Poll: Call of Duty requires Skill... or not?

[Antidrall]

Center screen, push button, know where everything and everyone spawns. rinse and repeat.

 

[InsaneOne10]

It really comes down to what you consider skill. Personally, I see CoD as more of being in the right place at the right time so you can get the first shots in, which is a skill of sorts but still subject to a lot of chance.

Thats a pretty ignorant statement when you actually think about it. People arnt just randomly running around in circles hopeing to get lucky and find somebody. You have to know the maps, anticipate your opponents movements, ambush/flank them, etc. Sure you can take your method and do shitty but if you actually want to win and get a good score then it does require skill.

Just like any game it does take skill to be good at the game. Its just that the call of duty games are easy to be mediocre at.

I never said people were just running in circles (well I've seen some but nevermind them) but flanking/amushing is an attempt to put yourself in an advantageous position at the right time and there's less chance to it the more knowledge you have about your opponent, which should come from good teamwork and communication which I don't see much of playing CoD.

 

[FightThePower]

Of course it does.

If it didn't. No one would be measurably better at it than anybody else.

I'm sick of these threads. It's just full of elitists using it as another chance to reminisce in their halcyon days and complain about how everything's gone down the toilet since counter strike.

If the game was so easy. Why do you lose at it?

having fast reactions in of itself is a skill. Sure it requires a completely different set of skills than some other shooters. Doesn't mean they're any better or worse.

You summed up my thoughts exactly.

There's no way to credibly argue that Call of Duty takes 'no skill'.

 

[sneakypenguin]

Every multiplayer game requires skill. How much skill depends entirely upon the opponents. Saying CoD doesn't require skill because it's a twitch shooter is preposterous. So because the game moves along at breakneck speed, all of a sudden there's no skill involved? I fail to follow that logic.

Good players will always beat bad players in Call of Duty. That is, by definition, what skill is.

Listen to this man for he is wise(other than his opinion on metallica /troll ). If a game required no skill then everyone should be 1-1 K/D W/L as it is random chance.

As that is not the case one can say that there is a measure of skill involved beyond basics.

 

[Lyri]

It's the age old question since CoD 4. I was wondering what Escapist thought. Me personally? I don't think so. Certainly takes some basic skill, but besides hoping you're connection is good enough and whether the other guy is ready or not plays a large part.

Every game requires skill, it's as simple as that. It doesn't take skill to play it but it does to be good at it.
You can't even hope to get a marginally good score without some semblance of decency.

The debate over whether something is skillful or not in a game is pointless. I can't bloody stand the debate in game, usually started after someone gets killed one too many times in a certain way "X has no skill" or "***ING STOP USING X YOU **** YOU NO SKILL ****"

I mean seriously, if someone's killing you repeatedly one way and you're not clued in enough to figure out a way to stop it then sure, skill may or may not be a part of it - but you're still a dumbass.

That sounds more like you're talking about if a weapon or attachment is OP or not and then you go on to say that dying in the same way means you're still a dumb ass.
Certain things in that game where broken or abusable (Sorry noobtube, you're aptly named), there is nothing wrong or preventative you can do about that.
I hated certain maps because you know what was going to happen, frag fests and tube spams (Wetwork).
If you died to campers then you clearly aren't map aware or cautious enough when you play, that's your own fault.

 

[Alordo]

CoD's multiplayer is too much like real life warzones for me.

Really? So as you're sitting all comfy in your parent's house, clicking on your controller, there are bullets whizzing by you? Punching holes in the couch? A grenade just suddenly goes off in the dining room? Artillery shells start exploding in the upstairs bathroom? Because buddy, NO VIDEO GAME is close AT ALL to RL combat. That's the most asinine comment I've read about CoD.

OT: Of course it takes skill. Every game takes some if you want to be successful at it. Having no challenge in a game equals a great deal of boredom.

 

[HassEsser]

Call of Duty requires the least amount of skill out of all the multiplayer shooters I've played, and multiplayer shooters are all I play. There is, definitely, skill involved, but it is below minimal when compared to a game like Counter-Strike. In CoD, the winner is who ever shoots first, and whoever shoots first almost always does so because of luck (this stems from random spawn-points); in Counter-Strike/Battlefield/Team Fortress/Quake, however, the winner is whoever knows the game more.

EDIT:

CoD's multiplayer is too much like real life warzones for me.

Really? So as you're sitting all comfy in your parent's house, clicking on your controller, there are bullets whizzing by you? Punching holes in the couch? A grenade just suddenly goes off in the dining room? Artillery shells start exploding in the upstairs bathroom? Because buddy, NO VIDEO GAME is close AT ALL to RL combat. That's the most asinine comment I've read about CoD.

+1

 

[ultrachicken]

All multiplayer FPS's have luck as the most important factor in determining how well any given player does. Quite often you'll get into situations out of your control - sniped from across the map, turning a corner and going face to face with two enemies, etc.

That said, skill is still a large factor as well, just less so than luck.

 

[Justanothergamer300]

Who notices someone and shoots first that what it's all about

 

[Zhukov]

Yes of course.

Why do you think some people consistently perform better then others?

(And no, for the record, I am not a CoD fan.)

 

[CactusPants]

I'd say it requires some basic FPS skills, i.e. reaction times and accuracy, but to be truly good takes map knowledge and weapon control. Can't really say much for CoD though, BlOps was the first CoD I played online. Regardless of that though I'd say those skills count for any FPS.

I still stand by my assumption (from personal experience) that the minimum skill level is much lower for CoD rather than say Battlefield, Quake, Counter-Strike, etc.

EDIT:

Call of Duty requires the least amount of skill out of all the multiplayer shooters I've played, and multiplayer shooters are all I play. There is, definitely, skill involved, but it is below minimal when compared to a game like Counter-Strike. In CoD, the winner is who ever shoots first, and whoever shoots first almost always does so because of luck (this stems from random spawn-points); in Counter-Strike/Battlefield/Team Fortress/Quake, however, the winner is whoever knows the game more.

+1

 

[AugustFall]

I would say any game where there is a definitive difference between how two people perform must have skill involved. I don't even understand how this is a question. Reaction time, strategic reloading and making the best class for your own personal style all factor into how consistently well you play.

I can't get 30/0 K/D I know people who can, I'm sure plenty of people on here will claim to be able to. These people have skill, people like me who sit at bottom of their team do not have skill.

 

[zehydra]

Definitely, that's why you have good players and bad players.

 

[Adam Galli]

All games take skill to play.

 

[Death on Trapezoids]

It's kind of been mentioned in the poll, but above all else CoD requires a goood connection. Sure twitch reflexes are nice, but the connection is the difference between that extra foot of lag between his knife and your back, those extra few projectiles connecting, etc.

 

[Kinguendo]

It should, but it doesnt.