The Call of Duty issue

[PissOffRoth]

Call of Duty has spawned way too many horrid FPS games in its wake, and the latest iteration in the series is just plain broken. So that's why I hate it and won't be buying the next one. You're no less of a gamer for liking them, and the single player was fun. The multiplayer is what most people judge the game by, however, and that's the part that most people have a problem with. So just specify that you're only in it for the campaign and you'll be fine.

 

[BarbaricGoose]

I hate it because it shows everyone they can get away with creating a generic modern FPS game, re-release it each year and make a trillion dollars out of it. It doesn't promote innovation or creativity. People love it even though every single game is the same with a half assed campaign tacked on. If they just ditched singleplayer and made an mmo like they should it wouldn't be such a big deal.

and no, I don't dislike it just because it's popular.

I think you do dislike it because it's popular, you just might not be aware of it. It's fun to be the underdog. It is fun to be the guy who likes the unpopular thing.. to some extent. Who are you to say it's "Generic"? Can you even define that word (intelligently) without looking at the dictionary? I honestly can't, but if you can can--you're awesome. I digress... getting back to my point, CoD has innovated. Each game features a new campaign. You are free to dislike the campaign, but it's entirely new, with new scripts, good guys, bad guys, scripted moments, and plot twists. I for one always enjoy the campaign in each CoD. They add new features to the multiplayer, too. New maps, guns, customizations, and recently they made it so you could change the way you earn killstreaks.

Ask yourself, if that's not innovation, what is? I cannot think of any sequel, to any game, that innovated more than that. A sequel adds new characters, new levels, new weapons (or puzzles or whatever the main gameplay attraction is,) sometimes new mechanics, and the sequels to CoD add all of those. Take a look at Final Fantasy XIII-2. (Or is it 14-2?) How different is that game from Final Fantasy XIII? Think about your favorite series, and ask yourself, how much did the sequels truly innovate?

CoD is a yearly franchise, like Madden, or whatever the soccer games are, or the baseball games, but it's a shooter. Maybe it's that people like to feel superior to other people. And it's easy to feel that way when you can just say, "Oh yeah, everyone who plays CoD is an idiot." You just made yourself feel superior to the 6 million + who enjoy CoD.

 

[Vanilla_Druid]

I have never been a big fan of the control schemes of first person shooters, and I am not very fond of the military. I also have an aversion to guns, so the games never have tickled my fancy. I am also not a fan of the elder scrolls games for they look just as brown as Call of Duty, and I can never adjust to the big red lips that just have to be on every female's face.

 

[Gatx]

Well, I for one despise CoD and the things it set in motion in the FPS genre. When I look at the most awarded games from my favorite genre it saddens me that terms like "fast-paced" are used to describe this incerdibly slow gameplay, this boring mechanics (full regen. hp, two weapon limits, the speed you move). I could go on and rant wide and bride about how I dislike this game.

But on the other hand, I won't judge someone just based on the games he played. Enjoying games I don't like doesn't make all the things you say suddenly bad, enjoying CoD (and not ONLY CoD) can't make your contribution to a discussion less worthy.

The problem is more that many people can't accept the fact that there are people who like Bay-esque spectacle. That there are people with different tastes.

You could easily say the same thing about Madden... but I guess it used to be something similar in that it was considered an insult to suggest that someone plays it, though to a much lesser extent than "Go back to your CoD" (or some variation thereof) is now.

 

[Rad Party God]

I still dust off the older entries of the series every now and then, especially Call of Duty 4, but I just don't like the direction the series went after Modern Warfare 2, especially regarding the PC version.

I don't judge anyone for their shitty tastes, I'm pretty used to that, some of my best friends don't even like videogames at all, and yet, they're some of my best friends I've ever had.

 

[Ninjat_126]

I don't think it's worthy of all of the praise, and the game's spawned a genre of brown, realistic shooters that has been far too dominant for far too long.

 

[Astoria]

It's probably got to the do with the stereotype. People hear that you like Call of Duty and they get the image of a 13 year old douchebage swearing his head of into his headset. Either that or it's people just being stupid and refusing to accept that people can enjoy games that they don't like.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Dude, as someone who's from the 80s you should know that there are much better games out there. I'm personally not nuts about the multiplayer but you only play the campaign? That's crazy and definitely not worth $60.

