This "cod hate" is getting out of hand.

[Vibhor]

Hitman is a diffirent game and you cant generalize 18 million people because most you played were douchebags, i mean, you dont even scratch the surface.

Whats different about hitman?
You can go in first person and kill everyone. I mean there are huge similarities.
I find your sentence hard to believe because YOU were the one that compared Stalker, prince of persia and dead space 2 to Call of duty.

 

[Dramerc]

I'm gonna stop you right there.

This is the new stupidest reason to hate Call of Duty.[quote="teebeeohh"


no my reason was a damn good one I spent 2 years at army cadets and i get threatened by COD nutters i just left high school and there i got bullied by COD fans for not playing COD so my reason to hate is good i got a Xbox 360 so i could play RDR i got attacked for that too every day they demanded me to get COD! so my reason to hate is well founded

 

[noble cookie]

The CoD games and the map packs for them are overpriced because the money hungry devs know that people will buy them regardless of how crap they are.

People hate Call of Duty because it doesn't deserve the amount of popularity that it has, because it overprices everything, the games are filled with bugs, and the campaigns suck.

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

long post

Point 1: AC Brotherhood's improvement was the addition of a multiplayer feature. As for uncharted I can't really say much about it because I have not played it.

Point 2: Yes these games are fun now but unfortunately it won't last MW3 is going to be the 8th core game in the series. Their is only so much of a game you can improve before you can't improve any more or break the formula that makes the game great.

Point 3: I don't blame the game for it's current state I blame the fans. People are often too quick to complain about the slightest thing and the devs can't fix everything for everyone.

Point 4: Check out this group for we seek to promote good sportsmanship between gamers and could use new members http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Generation-Game-GG

And finally Point 5: Was that a reach pun in your last paragraph

1)To be honest i thought the mp in AssBro (cool name eh?) dead space 2 and uncharted 2 have to be the most pointless feature you can use on a singleplayer based game, but i realize i am biased since its actually much bigger feature than what cod has added but as one of my friends said "Its easy to impress by adding something that in other games is there to begin with or fixing and obvious flaw, but if the template is ok, there is not much to add/fix now is there?"

2)I am hoping that since its mw3 and mw2 was bigger than black ops, that we wil see something since its too early to tell, but yeah, i dont think they will change much just like my other favorite franchise uncharted.

3)People compained about cod4 not being accessable enough, they made waw more accesable, then they complained about not being fun, they added killstreaks, then they complained about being unbalanced, they balanced black ops, like the guy from bioware said "no matter what we choose to do, someone will get pissed anyway"

4)thanks

I can't agree more with your point 3. I mean you can't please everyone and I do agree about how balanced Black Ops is. But even hardcore CoD fans are starting to get bored of getting the same old thing. Year after year with a slight tweak. And the year after year thing is the important bit. That is why people are getting annoyed and bored with the whole CoD scene, compare it to Halo, both games are hated because of their popularity but the Halo games are spaced out and seem less rushed.

But I personally think that COD has had it's day (just my opinion) Just think about it, will AssCreed be the same come it's 8th edition. I doubt it, games need to evolve like everything else.

I mean CoD doesn't really need it's CoD title now it's just a plug to sell more because, well people hate change.

 

[Griffolion]

its one of the most sucessfull franchises thus a very good geame. I guess its the same as halo back then when it was bashed.

I love the smell of ad hominem in the morning. It is actually morning here too.

OT: I don't hate CoD, I just think it's an overly popular, highly overrated game who's only success rides off it's record breaking sales. Said sales speak about the type of people buying the game as much as the game itself. Other than that, CoD hasn't been good since the original Modern Warfare, everything else has been a simple re-hash of the same old things with different names, faces and times slapped on. No hate in there, just opinion, albeit negative. That said, my main problem is with the players as much as it is with the actual game.

I've played CoD, both single player and multi player, it get's very stale, very soon. There's no real tactics or logic in there, it's simply who can ADS before who. I prefer slower, more strategic shooters like the Battlefield franchise, because it suits me better. The Battlefield single player 'attempts' at story lines are terrible, but it's all about the multi player with BF anyway.

So yeah, no hate with me, but I dislike the CoD franchise as it doesn't suit me as a shooter.

Another thing will be is that they say there are too many cod games and it has gone stale over the year wih no changes whhile praising bf3 which comes from a franchise who is doing the same formula for farrr longer with very few additions. Eg: BF3 is basicly bf2 with better grpaphics and destruction(since they bringing back the airplanes)

Apart from:

The fact that BF3 includes a game engine so sophisticated that it's incomplete due to current high end hardware not even being able to support it.

