did a terrorist leader manage to convince the military to undertake such a campaign, since it's quite obvious that he isn't working for the government, what with him needing to kidnap the Russian president and all. Also, also, how the hell did he manage to get so many terrorist into the president's plain?

All in all, I don't think these are bad games, but the single player campaigns leave something to be desired.

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

I've never played any of the Black Duty or Modern Call games, and I feel incredibly left out of these discussions. =(

So why weigh in at all? Don't just post to boost your post count or whatever, that was pointless.

OT: Those may be basically invalid complaints. The complaints such as MW2 being one of the most unbalanced online games I can think of, BlOps literally killing sniping, and MW3 being functionally the same game as MW2 while adding a load of unnecessary killstreak bullshit are completely valid.

 

[wickedmonkey]

My main beefs with the series are that it *still* uses the bloody Quake 3 engine, yes it may run well of older systems, I can get behind that line of thinking, but it still looks naff and tacking on newer rendering trickery will only polish the turd so far.

Matchmaking is a horrible idea, always has been a horrible idea, always will be a horrible idea. When you have to add mountains of interpolation and prediction to a multiplayer game to compensate for choosing Little Jimmy and his 1 meg broadband line to host the match while he torrents porn and streams music, then you've destroyed any vestige of "skill" that may be behind a shot because the game guesses where your shots went. And then Jimmy gets upset because he's losing and quits. Cue host migration! Yaaay...

You've also wasted valuable time and resources that could have gone into making a solid client/server set-up developing that and the IWNet shite which is probably even less secure than dedicated servers with no way to actively regulate misbehaving players, leaving everyone else powerless and frustrated while some toolbag with a dodgy CD-key ruins a match with cheats/trolling/unpleasant behaviour etc.

/rant off

 

[Brotha Desmond]

You can't use the sports analogy for Call of Duty. The actually real life sports game doesn't change save for the players. The rules are set. For a shooter game that you had five years to change the formula and you don't, there isn't any excuse save for your own lack of creativity.

 

[Gameguy20100]

i guess i don't like Cod because I'm biased against Military shooters i mean I used to like one Cod 4 to be exact i fell out with them because the SP became so weak and repetitive always running and hiding behind chest high walls Ive got nothing against MP i meen i still love the Mass effect 3 MP but i still think that the single Player should always be the main focus

 

[Ljs1121]

I don't buy many FPSs at all, Call of Duty included, because it's just not the type of game that interests me. The multiplayer is fun to mess around with every once in a while with friends, but I'm not going to pay for just that. Gimme a nice third person action/adventure over a military FPS any day.

Still, though, a lot of people do love Call of Duty and I'm in no position to think myself any better than them because of it.

Also World at War is the greatest CoD ever and any other opinion is wrong just saying

 

[Baron von Blitztank]

Cod? I'm not a big fan of Cod. I much prefer Haddock!

 

[BreakfastMan]

1) They should either cut the campaign or force the entire studio to play COD 1&2. The campaigns have ALL been terrible since that point, with the exception of WaW, which was merely competent. And yes, you heard that right, I didn't like COD 4's campaign at all. Wow, you got nuked. And what about all the other stuff? Oh, right, terrorists are here, you go there, shoot brown people, nuke, patriotic music, the end. People who praise COD 4's campaign while critizising MW3's in the same breath piss me off, if you claim to love one but despise the other you are just trying to look cool.

Yep, it can't be because they have actual, legitimate reasons to dislike one over the other. They are obviously just trying to be all cool and hip. Those silly people, having different opinions than you. They must be being disingenuous, obviously. There is no other option. -_-

Also, ooh, those sweet, sweet Undistributed Middle fallacies...

Well then, explain why COD4's campaign is good while MW3's is shit, despite both being almost identical in terms of mechanics.

I wouldn't know, I haven't played any more than the first two missions or so of MW3's. It just seemed incredibly disingenuous to me to outright insult those who had different opinions than yours, claiming that they were not as valuable for no other reason than their opinions were different. Not good form, makes you look like a bit of a bigot.

 

[Jamieson 90]

I personally just don't like COD since my preferred style of FPS are usually team, class and objective based. Examples of this include but are not limited to 1) Wolfenstein Enemy Territory 2) Quake Wars Enemy Territory. It's just a shame SD messed up Brink so much because it looked so promising. So I guess my resentment towards the PC FPS genre at the moment comes from the fact that there is very little choice at the moment, unless you like Modern FPS shooters that focus on death match that is, and of course there is the whole Console to PC ports too that developers so shamelessly bundle PC gamers with.