 

[Zeema]

Because thats what humans do, some like things some dont.

Call of Duty is just a game, in the big scheme of things its not like its crippling the games industry

 

[krellen]

What I don't like, however, is how they seem to influence every other type of game. All shooters seem to need competitive multiplayer, and other games that don't need them are getting action elements.

This is where I come at this from, with an additional bit:

I "hate" (too strong a word for my real feeling, but meh) Call of Duty - and its ilk, including Battlefield, Halo, Gears of War, and shooters in general - because its popularity creates a feeling amid the culture at large (mostly non-gamers, but several gamers buy into this as well) that this is what video games are - all that they are.

Well, that or World of Warcraft, anyway.

I'm often loathe to call myself a "gamer"* because the image that espouses in others' minds is of shooters or MMOs. But I don't play those games, and I hate that these games' popularity has dominated video gaming culture.

(*I don't really like the term "gamer" as used around here. I still consider "gaming" to refer to tabletop RPGs.)

 

[Aeonknight]

I liked CoD until MW3. I adored MW1, enjoyed MW2, hated Black Ops, and dislike MW3 for keeping all the bad aspects from MW2 and BlOps and combining the 2 into a cesspool of "ugh".

 

[Torrasque]

Yes, I do like those games, and they are good games! They're fun, they're exciting, and as shooters, they get the job done. I don't play the multiplayer, but I do enjoy the campaigns, and yes, I do buy them when they come out. And enjoy them.

See, that is your problem.
I play the campaign for about a day, play the spec ops and what not, then I play the multiplayer.
As someone that has about 3 weeks of game time across CoD4, MW2, Black Ops and MW3, I think that I can honestly say that the multiplayer fucking sucks. Not only are there serious flaws in the gameplay, there is this thing called <url=http://www.avforums.com/forums/call-duty-cod-ps3/1174038-sniperfrog-exe-please-read.html>sniperfrog.exe.

You can also tell that the games cater to the casual crowd and don't give a fuck about the people who play the game seriously.
If the gameplay issues were balanced and the built in game equalizer taken out, then I would enjoy CoD; I love MW2, but recently CoD has just been one disappointment after another.

CoD DOES have good campaigns (I fucking hate Black Ops, shittiest campaign I have ever played) but they focus on the multiplayer aspect. Most people talk/argue about the multiplayer as well. So when someone disregards your position because you defend CoD, they assume you are one of the millions of retards that plays CoD because their friends tell them to buy it and because "it's another CoD".

 

[Stormz]

I hate it because it shows everyone they can get away with creating a generic modern FPS game, re-release it each year and make a trillion dollars out of it. It doesn't promote innovation or creativity. People love it even though every single game is the same with a half assed campaign tacked on. If they just ditched singleplayer and made an mmo like they should it wouldn't be such a big deal.

and no, I don't dislike it just because it's popular.

I think you do dislike it because it's popular, you just might not be aware of it. It's fun to be the underdog. It is fun to be the guy who likes the unpopular thing.. to some extent. Who are you to say it's "Generic"? Can you even define that word (intelligently) without looking at the dictionary? I honestly can't, but if you can can--you're awesome. I digress... getting back to my point, CoD has innovated. Each game features a new campaign. You are free to dislike the campaign, but it's entirely new, with new scripts, good guys, bad guys, scripted moments, and plot twists. I for one always enjoy the campaign in each CoD. They add new features to the multiplayer, too. New maps, guns, customizations, and recently they made it so you could change the way you earn killstreaks.

Ask yourself, if that's not innovation, what is? I cannot think of any sequel, to any game, that innovated more than that. A sequel adds new characters, new levels, new weapons (or puzzles or whatever the main gameplay attraction is,) sometimes new mechanics, and the sequels to CoD add all of those. Take a look at Final Fantasy XIII-2. (Or is it 14-2?) How different is that game from Final Fantasy XIII? Think about your favorite series, and ask yourself, how much did the sequels truly innovate?

CoD is a yearly franchise, like Madden, or whatever the soccer games are, or the baseball games, but it's a shooter. Maybe it's that people like to feel superior to other people. And it's easy to feel that way when you can just say, "Oh yeah, everyone who plays CoD is an idiot." You just made yourself feel superior to the 6 million + who enjoy CoD.

