Gaming CODPLOPS: A Cynical History Of COD

M'eh indeed.

TBH, I don't mind the fact that the single modes are heavily scripted and linear, as long as it's entertaining - completely free-roaming sandbox games bore the ar$e off me - but the gradual drawing down of SP in favour of MP cashcows pisses me off.

If they can't be bothered to create a decent SP experience that lasts longer a few hours, then I can't be bothered to part with my cash.

fuq em

 

and you have a serious lack of reading comprehension - the game reused textures and models from previous versions - there is 0 innovation at all; which part of that do you not understand? its simply a MOD as they changed very very little.

it plays on a £99 netbook - thats how poor the game is.

maybe when you get to year 9 you`ll understand why the industry begs for games like crysis and batlefield to advance tech (you know the same industry that makes new video cards)

by your own `opinion` *who cares about DX* , then an 8 year old geforce or radeon will do.

its the same `MP experience` as with the previous 6 COD games.


how sad.

 

Similarly, If you don't like an opinion piece about your beloved game, ignore it and stop bitching about it.

 

And... now your opinion is worthless.


I'm not even going to touch on that "don't like it, don't buy it, don't whine about it" hypocrisy of yours. So, stop making a fool out of yourself and just leave this thread while you have some dignity.

 

Once agin you completely miss the point of what makes a game good or bad "it plays on a £99 netbook - thats how poor the game is." that line says it all. You really dont have any clue. And the mp exsperience is no way near the same i simply cannot understand how you could say something like that you say that youve played all the games but tbh i see no evidence of that anywere in your posts it sounds like youve been playing online with your eyes closed.

 

The CoD series is to shooters what FIFA is to football. You get one a year and it's essentially the same as the last one but everybody switches to it and carries on what they were doing before. Creatively it's an exercise in refinement rather than actually, you know, creating new stuff. Call of Duty is more of a subscription than a series at this point.

It should absolutely be clear to people by now that if you're buying a CoD game for single player you are doing it wrong. It's a game for people who like an out and out competitive shooter. And in that regard it is still the king.

I get that we all like creative games that push boundaries, but also there are millions of people who just want a quick, simple game, with thousands of players, that they can fire up and enjoy some random acts of violence for a while. The advantage of the CoD annual release and the massive popularity of the games is that they are inherently more accessible for online players, you can't play Counterstrike now, the only people that still play that are just terrifyingly good. But CoD reboots once a year, levels the playing field, and you can get back into it.

Creatively, and as single player games, the CoD series are embarrassing to gaming. Horrible, reactionary orgies of really stupid violence designed not only to appeal to the lowest common denominator but inspire it to plunge even lower. But as a multiplayer shooter series they've pretty much perfected the system.

 

it is - and i have pretty much ALL COD games made , and for the last 6 COD titles , its the same damn thing in MP with no change

but please carry on with your tired lines of rage - the whole `im right and OMFG you disagree so your wrong` is so sad. one day , when you leave school , you`ll understand this.

 

So my opinion is worthless and somehow yours is worth something?? I dont like the BF series because of the gameplay not because of anything else theres a HUGE difference in stating that you dont like a game and pissing all over both the game the developer and its players. And on another note ill post in this thread as much as i please and if you dont like what im saying the option to leave is as open to you as it is to me.

 

pre teen rage is funny.


COD gameplay hasnt changed for 6 years , they reused models from WAW and MW1 in MW3 (and a ton of textures as well) - its laziness to make money and nothing more. other than maps (woopy doo) the gameplay is esactly the same in MP.

 

You still manage to completely avoid the subject and go on to personal attacks, thats very mature of you. But im guessing that age probably is a factor here since i remember when games were judged on if they were fun to play or not regardless of pixelcount and dx11 effects.

 

Article published on a Sunday. +1

 

I don't understand how anyone can enjoy linear scripted twaddle, where 'skill' = 'how lucky you can be in avoiding the enemies cheap, unstoppable shots'. It's mindless boring set pieces. That isn't a SP game. Play the original Far cry or Halo if you want to see how a good FPS SP is made. Or alternatively any one of the Elder Scrolls, Fallout , Final Fantasy, GTA, MGS, ME games.

I mean why do you think Crysis 2 was so harshly criticised compared to 1? Because they dumbed down the SP and made it more linear and restrictive. People want freedom and choice in their SP experiences.

Cod's not a SP game, and to think it is is madness.

