It has this obnoxious, almost Michael Bay like fetish for American military hardware, to me the games now seem more an attempt to one up the previous installment by cramming ever more military phrases into it than a focus on the soldiers fighting the conflict, the last installment I truly enjoyed playing was Call of Duty 2.
The Call of Duty hate.
- Thread starter omega_peaches
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Most of the hate comes from being too mainstream. I know it sounds weird, but the most successful a game is, the more people will go "ohh, its just awful". Something about not liking that other people likes the same they do, because that makes them less special.
Personally, I don't hate COD, but I am a little fatigued of the franchise. I like to play the campaign in FPS (I am not so much into competitive multiplayer), and while the quality of it is always pretty good, they have grown shorter and shorter every year. I don't want to pay $100 or more (games are more expensive where I live) for something I can complete in a couple of days and that has so little replay value.
Personally, I don't hate COD, but I am a little fatigued of the franchise. I like to play the campaign in FPS (I am not so much into competitive multiplayer), and while the quality of it is always pretty good, they have grown shorter and shorter every year. I don't want to pay $100 or more (games are more expensive where I live) for something I can complete in a couple of days and that has so little replay value.
Gunmetal grey and dystopian brown. That's all I have to say.
I just want to play games with color, some variety of music and just plain fun. Psyhonauts, TF2 (before F2P, too many 13 year old's now)and old Nintendo games were much like this. Heck, even Mass Effect has a wider palate of color than most "Modern" shooters!
I just want to play games with color, some variety of music and just plain fun. Psyhonauts, TF2 (before F2P, too many 13 year old's now)and old Nintendo games were much like this. Heck, even Mass Effect has a wider palate of color than most "Modern" shooters!
I've played it the Spawning spots are horrible and camped. The stadium map you spawn right next to the enemys flag.
Spawn and die,spawn and die
Hellie over the spawn point
spawn and die spawn and die.
No rewards for teamwork so every just goes to their favorite camping spot
Not fun, other games like bc2 have spawn camps where the enemy can't go.
I just rather play other better games.
Spawn and die,spawn and die
Hellie over the spawn point
spawn and die spawn and die.
No rewards for teamwork so every just goes to their favorite camping spot
Not fun, other games like bc2 have spawn camps where the enemy can't go.
I just rather play other better games.
Counter strike isnt as tactical as chess, half of your chance of winning is trying to get headshots with the awp, there is only really much tactics in proffesional gaming.CarlMinez said:Because the multiplayer is not very tactical compared the "classic" shooters:
The multiplayer/PvP concept as a whole ruined gaming. Initially it was cool to join with your friends and not have to worry about bringing consoles, controllers, computer towers, keyboards, etc... But now? No, it's been abused. Multiplayer is no longer about having fun, it's about finding every cheap, pathetic, petty exploit possible and abusing it to break the game so you look good on a leader-board. That kind of attitude has lead to this slow build-up of hatred that society has with gamers, and it overflows whenever a kid stabs his friend for allegedly cheating at counter-strike, a game they're not even old enough to play.
Who does multiplayer cater to? The bullies. The same people that pushed nerds around ALL the time in high school, who feel they had something to prove and spend their whole time picking on the smarter people. Now they play games, and they think the only "cool" ones are Halo, CoD, Madden, and other half-baked ego based piles of pixels. Even Randy Pitchford stood up and said "All the cool gamers will be playing Duke Nukem" and we took it lying down. Multiplayer should never have become a big deal amongst real gamers, because REAL gamers enjoy just playing, not bitching at each other for using that one weapon we've all come to hate.
No, multiplayer invited the type of people gamers didn't want, but now we're merged into one big entity and paying the price for it every day by being blamed for the world's woes. Gamers should have focused on co-op, making sure THAT became the focus of an online-based game, but we didn't. We felt a sense of power over new players and we became the very thing that pushed us around. We became the monster that is the bully, and every time you quickscope or bunnyhop some new player, calling him a noob, or telling him to uninstall, you're no different than the big kid that stole your lunch in high school. Now gamers play thinking they have something to prove, flaunting their "skill" like it matters at the end of the day, and thinking anyone that doesn't play like them, or do what's "cool" is some nerd/noob to be picked on. To try and break that stigma or atrocity labels you a "carebear" which is just another word for the old "wuss"
The problem was never multiplayer, but those who allowed it to become immensely popular.
Who does multiplayer cater to? The bullies. The same people that pushed nerds around ALL the time in high school, who feel they had something to prove and spend their whole time picking on the smarter people. Now they play games, and they think the only "cool" ones are Halo, CoD, Madden, and other half-baked ego based piles of pixels. Even Randy Pitchford stood up and said "All the cool gamers will be playing Duke Nukem" and we took it lying down. Multiplayer should never have become a big deal amongst real gamers, because REAL gamers enjoy just playing, not bitching at each other for using that one weapon we've all come to hate.