SO yeah I'd like to see more games like this:

[youtube=Qwv2ksiywTY&feature=related

 

[Blazing Steel]

I like CoD. It has a multiplayer I can easily jump into with my friends. The single player is full of specticles that I enjoy, sure it's not long but I don't feel it needs to be. I buy each game because for me they change enough to warrent the price tag. Sure you might not see the changes, but then I never saw the changes between Assassins Creed 2 and Brotherhood or even the Mario games. Games in a series don't change a hell of a lot because they're normally built on the same formular that works.

CoD does what it wants to well. Ofcouse it's single player doesn't compare to Skyrim, but it doesn't try to. It's a fun game that adds to my balanced diet of gaming.

 

[Tdoodle]

This one is also funny. COD catches so much flack for not "evolving", while Total War is fine...? What major innovations has CA made to it's long running series between Medieval 2 and Shogun 2? Naval battles, better multiplayer, and that's about it.

Just wanted to pick on this bit; I imagine the reason Total War doesn't get flack for not introducing "major innovations" is because each one is set in a completely different period to the last (except for Napoleon following Empire). That means new units, tactics, maps, technologies and setting on top of the graphical overhaul each version usually gets.

In cod that would translate to new maps, perks, killstreaks, weapons...


Its pretty much the same deal for both games. I dont see why people are bashing on cod only.

Ehh not really. The big difference is that while Call of Duty has a few new things each time most of the weapons, perks and killstreaks are carried over from previous games, whereas in Total War very little if anything is carried over between new instalments (not counting direct sequels like Medieval 2, but these are years apart from their originals so naturally don't get the same amount of grief). Maps I'll give you, but from what I can tell a lot of the old ones seem to feature in DLC packs anyway, which probably only adds to the argument against it.

Again, I can see where he's coming from, but it's not really the same.

 

[Full]

I was a fan of Black Ops Zombies, especially the changes they made to it through the DLCs. Don't care for the multiplayer much, and the campaigns only can be good.

The obvious standpoint (that I'm sure has been said) is that it needs to either slow down or just come to a stop. It sells absurdly well, and every other big name publisher wants to sell that much to please investors, or whatever. So, they limit their developers to make something that looks like it, to appeal to those of whom who do like it,. And when that happens, when all the games we have are just knock offs of loosely justified war-propaganda, I wonder why people look down on the developers, fans, and the medium as a whole.

 

[BBboy20]

Millions upon millions of dollars and the spawn system never was improved.

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

I personally just don't like COD since my preferred style of FPS are usually team, class and objective based. Examples of this include but are not limited to 1) Wolfenstein Enemy Territory 2) Quake Wars Enemy Territory. It's just a shame SD messed up Brink so much because it looked so promising. So I guess my resentment towards the PC FPS genre at the moment comes from the fact that there is very little choice at the moment, unless you like Modern FPS shooters that focus on death match that is, and of course there is the whole Console to PC ports too that developers so shamelessly bundle PC gamers with.

SO yeah I'd like to see more games like this:


I completely agree about Brink, it was a shame it had to flop rather epically. But it's like I said, if it's personal taste then I understand. I'm not about to rage because you don't like Cod.

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

snip

Well what I'm gathering at this point is pretty obvious that you just don't like CoD for it's gameplay and are flogging it for unrelated stuff. BF3 was in no way an evolution from BC2 or even BF2. If you don't like CoD that's fine, no need to get so defensive. But there are just as many asshats in BF3, how many vehicle camping, jet stealing, base raping douchebags have you seen? There's no difference in dicks, I assure you.

 

[Joccaren]

Yeah, in general most of what I see on the more reasonable areas of the Internet, I.E: here, is a "This is why I don't like CoD", not a "This is why CoD is bad" using those arguments.

The other variation is "This is why CoD shouldn't get a 10/10 review score", which IMO is damn justified. Review scores shouldn't go by what's popular/who's paying more, but by the game itself, and preferably not be a "I really love this game so 10/10" sort of review, nor a "I hate this game so 2/10" review. That's getting more into the review side of things though, and that's an entirely different argument.

So, basically, you're mostly preaching to the converted.

Most people here I'd assume are like myself - won't go out of their way to call CoD bad, unless someone comes along and tells you that CoD is great and it really shouldn't get so much hate from the community, and its obvious everyone only hates it because its popular - or other people that act like the game is gods gift to man. We do it for every game when a fanboy says such things though, so its not like we're singling out CoD on this. We just don't like the game, but we don't hold it against the people that do.

If you were looking for the audience of people that go out of their way to bag CoD and blame it for everything wrong in the gaming industry, Youtube is only a short click away.