Graphics is hardly the absolute benchmark of what makes a good game, though. Every single game I have ever loved I have done so for about 10 other reasons than the graphics. Most people care about the actual playability, reward system, learning curve, level design and fluidity/control of the character than whether they can see shiny polygons flying around.

Good graphics enhances the game, yes, but it hardly makes it.

It's a public forum; ideas and criticisms are supposed to be shared around .

 

The subject ? Subject is about the fact, that COD4(MW)=COD5(WaW)=COD6(MW2)=COD7(BO)=COD8(MW3)=COD9(BO2).

In my opinion, if they would charge <=10€ for each map pack (they are charging 50-60€ for it now and they call the map pack as a whole game) like every other publisher, it would be fine. But because people like to be milked out of money and gladly pay 60€ for circa 1 month of work on multiplay maps and about 3-4 months of work on 5 hour singleplayer mission, then why not.

And why people here usually dislike CoD? Because of the above, and because every other game series have evolved durring the series. Compare Mass Effect 1 to 2 and 3 - you can see the difference. Battlefield 2, Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3 - you can see the difference. GTA1,2,3,4 - you can see the difference.

COD4 vs COD8 ? You can't see any difference.

 

I don't see what everyone's problem is.

Some people like buying COD-style games each year. Some developers and publishers like to cater for that market each year.

Some people like buying a different type of gaming experience each year. Some developers and publishers like to cater for that market each year.

I don't think any of us really is so righteous that they can honestly tell the other they are totally wrong, and that their opinion is correct.

Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks, eh?

Now let's all play nice, if not together, then with our own games. It's good to promote discussion on gaming trends, but why does it have to get so vociferous?

 

The subject was me having problems with his statements that the game was bad because it runs on a cheap computer and doesnt have the latest Direct X version support. That is not how you should judge a game. Saying a game is bad just because it runs on a netbook is dumb. Its not about the graphics it never has been and it never will and anyone who thinks so has missed the point. You can pick up an old computer at a garbage dump and run Monkey island on it and it will still be an awesome game.

 

Really? So they all have the same maps, weapons, attachments, killstreaks, level design, prestige system, perk system?

No they don't.

The game's are way more different than you are making out. I agree though that to an outsider they may seem samey to an extent, but only the same was that BFBC 2 feels samey to BF3, or any other new title in a series compared with its predecessor.

The fact they are a series means they have to have some continuity because the essential formula has been proven to work!

Well, you're minimising the similarities and exaggerating the differences in those games. BF3 doesn't feel that different from BFBC2. I could list a million differences from cod game to cod game that you wouldn't appreciate or see, which you perhaps could for BF. To an outsider, however, you could say any two games in a series feel samey and lack originality compared with the previous one.

However, I do still think you have a legitimate point about lack of originality as the series has progressed. But that's because you have the wrong expectation of what Cod is.

You really should think of Cod as you would Fifa, as has already been said. Because people have accepted that the essential multiplayer experience is what they're after, they really don't expect much innovation other than new maps/weapons/killstreaks etc. You may call that a glorified map pack, but we still enjoy the game and can't find anything that comes close to it currently.

Even if it were true that every other FPS series was more innovative than Cod, it makes no difference if the games still can't get anywhere near it in terms of player control/learning curve/rewards system and fun.

 

I don't agree with you. As I've said, I'm not a fan of sandbox games, and I do think the better SP games strike a balance between scripting and free-form play; but that does not mean a scripted game cannot be entertaining. The fact is the vast majority of games are scripted to some degree, so it's little more than uninformed snobbery to to look down ones' nose at the games where it is more obvious.

Again, I disagree. Cod has always had a single player game - but it's clear the developers want to make more money rehashing a MP experience, by adding a few features and some new maps - something just as easily achieveable with DLC on an earlier Cod release. The SP game is now nothing more than an attempt to justify charging full price for what is now essentially WoW with guns.

I do agree with you here - some of my favourite games won my adoration through story, atmosphere and gameplay. I still want nice graphics, but not at the expense of all else.

Absolutely, but read the part of the post I had replied to, to get a little context, before preaching to me.

 

I am so sick of people constantly complaining about COD... If you don't like it then don't play it. I LOVE MW3... I love it more than Battlefield 3. Every time I play COD it "feels" like a new game to and seems better then the previous. You guys at Bit-tech are like a bunch of whiny girls... It's a f**king video game... not a novel... not a movie... not a new scientific breakthrough... Stop trying to read into so deeply.

If it's fun to play... then it's done right.

 

My previous post was ONLY referring to the PC Version... if your playing them on a console you should have been shot in the head a long long time ago.

And yes I do like dots...