No, multiplayer invited the type of people gamers didn't want, but now we're merged into one big entity and paying the price for it every day by being blamed for the world's woes. Gamers should have focused on co-op, making sure THAT became the focus of an online-based game, but we didn't. We felt a sense of power over new players and we became the very thing that pushed us around. We became the monster that is the bully, and every time you quickscope or bunnyhop some new player, calling him a noob, or telling him to uninstall, you're no different than the big kid that stole your lunch in high school. Now gamers play thinking they have something to prove, flaunting their "skill" like it matters at the end of the day, and thinking anyone that doesn't play like them, or do what's "cool" is some nerd/noob to be picked on. To try and break that stigma or atrocity labels you a "carebear" which is just another word for the old "wuss"
The problem was never multiplayer, but those who allowed it to become immensely popular.
You know what? I don't hate Call Of Duty anymore.
What I hate is a new thread every week telling me that I that I hate Call Of Duty
Oh and:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.304059-Poll-Poll-Does-Call-of-Duty-deserve-all-the-love-it-gets
Thats^ absolutely everything I have to say about CoD.
What I hate is a new thread every week telling me that I that I hate Call Of Duty
Oh and:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.304059-Poll-Poll-Does-Call-of-Duty-deserve-all-the-love-it-gets
Thats^ absolutely everything I have to say about CoD.
Reasons why I don't like Call of Duty:
- Kill streaks; I really don't get the whole idea of rewarding a player that is already doing well, to do better, with less effort.
- Perks; Second chance and the likes, does this really need to be expanded on how bad and unbalancing these ideas are?
- Community; You can't defend it, CoD has become rampid with smart mouth whiney pre-teens and you hear more of "WHAT THE FUCK? UGHHHH!" over mics than anything else said per game.
- Lacks depth; Every game mode is essentially Team Deathmatch. It may not look like it on paper, but that's what the community makes it. The rewards you recieve for getting a good kill streak far out-weigh the rewards you recieve for completing objectives.
- Doesn't encourage teamwork; Going around in a squad would be benefitial, but they'd just steal your kills right? And that's not fair to you.
- Scope of the campaigns have changed; Remember CoD1-3 and WAW? Remember the iconic tagline "Victory was not achieved... By one man." from the first game? It raised an emphasis on being apart of something bigger. You were just a soldier, amongst hundreds/thousands of soldiers in a climatic engorging scene of war.
Where are we now? Oh we're special agents jumping chasims on snowmobiles, rapelling through windows and snapping dudes necks. Assassinating Fidel Castro... What are we doing? We've become what we all laughed at Medal of honor for.
Call of Duty. What does that mean to you? To me, it's meaning to go fight for your country, being patriotic... Apart from WAW, What the hell has CoD4, MW2, BO, and MW3 been about? Cause it certainly hasn't been about the Call of Duty
- Kill streaks; I really don't get the whole idea of rewarding a player that is already doing well, to do better, with less effort.
- Perks; Second chance and the likes, does this really need to be expanded on how bad and unbalancing these ideas are?
- Community; You can't defend it, CoD has become rampid with smart mouth whiney pre-teens and you hear more of "WHAT THE FUCK? UGHHHH!" over mics than anything else said per game.
- Lacks depth; Every game mode is essentially Team Deathmatch. It may not look like it on paper, but that's what the community makes it. The rewards you recieve for getting a good kill streak far out-weigh the rewards you recieve for completing objectives.
- Doesn't encourage teamwork; Going around in a squad would be benefitial, but they'd just steal your kills right? And that's not fair to you.
- Scope of the campaigns have changed; Remember CoD1-3 and WAW? Remember the iconic tagline "Victory was not achieved... By one man." from the first game? It raised an emphasis on being apart of something bigger. You were just a soldier, amongst hundreds/thousands of soldiers in a climatic engorging scene of war.
Where are we now? Oh we're special agents jumping chasims on snowmobiles, rapelling through windows and snapping dudes necks. Assassinating Fidel Castro... What are we doing? We've become what we all laughed at Medal of honor for.
Call of Duty. What does that mean to you? To me, it's meaning to go fight for your country, being patriotic... Apart from WAW, What the hell has CoD4, MW2, BO, and MW3 been about? Cause it certainly hasn't been about the Call of Duty
Why would you need headshots with the AWP? Have you even played the game?ToastiestZombie said:Counter strike isnt as tactical as chess, half of your chance of winning is trying to get headshots with the awp, there is only really much tactics in proffesional gaming.CarlMinez said:Because the multiplayer is not very tactical compared the "classic" shooters:
Nonetheless, Counter Strike is widely considered to be the most tactical FPS game there is. It's an e-sport classic of that very reason.
Alright. I may have been a little harsh in my wording. I'll be nice and dig out my laundry list of problems with CoD and address each of your own reasonings as the why people hate even though they read like a child puzzling over an ant's reason for existing. You even admit you disagree with it being the same game every year, which begs the question why you brought it up if you're just going to disregard it anyway?omega_peaches said:
Let's begin, if only because I have nothing better to do today.
"... it seems that a lot of the hate is because it ushered in a new era of shooters..."
Okay.
"But, how is this Call of Duty's fault?"
You know, I have no honest idea. Why should something be responsible for something it did? It just baffles me...