By destruction you mean not pre-animated sequences and set pieces but actual real-time physics driven destruction that is different every time it happens.

The fact that weapons and load-out are massively customisable compared to BF2 and even BC2.

A new approach to squad based play.

A greater amount of game types to suit all kinds of player.

By better graphics you mean as good graphics an FPS has ever been.

The fact that vehicles, including jets, actually exist.


I could go on but my wrist is hurting. Like I said before, Battlefield tickles my fancy orders of magnitude over Call of Duty. That's just me.

Cant say that the things you pointed out are making a a point. You say cod doesnt suit you as a shooter, i could say bf doesnt because of the vehicles and the team based gameplay. Also glad they adding TDM to pull cod players in the game. The weapon customization is nowhere near as big as black ops, just because you can put all the attachments does not mean its, big, black ops had camos and even reticles for the sights.

As for the engine? Only on pc, dont deny it, you said that "includes a game engine so sophisticated that it's incomplete due to current high end hardware not even being able to support it. "

Imagine how it would be on consoles? half those things wont even be available.

Yeah and the fact that CoD suits you more than BF3 bears no problem with me, it's what's known as opinion and preference. But comparing CoD game to CoD game, it's rehashed because it's a successful business model that demands little deviation or innovation because Activision don't want to stray away from a winning formula. Comparing BF2 to BF3; sure the core mechanics that make Battlefield what it is are re-done, but everything about that mechanic is changed, upgraded with new aspects added in too.

I was never comparing BF3 to Black Ops, I was comparing it back to BF2 and BC2 as per my response to your quote. I couldn't care less for a 'camo' on a gun nor a reticle on a sight as I'm usually focused on the person I'm trying to shoot, not some vanity item.

And what about the engine and PC? I'm not getting what you're alluding to here. Yeah, the PC is high end hardware compared to consoles today. I was getting at the fact that Frostbite is incomplete because even high end PC hardware can't support everything DICE want's Frostbite to do. It's nothing bad, it's actually good that they're developing something so ahead that it will push future systems. Eventually, tech will catch up. And that will be when DICE release a true successor to BF3.

 

[Still Life]

-Snip-

You need to find some better examples. I see what you're trying to argue, but Doom came from a studio which had a fraction of the budget seen in AAA titles today, and was developed in era where the FPS genre was experimental. Doom was also developed in an era where the industry was in its infancy. Not a great comparison at all. There was nothing to derivatively rehash, as id pretty much invented FPS.

Much of the same can be said of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series. The devs behind it are small time, based in Ukraine, who have more or less handcrafted their own tech from scratch, creating a game which breaks new and innovative ground for the genre. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. was flawed, however it was almost universally hailed as an important game for shooters and opened up new ways of approaching FPS. GSC did a lot of experimenting with the core game design with CS and CoP and have said that the lessons learned will translate into the numbered sequel. That's not rehashing.

Your core argument has merit, if I've read into it correctly. However, you need to find better examples/evidence to make your case.

 

[nuba km]

by by 'fixing' my post so stupidly

I don't think it's terrible. I had to play off what your wrote you see. Objectively speaking TF2's multiplayer is pretty rad. It does nothing for me though, that's my issue with it. But I can see how other people could dig it.

But also, as long as we're speaking objectively CoD4's multiplayer is just better. Not by much mind you but it's better. It flows infinitely more smoothly than TF2 and the satisfaction from making a kill and seeing that little +10 pop up smokes anything TF2 has to offer. Smokes it I say. And I'm just being a fanboy here, honestly CoD4 is the only CoD game I like, and its fans are the worst type of scum you'll meet but I honestly think TF2 gets a free ride amongst gamers for its art style which admittedly is pretty rad. My biggest complaint with CoD4 is that it's boring as hell to look at and as a result it's hard to distinguish from the slew of terrible imposters and terrible sequels that have come about in its wake.

I honestly tried TF2. Dozens of times actually, I really really want to like it to get in on this wonderful game everyone talks about. But I just can't stand it for more than twenty minutes. I try out the classes, I curse at how sticky and awkward the game feels and the just give up, listing aloud all the things I'd rather do than play TF2 some more. Like play Minesweeper or watch Antiques Road Show or floss my head with a length of barbed wire. Something... anything.

