Why the Hatred for Black Ops?

[miketehmage]

snip

It's been a while since I've played it but I'll try to explain. Also I'm not claiming that I am entirely correct. The experience is subjective.

I hated the flashbacks, yes they were used to drive the plot between several different missions but any scene with mason strapped to the chair annoyed me, and the conversations between missions bored me, and it felt like they were interrupting the flow of the game.

This part might be invalid as, like I said, I haven't played for a while but, I can't actually remember any point to the plot twist other than it was a plot twist. Instead of having the man be a part of his imagination, why not just keep him alive? I don't see it as being hugely clever either, there wasn't really any opportunity for the player to see what was coming, other than arguably in the hole in Vietnam (I think?).

I also disliked the crossbow.

I can't put my finger on it but I just really didn't enjoy the campaign. And, in typical CoD fashion, the campaign lasted maybe 3 hours. So for your money you get a subpar campaign and the same multiplayer with a different skin. I don't consider that to be a fair deal. But many people do.

 

[FilipJPhry]

How I see everyone who bitches about CoD:

 

[jaoblia]

Its the 3rd time they've released it, save for a new campaign its the same mechanics, levels, and modes. Also the sheer amount of gibbering insane 10 year olds online threatening to lay your mother thrice.

Is that a Clone High reference I just read?

Shared love of Clone High is Raisin'Us Higher my good man.

 

[Balimaar]

Yet the online is full of Quickscopers now?
They need to fucking removie aim assist from Snipers already, it's the only thing that can get rid of quickscoping.

yes. yes it is. absolutely non stop filled with quickscopers who ***** whenever someone snipes them in the PROPER fashion - you know actually look IN the scope?

what they need to do is (yes aim assist should go) get rid of how the crosshairs get smaller as you start looking into the scope. you shouldnt have pin point accuracy until you are actually looking into your scope.

but for that to fully work CoD devs really need to make bigger maps. even if its the illusion of having a huge amount of space that maps like MW2s Afghan created.

 

[Starke]

snip

It's been a while since I've played it but I'll try to explain. Also I'm not claiming that I am entirely correct. The experience is subjective.

I hated the flashbacks, yes they were used to drive the plot between several different missions but any scene with mason strapped to the chair annoyed me, and the conversations between missions bored me, and it felt like they were interrupting the flow of the game.

This part might be invalid as, like I said, I haven't played for a while but, I can't actually remember any point to the plot twist other than it was a plot twist. Instead of having the man be a part of his imagination, why not just keep him alive? I don't see it as being hugely clever either, there wasn't really any opportunity for the player to see what was coming, other than arguably in the hole in Vietnam (I think?).

I also disliked the crossbow.

I can't put my finger on it but I just really didn't enjoy the campaign. And, in typical CoD fashion, the campaign lasted maybe 3 hours. So for your money you get a subpar campaign and the same multiplayer with a different skin. I don't consider that to be a fair deal. But many people do.

Yeah, okay, thanks.

I guess the problem I'm seeing on the plot twist was kinda layered in the timeframe it's set in. Its built around elements of Cold War paranoia that look pretty ridiculous today. Evidently the game didn't do a good job of conveying that... and as I recall didn't really try to convey that at all.

It could just be all that time I spent in college dissecting Cold War politics paid off here, but I'm not sure.

Differing tastes aside, I'm just trying to parse out what about the game puts us at opposite ends of the spectrum on the campaign.

 

[Cyrus Hanley]

I noticed some of the weapons didn't fit the time period either. The final mission might take place in 1968.

They don't? Which one's? I'm not saying you're wrong I just thought they were all from that period.

-snip-

Yeah I just looked up a couple of the guns you mentioned and wow, they're really off the mark there. I could understand one or two years, but 10-20? WTH?

It's a shame too because there were a lot of other much cooler weapons from that period they could have used, like the Carl Gustav M/45 ("Swedish K"), Remington 7188 (an experimental selective-fire shotgun based on the Remington Model 1100 semiautomatic shotgun), the Winchester Model 70 (used by Carlos Hathcock... 'nuff said), the XM21 (prototype to the M21 Sniper Weapons System in Call of Duty 4), the Nagant M1895 (a silenced revolver used during the Vietnam War, no joke), the Stechkin APS (a machine pistol that predates the CZ 75 by over twenty years), et cetera.

 

[Lugbzurg]

Congrats. You did not get the point.

You're supposed to shoot through windows and can hardly see anything. If you can see them, they're likely inside the house, which is exactly what you don't want. So... Facepalm to you.

Also, I did play Dead Ops, and Black Ops in general. It was a downgraded version of Geometry Wars. Only real upside was that it had more complicated levels.

And that is still flawed logic. Just because it shares the same viewpoint does not mean it's the same as another game.

"The same viewpoint"? They're practically the same game! You wander around an open map, running in all directions as enemies charge at you mindlessly, all simple-like. Kinda like Asteroids, except the things you're shooting have actual AI. The mechanics are all exactly the same.

 

[hermes]

Because using the same formula over and over is a crime to gamers, even though the formula is good and millions of people enjoy the game.

See, that's the part that I don't get. It's a crime to gamers even though gamers enjoy it? I can't exactly put my finger on it, but there's a paradox in there somewhere.

The paradox can be summarized as: people don't know what they want.
They will complain about some game being formulaic, but they will almost never risk something new because its an unknown, and the comfort zone is already established. Seriously, if forum opinions were any indication of sales, Call of Duty would be in the bargain bin instead of breaking sales records every single year.

Why won't people just enjoy the games they like and leave others to their own preferences?

Welcome to Internet, where everybody has a megaphone and the conviction that their opinion is the only one valid, and we are all better people for knowing it.