Sarcasm aside, I see what you're getting at. Sure, it started a trend, but why should it be disliked because everyone else jumped on the bandwagon? Well, you'd be right, but unfortunately it's CoD itself that keeps jumping on it's own bandwagon. MW3 will mark the fourth game in the CoD franchise alone that takes place in the modern era. And MW1 came out in 2007.
Come to think of it, CoD wasn't even the first game to get the modern shooter ball rolling. Battlefield 2 came out in 2005. But as I said, it's not so much that it "ushered in a new era of shooters", because it didn't, it's more truthful to say that it's its OWN era of shooters. Four games in four years with the same general setting and the exact same gameplay? Yes, I know I'm counting Black Ops perhaps unfairly, but visually it looks no different than MW1 or 2 and many of the guns in Black Ops are present in MW1 and 2.
"I see where most of the other hate comes from, that it's the same game every year"
They've been reusing the same engine since CoD2. They have many of the same weapons, perks, and whatnot. The gameplay is EXACTLY the same. The controls are the same... yeah, I don't see how anyone can miss the fact, not opinion mind you, FACT, that these are the same games every year. Each one feels more like an over priced expansion pack than the last. Now true, this is based solely on the multiplayer aspect of these games. But the single player campaigns are so worthless, I have no idea why they bother putting them in the games year after year. I never want to meet the person who plays CoD for the single player.
Now, you can argue that the maps are different or that this gun is different or these perks aren't the same, but that's only because they're tweaking the game ever so slightly each time try to make it better. For example, going into MW2 they went, well, people really seem to like those kill streaks. Let's add in a whole lot more and even have one that wins you the game completely nullifying the purpose of the objective in the game modes where the object isn't to kill everyone. Now with MW3 they went, well, people didn't like how easy it was to play every game type like it was TDM, let's make it based on some sort point system this time and take out some of those more annoying perks.
So, no, they're not "exactly" the same game year after year, but honestly, Madden makes more changes each year. And no, I'm not talking about the roster. One year they gave you the option to control you're lead blocker with the right thumb stick. Another time they gave the QBs a moveable vision cone that dictated the accuracy of their throwing. Each of those changes, taken separately, changed Madden's gameplay way more significantly than anything they've done in the recent Call of Duty games.
"that apparently it's about how America is FUCK YEAH"
This is a sad staple of modern setting FPSes. Granted, it would make just as much sense if Russian developers made games where they fight off the oppressive, capitalist dogs of American, but we're the only ones doing it and it's already gotten old.
Mind you, CoD seems like it's taking steps in the right direction most of the time each year, but they've barely moved from where they started. This is a far cry from, say, bungie, who went, well that Halo game sure has come a long way considering it started out as an RTS. But I think we can do it way better. Then they left it alone and made Halo 2, a game that had way more differences in how it played and felt. A game that wasn't just a carbon copy of it's predecessor with tiny bits changes here and there to give the illusion that's it's different and forgive my fan boy-ism here but Halo 2 had the best multiplayer of any console FPS I've played in recent years and is proof of what CoD developers could accomplish if they tried.
So to summarize, it's ugly and if you've played one, you've played them all. I've had my fill of it so now I'm going to go sit at the Battlefield table where they'll let me fly a jet around.
I like Modern Warfare 2 and Halo games more then Battlefield, but one cannot argue simple logic. The console versions of battlefield will have dedicated servers, so it's simply a better online experience. That's what it comes down to at the end of the day. There really isn't anything to argue about, it is a fact that battlefield is better.
Really? anthor one of these. anyway yeah i don't play COD, as i'm more of a TF2 kind of guy (I.e VALVE FANBOY!) But i don't hate it. it just gets a bit tiring around that time of year when every second conversation with people who game is about cod.
I don't hate C.O.D. - mostly because I only play the single player - and I think it's fun. However it's not a good game, it's an above average shooter (a 7 out of 10 with MW 1 getting an 8) and if you like it you like it, if you don't you don't.
The thing I hate the most about it is the decisive nature it creates in everyone.
The thing I hate the most about it is the decisive nature it creates in everyone.
I don't hate it, but I am awfully bored of it, and annoyed that each subsequent title adds hardly anything, or in some cases actually takes away features. It's a shame as Call of Duty used to be a kick ass single-player game with great multiplayer too. Now the single-player is way too over the top that its just silly, and the online community is just too horrid to play for any length of time.
Because they suck at it, or they think it's the cool thing to do. Seriously. I guarantee you a huge amount of the Call of Duty haters hate it because of those two reasons, not even trolling. Actually some may dislike it because it hasn't brought much new since Modern Warfare, but who cares, have any of the Final Fantasy, Legend of Zelda, or the Super Mario sequels really come up with anything ground-breaking? Expecting something to change video game history from Call of Duty is like expecting some death metal band's next release to be the new Dark Side of the Moon.omega_peaches said:
Also, if it's a fact that Battlefield is better than Call of Duty, it's a fact my opinion is superior to your's, and my opinion is that your opinion sucks.
trololo