If I disliked the games solely based on the fact that they are popular. I would also hate Gears of war and Halo, but I don't. I enjoy both (Gears of War I'm a big fan of)

It's what Call of Duty represents that makes me hate it. Like my post said. It gives the impression that anyone can make a 6 hour FPS. Put in multiplayer and call it a day. The games break records every time they get a new release despite them all playing exactly the same. Adding some new guns and maps doesn't make it new or innovative. It's the same with sports games, they'd be better off just releasing them as DLC instead of making people pay for a 60$ game. I could possibly forgive them if they at least had some good stories in there, but they lack that as well. I'm tired of playing as amazing buff Americans going in and saving the world from the evil Russians/Germans/Koreans or whatever country is evil in the game. Give us something interesting for a change.

I'm surprised people haven't gotten tired of the games yet. I wonder when they will, maybe in 20 years when Call of Duty 200 is released.

What I don't like, however, is how they seem to influence every other type of game. All shooters seem to need competitive multiplayer, and other games that don't need them are getting action elements.

This is where I come at this from, with an additional bit:

I "hate" (too strong a word for my real feeling, but meh) Call of Duty - and its ilk, including Battlefield, Halo, Gears of War, and shooters in general - because its popularity creates a feeling amid the culture at large (mostly non-gamers, but several gamers buy into this as well) that this is what video games are - all that they are.

Well, that or World of Warcraft, anyway.

I'm often loathe to call myself a "gamer"* because the image that espouses in others' minds is of shooters or MMOs. But I don't play those games, and I hate that these games' popularity has dominated video gaming culture.

(*I don't really like the term "gamer" as used around here. I still consider "gaming" to refer to tabletop RPGs.)

This is also a great point.

 

[Spectrre]

I hate it because it shows everyone they can get away with creating a generic modern FPS game, re-release it each year and make a trillion dollars out of it. It doesn't promote innovation or creativity. People love it even though every single game is the same with a half assed campaign tacked on. If they just ditched singleplayer and made an mmo like they should it wouldn't be such a big deal.

and no, I don't dislike it just because it's popular.

Pretty much this. I started playing COD when the first one came out for PC. I loved it. The second one (still one of my favorite shooters of all time) was even better. After that I had a little break from COD sort of. Not purposely, it just kinda happened. I got back to the series with Modern Warfare 2 (I did play COD 4 but not extensively) and I loved it. It was fun, fast, action packed. I played it all the time with my friends and had a lot of fun doing so. And to this day I enjoy playing it, be it a lot less often.

I don't even care that people hate the game or the mistakes it made. And I am in no way denying the many many flaws the game has. But it just works for me. As long as I have friends to play it with I will. But Black Ops proved detrimental to the way I think of COD. It was the last one I bought and I was terribly disappointed.

It started to look more and more like they're just out for the money and nothing else (shocking, I know.) as even MW2 proved. The games are "shat" out every year to make insane amounts of money, not to give people a great game to play. They make no (or retarded) attempts to provide post-launch service, they don't put any effort into re-inventing themselves.

All these things turned me off the COD series because I no longer want to support the company that makes it. Robert Bowling (Or Trolling >.>) is a prime example of how they are just pulling a veil over people's eyes. Also the whole "making the game accessible for everyone" resulted in the COD community being 1)A lot younger than they should legally be and 2)Filled with people who eagerly exploit the fact that you don't have to be skilled to play this game.

Wall-o-text *glares over post* Oh well.

 

[dobahci]

Because people think that it's causing a lack of innovation in gaming, a guess those people conveniently forget about Skyrim, Arkham City, Human Revolution, Space Marine and Mass Effect 3. I guess the majority of gamers are insecure.

That's exactly what it is doing, though. People praised Human Revolution, but if you compare it with the first Deus Ex...

See, the reason why people get pissed about Call of Duty, or at least the reason why I get pissed about Call of Duty, isn't just because I'm a hipster who hates everything that is mainstream, or because I'm some kind of misanthrope who despises the idea that people should be allowed to have fun. It's mostly the same reason why the average person gets a little pissed when they hear some celebrity bought a mansion for $13 million, or bought a Ferrari for their 16-year-old stepdaughter after they crashed their previous Ferrari into a lamppost. It's because you know the money could be (and should be) spent on so many better things.

