News 'Innovation is key for Call of Duty'

The one big problem i always had with the COD games was that the campaigns were always short, even the originals, if you really sucked at Veteran mode they might take a day but no longer than that, I want a campaign that's actually going to take me a LONG time on normal and hardened, not to mention Veteran. I mean these are wars here, they don't get fought in 1 day, make the game really realistic and make sure the campaign is going to take a while to beat. Other than that I prefer the MW games over Blops, Blops sucked, period.

 

So [i[that's[/i] why they've been releasing the same game for the last four or five years.

 

Exactly the same situation here, I also bought Blops thinking it would be kind of similar to CoD4, but it turned to be rubbish. Also I refuse to buy dlc, this means that the game is pretty much dead since almost all server are running dlc content.
Innovation my ass. I really want BF3 to knock cod off its feet (or even slightly).
EA are doing well with all the early advertising

 

I'm only playing Cod4 so I don't know about MW2 or BO but what hints are you talking about? Granted, I play mostly HC (SC when I do knife only) but HC is in MW2 and BO right? Hardcore doesn't have any hints telling you what you should do..

 

there's not much i can disagree with regard the comments this dude made.

call of duty have made highly successful and most importantly highly enjoyable games over the years.
i have bought games from the early years of the franchise up too MW2, and i have seen innovation, some people here must think innovation mean a complete change, it doesn't, sometimes innovation can simply mean gradual, simple changes that improve game-play, in that sense there has been innovation.

and for me, the call of duty series has been superior compared to its main competition, but whether it stays like that i don't know, i don't even know if i will buy the next modern warfare due to the business with infinity ward and all the dismissals, i'll just wait and see i suppose.

 

Bought blops and never installed it. Bfbc2 Vietnam released and since then it's pretty much the only game I play

 

I thought MW1 and defined the genre of linera shooters. Excellent pacing, graphics, very good scripting, level design and mission. I also think mw 2 is much better than mw1 gameplay wise, sure the story is crazy but the game has a high level of polish and tight gameplay. blops was a step back in graphics and MP gameplay. Being a hardcore FPS player since the doom and quake 1 days, I haven't had more fun ina mp shooter than mw2 good mix of arcade, weapon balance, and perfecting the fixings of modern FPS (kill cam, kill streak perks, etc) The only thing missing is a better lobby and server system.

 

The first Nazi zombies (WaW) was innovative and cool. Although WaW was very unoptimized, it was quite a fun shooter. MW2 was drivel. Black ops brought nothing new to the FPS table.
So IMHO, WaW was the best, followed by MW1 then MW2. Black ops doesn't deserve mention. Oh and I never played Cod 3 and below.

 

LOL not with a new engine it won't. YOU THINK that they can just put all this into a crummy little engine whose base code is about 10 years old. dream on buddy. Battlefield 3 is so far ahead of anyone in the FPS market in terms technology. and this is the reason why COD is going to flop. BECAUSE THEY GOT A LOT OF MONEY AND DIDN'T INVEST IN TECHNOLOGY TO STAY AT THE TOP.

 

pfff, games that only last a few hours, done and dusted, what next, wheres the next game.Not enough game content, graphics r great but at what cost Advertise and hype it up( broken and glitchy when released). does that sound like Microsoft(still at least they seem to be learning ) Innovation is a new idea, not dlc and the same borin crap added to one good idea. These days the games are just not upto par!!

 

innovation? yeah right. CoD4 was the only good one after that they just copied it and sold it as a new game with minor differences. So there is no inovation.

 

Newest engine doesn't mean best game. Ask unreal 3 and doom 3 how that worked out for them.

while not neccessarily innovative, I still maintain that MW2 was one of the best MP tactical FPS of all time. The game play was very tight and relatively balanced. even the gold standard CS, people in tournaments only used the colt, ak, awp. In MW2 there's many more viable weapons.

 

For me Call of Duty ended at MW2, enough is enough.

Bring on Battlefield 3, the true innovator.

 

Exactly. I don't know how "cinematic gameplay" can be considered a good thing. That's like a singing aspiring to make "sculptural music". We tried the whole interactive movie thing in the 90s. When the CD-ROM came out, everyone went nuts for it. Didn't work out well then, won't now. The only difference is that COD et al are rendered on the fly.

And for those curious about what Black Ops is like, I can say without hyperbole it is the worst game I've ever played.

 

Lol, no offence but COD3 isn’t even a game, as a piece of entertainment it’s as laughable as Treyach's claims to be a PC developer.

And where on your list are COD, CODUO and COD2?

COD has come to its nadir because everyone plays it, simple, casual gamers, non gamers etc. There are even people who only play COD!
When a brand becomes openly viable for all social groups it loses its magic because it has to become watered down to suit everyone and keep them in their seats.

I get angry when I hear COD fan boys on youtube playing up like some self styled authority on FPS game play saying they new Battlefield should basically be simplified to emulate COD so they can own each game and make another franchise unplayable, it shows how lame and saturated the gaming community has become... blame Microsoft and Sony, as much as ive come to dislike Activision they are still responsible for some of the best game experiences I’ve had in the past and I hope they stop pandering to consoles and the masses and pull some true innovation out.

 

oh god so true.

according to them: killstreaks in every game, weapons should be always pin-point accurate and every minute should be filled with something exploding. Crysis 2 is what happens when developers listen to those morons.

 

I have no idea why people think that MW2 is so bad. The multiplayer is the best of any CoD game in the series. The Domination mode is absolutely the best, and the maps and kits/classes match it perfectly. This coming from a guy that has played them all.

 

I don’t think it’s that bad and if it looks that way its not strictly MW2’s fault rather than the recent franchise as a whole. but I just feel personally that the format is just a bit stale, the fast paced, random action in small spaces is just too frustrating and there’s a distinct imbalance between skill and tactics. The main advancement from MW1 aside from the MP tweaking was Special Ops and that was disappointing in the extreme as it was only a fragment of co-op the franchise really needs. The other thing that makes it lack lustre is that it crawls along in terms of unlock progression and if you cant get the upper hand against superhuman players it feels largely pointless and un-enjoyable like many COD games since MW1
MW2 is good, but it’s the epic scale of Battlefield and its destructive tactical approach that totally outguns COD, it offers that epic open battlefield feel that the first two COD games and the United Offensive add on had but on a bigger scale, its almost like the modern Battlefield series delivers what COD:UO offered and never carried forward (although BF1942 was out at the same time).