Poll: Call of Duty?

[TheAceTheOne]

Hey, haven't I seen you somewhere before, The Heik?

Possibly. I've been active here for a few years, and my escapist name is the same as my Gamertag on XBL. You'll forgive me if I don't remember you myself, but I'm absolutely terrible with names (heck I'd probably forget my own if it wasn't on my Driver's License ;P)

I meant I added you on here, haha. Hey, just message me in response, but how's that game you were working on for college or whatever coming along?

 

[RA92]

Well, I liked CoD4, but I never felt inclined to play the later installments. The series needs to evolve if it wants my attention.

And so far, it's done pretty well for itself without my attention.

 

[Riobux]

I'm incredibly neutral on it. The developer and publisher come across as greedy, the story isn't impressive and the multi-player usually comes across like every other FPS known to man: A lot of people play it excessively to the point where new players or amateur players are left bored, waiting for the next respawn. The only thing that really stands out is the general fan-base are a collection of some of the worst players in terms of being "human beings". If you want to find the type of people who would kick a child in the face for extra money, Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 2's multi-player is where you're finding him.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

It's good, yeh.

I think the helicoptor and harrier killstreak prizes are a wee bit overpowered, but apart from that...fun with friends.

 

[Saulkar]

My one and only gripe with the game is EVERY OTHER FUCKING GAME TRIES TO EMULATE IT! Yes, emulate it. Developers want to preserve the game that ther fans know and love and modify the damn mechanics to match COD to draw in the crowd but all they end up doing is pissing off their established fan base.

 

[zombiejoe]

I'm not a huge fan, but I can have fun with it.

 

[Hamhandderhard]

I've been playing Call of duty since 2003 when I got my mind blown at the prospect of a World War 2 FPS that brought something different and new to the table (Playing with a squad, playing as the British and Russians etc.) Unitied Offensive was even more awesome. It was a mix of Battlefield 1942 and Call of Duty.

They're good games except the MW single player campaigns have gotten ridiculous in a story sense (Feels like a Bay movie And yeah all the multiplayer's of the post 4 era are nothing but copies of 4.

 

[NinjaTigerXIII]

Yeah I like CoD, but after the same game three times in a row I can't purchase it again, just can't do it.

 

[Gaiseric]

I liked CoD4 and that's it. Lost interest in the story after I finished it.

Tried some of the earlier ones before I played 4 and didn't like them.

 

[DustyDrB]

Nope. I think the first and second games were the only ones I played, but it could have been a different franchise altogether. A buddy of mine in high school always had a whole bunch of those war FPS games for his PS2. We went through one of them in co-op. That was actually pretty fun. I'm not really into the whole FPS genre, though. It's the perspective that bugs me.

 

[NewYork_Comedian]

The first game was the first real game I ever played, so the series has a special place in my heart. I loved all of the games up to World at War, and thought Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops were okay.

If i had to pick a favorite out of the series, it would be a tie between MW1 and Call of Duty 2. I thought that both were the most exciting and heart pounding of the games in the series, and they both had their moments.

My favorite missions however comes from United Offense were you are part of a B-17 flying Fortress crew and have to defend the bomber from incoming fighters until you reach your target, and it was very exciting because this was still in the days where it was a health bar instead of Regenerating health, so individual pieces of the plane would take damage and were impossible to re-heal which added to the intensity.

 

[Feralbreed]

Treyarch games are pretty much low grade shit.

I'm sorry, as long as Treyarch still come up with original ideas, unlike IW who blatantly steal the work of a modder, they're still on top.

If Treyarch wouldn't be working under the CoD banner, and wouldn't be forced to push a title out every 2 years, they'd easily make better games.

Also, let's look at MW3's horde mode or MW2's multiplayer. When IW have to copy DICE and Treyarch, coming up with a mixture of Onslaught and Zombies, and when for MW2's multiplayer you have to steal the work of a modder, you know the creative behidn your game is ZILCH.

Should Treyarch have had some time, good technology, and should they have been free from Kotick, Black Ops would've been a shooter of it's own kind.

Unfortunately most CoD fans aren't aware of this.

CoD4 revolutionized the FPS genre, MW2 sharpened the experience even more by adding better killstreaks and migration.

In what manner did CoD4 revolutionize anything? The pretty standard linear CoD story I got in CoD/CoD:UO, a modern setting already used, but rarely acknolwedged mostly because, as I have already said, CoD players are barely older, or in many cases a lot younger, than the game engine that powers their game, and have little or no knowledge of gaming pre-CoD because that's where they started. Much like the My First FP...I mean Halo kids where with their "Halo is the first FPS evaaaar" comments.

The better killstreaks are actually from a mod for CoD4. But I doubt most of you CoD guys even know what a mod is, since you're mostly console players.

Migration...well, I can't argue with that, but only on the Xbox 360. PS3 and PC are neglected SOBs.

And yes, I finally logged in, I'm the guy that made the huge post earlier (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.296134-Poll-Call-of-Duty?page=2#11699204)

"revolutionized" -meaning that in CoD4 the "sprint" button was introduced, even Halo didn't have sprint. This doesn't seem like such of a big deal until you start thinking about the mechanic.

It creates a certain pacing to the multiplayer because if you sprint, you wont have your gun ready to fire. And of course the tactical advantage of advancing from cover to cover quickly.

And as far as I'm concerned EVERY modern FPS uses this mechanic or at least tries to copy it. Just look how even the Mighty Halo is Call of duty's ***** right now. Reach seems more like a CoD-game with out dated Halo elements in it.


And besides, don't be so quick to judge me just because I like to play Call of Duty on my xbox. I play games such as Portal and Team fortress 2 on my PC aswell and I am well aware what modding is.

Oh, and Treyarch games are still low grade shit. At least right now they are, whatever your reasons for it may be, they still do the B- class Call of duty games. And no, even the broken zombiemod isn't fun, even if you add Robert Englund in it.

 

[DanWydola]

it took cod a while before i thought it was good, mostly was how the first 3 games were the same story. but ever since modern warfare 1 and 2 and black ops ive come to enjoy it as a game.

 

[reddfawks]

I don't like it...Why? I was raised on games that took 20-40+ hours to complete on the story mode, and COD's piddly 4-5 hour campaign isn't satisfying to me.

And online? I just didn't find it fun with the myriad of campers and pre-pubescent eardrum-shatterers. If I want to play a multiplayer game, I invite some friends over, order a pizza, and we play Mario Kart or Scott Pilgrim.

 

[yretsyMredruM]

I never liked the Call of Duty series, with the exception of Call of Duty 2. I found the series to be quite boring. However, I never understood the hate for the series. For everyone who liked the game, there was someone who equally disliked it. It seems more people hate the series because of its hype rather than the gameplay itself. It is annoying to see an entire wall dedicated to Call of Duty at my local game store, but it makes them their money.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

It's okay, but if I never played another COD game again I'm okay with that.

Black-ops was okay, but MW 1 and 2 were ridiculous to me and I ended up selling them off.