So when you see millions that are spent developing and producing games like Call of Duty, and there's basically a new one every year (if you can call it new, when it's really basically just the same game with a different outfit), and tens of millions of people just lap it right up, then it communicates to the company that they're doing something right and they should just keep right on doing it. And so you see brilliant games getting relegated to the "indie games" market where they'll never be able to secure even a fraction of the budget of some big mainstream game's ad campaign, all because they're actually trying to do something new and original. All of the games you named are sequels or part of an existing series, which... honestly, what does that say about the mainstream game industry when the vast majority of their new products are sequels?

There's another element to it too. If you're a game fan, then most likely not only do you care about playing games that are fun, but you also care about the way games are perceived by the world at large, and the way that games are portrayed by the media. If you're a games fan you probably would like to see games actually respected as an art form sooner or later, on par with film and music, rather than simply being thought of as an interactive form of transformer and GI Joe toys. And if you're a games fan, you probably get upset when Fox News airs yet another story about how video games made some kid kill his neighbor's dog, or something like that, because you know what a bunch of rubbish it is. So, with all those things in mind, if you're a games fan, it's going to make you a little bit upset to know that the games industry continues to reinforce all of the negative stereotypes about the industry and about games as a medium by producing the same shitty shallow mindless racist war games year after year after year.

So basically what it comes down to is that, yeah, Call of Duty games aren't the worst games in the world. You could do far worse. But you know why they're so hated? It's because we deserve better.

 

[LittleJoeRambler]

I though MW3's multiplayer wasn't as good as MW2, so I haven't sunk near as much time into it, nor do I plan to.

One thing that really bothers me though: people say that Modern Warfare 3 didn't innovate, it just changed a few things and re-released a "expansion pack" at full price. I must ask this:

In what way(s) did people expect MW3 to innovate?

-You couldn't add a fun an exciting movement mechanic like jetpacks or rocket boots or something because it is supposed to be "near future" warfare, and stuff like that isn't anywhere near mainstream enough to fit within MW3's mythos. They would feel out of place.

-The guns are, well, guns. They're not very different from each other; they all shoot hot lead at high speed, and a couple have projectiles that go boom instead. Laser guns, shuriken-and-lightning guns, Jimi-Hendrix-experience guns just don't fit. They wouldn't make sense, and they'd feel tacked on and stupid.

-Map design has to take the movement into consideration. Everything has to be navigable; ledges can't be more than a few feet high, slopes or ladders are necessary to connect high ground to low, etc. After having so many maps throughout all its games, it's no wonder that they start to feel reused.

-Health regeneration has been there since the very beginning; yeah, it's annoying that people can just sit behind cover and heal back up, necessitating that you shoot them again, but consider this: there are a few ways to implement things like health packs. You could A) have them spawn at certain locations on the map, B) have them spawn randomly, or C) have them as a deployable thing like the Battlefield series does with medpacks. Option A means people will just camp a medpack location, gaining instant health upon taking damage and punishing players who move to places without nearby medpacks. Option B adds an element of pure luck to encounters: you start shooting someone, a medpack spawns near them, they heal up and kill you. Option C is just a roundabout way of implementing regenerating health; instead of healing automatically, the player has press a few buttons to make their health return. No real difference to gameplay.

Bottom line, I wasn't expecting anything other than what I got from the experience. But instead of bitching at high volume everywhere I go, I'm going to vote with my wallet and not buy Black Ops 2. Activision will listen much harder to its whining, empty-pocketed stockholders than they would ever listen to me.

 

[Shadowhawk77]

So can someone explain to me why the minute I say I like Call of Duty, a vast portion of the community acts as if I'm somehow a pariah? How I should turn in my gaming club membership card?

Yes, I do like those games, and they are good games! They're fun, they're exciting, and as shooters, they get the job done. I don't play the multiplayer, but I do enjoy the campaigns, and yes, I do buy them when they come out. And enjoy them.

So I am asking, out of genuine curiosity, why this immensely negative outlook on Call of Duty and the people who play those games.

There's your problem right there. When you say you like CoD you are basically calling a hitman on yourself because most people like that game(that have played it) and that ends up being in the millions. It gets annoying to some people that CoD fans keep making it seem so awesome when they see nothing in it so they get angry at the constant fanboy abuse. Hope that helps you not step on another landmine of a topic