I usually try to see things from all perspectives but in this case if you think TF2's multiplayer is better than CoD4s you're just wrong. It's terrible that bad sequels, a terrible fan base and dozens of poor imitators have scared gamers away from the geniunely fantastic game.

ok I see what you getting at that saying call of duty has terrible multiplayer is subjective, but I am not saying CoD has terrible multiplayer because I didn't like it. I mean I don't like plenty of good things, I don't really like the first mass effect but it is still a good game as it has developed characters and make it's plot have more of an impact as it makes you care a lot more about the fate of the people involved but the gameplay drags down it's over all quality as it has a pace that doesn't match the story and driving section have terrible controls and physics, as well as the weapons stats not having much of a noticable effet on gameplay. that is me looking at th egame and tking personal opinion out as much as possible to show the quality of game in order to say whether it is bad or good.

here is why I think CoD multiplayer is terrible:

Call of duty: a fast paced, completely unrealistic fps with a perk system and a small variation in multiplayer modes (only big veriation are vager(or how ever you spell it) matches. this has a larger target market and therefore more people should like it. But it is very easy to be cheap in it as it is extremely unbalanced and all that killstreaks achive is but widen the gap between the person who is winning and the poeple who are losing and not due to skill level, and using anything other then a lmg or a assault rifle is like throwing cheese as a shotgun only has an effective range slightly longer then the knife dash and the smg's are too weak and have too much or a spread to make then a use for anything then killing someone point blank, but yet again you have a knife dash for that.

that is bad multiplayer but because the fan base has a large portion of players who only play CoD and/or sports games that means they don't really have any point of comparison and therefore play it with out knowing of much better experiences. Also another large chunk of the fan base are people who just care about 'owning people' and don't care about whether it takes skill and therefore CoD's heavily unbalanced multiplayer appeals do them.

as you see personal opinion has very little to do with it.

 

[oktalist]

I hate cod, it's so bland. Much prefer like a nice kipper or salmon.

 

[Dollar Bill]

Seriously i can browse the internet without seeing so many people spam about it everyhwere even in non cod related videos/articles and if you say something negative about the game they are like "go play cod" like its some knida insult when in reallity its one of the most sucessfull franchises thus a very good geame. I guess its the same as halo back then when it was bashed.

But what pisses me off is how BIASED those haters are

They say that MW3 looks rehashed and same as last year.

Well, in E3 i saw uncharted 3,assasin's creed revelations and spiderman edge of time. If no one told me i would say i was looking at their predessecors, yet only cod is bashed.

In retrospective, killzone 3 and dead space 2 and fallout new vegas were exactly like their predecessors but did the fans complain? Nope.

Infact if you go take a look in game that tried to change, you will see they piss of the fans and failed like prince of persia in 2008, fans were pissed so they made a warrior within clone after that.

Hell if you take a look a the past you will see many similat situations, eg doom 1 and 2 were practicly the same with one new weapon and a bunch of monsters, when they made doom 3, everyone was pissed it changed. Same thing with blood 2 or the tomb raider series, all tomb raider games till angel of darkness were the same, after that they change the game and took their chances and the fans hated id and went back to the last 5 "Recycled" tomb raider games.

Hell even stalker series are recycled, suprisingly people only bash cod about it like all those examples i pointed out do not exist.

Another thing will be is that they say there are too many cod games and it has gone stale over the year wih no changes whhile praising bf3 which comes from a franchise who is doing the same formula for farrr longer with very few additions. Eg: BF3 is basicly bf2 with better grpaphics and destruction(since they bringing back the airplanes)

Imo this cod hate is getting out of hand and its way too biased.

You know instead of saying how much other games suck and are rehashed all the time, why don't you tell us what you think cod has done new and why it is so good. Besides, i think people hate it is more the fact that cod doesn't deserve all of the high sales and money it has gotten so far, while much better games just get shoved aside.

Beside that just because it got good sales doesn't mean it's a good game, it just means activision have marketed it to a mainstream audience, one that will put up with cod's shit year after year.

 

[snow]

I think ill take this post as advice and log out and not give a damn anymore.

No biggy, sorry if it sounded as if I was coming off as rude. Reading back it did sound that way which was not my intent. While most people dislike CoD including myself, there are people out there that like it, so it's good that there's a game out there that appeals to a certain crowd, because having choice in the types of games you play is a good thing. It's why I ignore console wars. It doesn't matter if one person thinks their console is better than the other, because the mere fact that there's the option to own one over the other based on what you feel appeals more to you is definitely a good thing.

I don't like the Wii, but it's good that it exists so those who like that style of gameplay can enjoy themselves. Many will bash on it, but that's really the only thing they can do, and the best way to disarm them is to ignore them. xD

 

[Vrud]

This thread really was much more amazing when I thought it was about fish.

 

[timithy4569]

Hitman is a diffirent game and you cant generalize 18 million people because most you played were douchebags, i mean, you dont even scratch the surface.

You can generalize on a community if they are mostly douchebags. If you only met a few people you can't. If you go into a bar and if 8 out of the 10 people at that bar are douchebags. You can safely say that all those people who go to that bar are douchebags. The 2 out of 10 probably won't even take offence. They also see that 8 out of the 10 people at the car are douchebags. If a friend of theirs wanted to go to the same bar he/she frequent, he/she would probably also tell them that most of the guys there are douchebags. What you can't.shouldn't generalize is when You see shela(someone who was a ***** to you before)go into a bar and say that all those people at that bar must be douchebags.

You generalize off of concentration. If you played 40 random Call of Duty games and on average 1/4 of them are douchebags. You are allowed to say that the community is full of douchebags. If anyone asks your opinion on the game, you are going to day the community is full of douchebags because there are douchebags in it. It is also expected to find douchebags when you play the game. (You are expected to find douchebags anywhere. The concentration of douchebags changes whether or not people say it.)

 

[El_Chubba_Chubba]

Reading through everyone else's posts, people have pretty much argued all of the valid points that I could of, but I just have to say it could be a under lying feeling that maybe their (the COD fans) last game wasn't THAT good?

It's just a possibility.

 

[k-ossuburb]

When in reallity its one of the most sucessfull franchises thus a very good geame.

That's the point I stopped reading. Twilight is popular, is that a good book? The Transformers movies are popular, does that make them good movies?

Just because a bunch of meatheads crowd around a single thing and claim it to be the best thing ever, doesn't mean they're right, it just means they're ignorant of the other choices. Most COD players tend to have a very, very limited view of what a game should be which is why it comes up in forums a lot. It's because we're sick of people going on about "realism" and "graphics" when the only game they ever seem to play allows you to heal by ducking behind a wall for a few seconds. Realism? PAH!

The story in the COD games is weak at best, Bulletstorm managed to wring an entire advertising campaign about how generic and predictable the COD franchise has become lately, it's gotten to a point where most gamers are so sick of the same old "brown shooters" that they're willing to jump onto anything that presents them with the slightest modicum of originality and initiative.

A personal problem I have with any one of the real-world military shooters is that you're playing as a nobody, you're just a soldier who's part of an army which is tasked to do something for some reason and save the world. It's pretty difficult to feel involved or immersed in a game when your own character is about as interesting as a sheet of cardboard with a drawn on it.

This s why they're churned out so often, they're pretty easy to write they don't need a lot of effort put into the game since all you have to do is clone the previous one and make some minor graphical tweaks and add/remove/buff/nerf the load out. This makes them incredibly cheap to develop, so all they are really are money-printing machines, since there's always going to be a market for this simply because most of them simply don't know any better.

TL;DR

They're boring, they're generic and they're nothing more than a con devised to drain money away from ignorant people who are too closed-minded of anything that doesn't fit into their little "realistic" idea of what a game should be. They're also suffocating the industry by making other studios want to copy them in an attempt to imitate their success which results in piles of bland, repetitive, unimaginative tripe that saturates the industry today.

 

[That Greek Guy]

i believe that the worst thing about cod is that its advertised SO MUCH that all the little stupid kids get it and get sucked in. But because they dont know anything about videogames they start screaming that cod is the best game ever and everything else is either gay or for pussie fps players. Just look at the comments on mw2 youtube videos. its just sad at this point

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

Of course CoD hate is biased, hating something is in itself bias. What exactly are you complaining about here? A product that's had hundreds of millions of people playing it has tens of millions of people who hate it? It's called having an opinion different to yours, get used to it dude.

 

[-Ulven-]

It's not just the game who is gettin the hate. It's more the community. I men I play some MW2 here and there. And everytime I kill someone I get called a noob beacuse I actually killed him...

Also. When I play BFBC2 I can tell people who play cod on a more regular basis off by the way they play. They usually lose the game by camping, not playing as a team and focusing more on K/D than actual objectives and whatnot. Also the MW thing got old after the 2nd one. Seeng how little this genre has moved by being pushed out on a yearly basis. It gives all us gamers something to blame when mechanics get rehashed.