Gaming CODPLOPS: A Cynical History Of COD

None of my post was an ego-trip, which is what he claimed (oh unless you count an obviously tongue-in-cheek comment at the very end). He's a distinguished troll. He contributed zero to the debate throughout the whole thread other than try and flame me. I'm surprised you would stoop as low though.

It seems that every BF player on here is unable to make a reasoned argument or even discuss differences without going into panic troll mode. Very disappointing, but nothing less than I'd expect from Bittech's gaming community .

 

The worst thing about it every release just fractures the player base so even if you like the multiplayer every year you have to upgrade or face rapidly declining numbers of players. A few months ago I tried to play a game of MW2 but it couldn't even find a game for me to play. So I went and bought BF3

 

Oh for pete's sake. You need to seriously reassess your 'it's me against the world' attitude. Apparently 'trolling' is now asking someone to back up their claims.

 

Wading into this a bit late, but never mind.

I used to be a COD fanboy. I played COD4 religiously for a good couple of years, and racked up several hundred hours in MW2 despite my love/hate relationship with that game. I had never previously played any BF game before BC2, with the exception of 10 minutes of 1943 on a friend's console, which I thought was pretty dire. I found it very hard to get into BC2 for the first several months - I didn't like the way the guns handled, the movement, the hit detection, some of the balancing elements and the relative slow pace of the game compared to COD. However, literally the only thing that blew me away straight off the bat was the sound design, which I thought was incredible. I hadn't heard anything like it before and it's something I take for granted now when I go and play other games....they just sound so flat and lifeless. Sure, it may not offer quite as obvious positional audio cues, but that certainly isn't the be all and end all of sound design IMO, and could also be considered as a crutch for bad players (i.e. makes up for having poor map/situational awareness....think how much harder it is to sneak up on a player in COD). It's still very possible to hear those same audio cues in BF3, it's just not shoved in your face and you have to listen a little bit harder.

Also, please stop with the whole 'if you don't agree with my opinion you must be stupid or a troll' bit....it got old after the third time. Forcing someone to agree with your opinion is not nearly as convincing as presenting a reasoned argument backed up by supporting evidence, and certainly isn't going to win us over any time soon. In fact, it just makes you look like a narrow-minded, egotistical jerk.

 

I can help out. Neither game is very good really, and yet neither is a bad game either. Both do certain things better than the other, but neither excels at anything. They are both symptoms of the time. Rehash and re-release. Yay more money.

Now that I've pissed off everyone perhaps you can stop bickering pointlessly over 2 sides of the same tired coin.

Roll on the next FPS fad... I for one want something different to play.

 

You really live up to your custom user title, don't you?

 

When provoked, yes.

I am old enough to remember when an FPS release meant a new game. Now we get a variety on the same theme. COD is how old? Before that it was medal of honour..and BF is little better. I understand war is the easiest setting to put people in to shoot s***..but it is terribly over done these days and very boring.

Think of the fps-thrillers we could have, or dirty nasty horrors that make doom look tame. And deus ex themed games..barely touched on. Where is that stuff eh? F*** cod and bf both. Stagnation, both of them.

 

Said better than me. This is what I meant in my thread 'Lack of PC Games'

I am bringing myself to playing older games as there is NOTHING new that inspires me to play newer titles. For example RAGE looked very good in the early days and i heard terrible reviews about it but i got it for a fiver, deal i thought. Think again, what a load of crap. Boring gameplay, the same repetitive type of missions, AI thicker than two short planks. gfx were shocking, I mean they were terrible. It reeked of consolofication and this is ID who used to make the best games!

 

Death to consolification!!!

it's funny how CoD gets compared to BF. the two games started out to be very different, one is team based vehicular war the other is a twitch shooter. now, both game has gunships, both game are fast paced, both games have class based system, both are consolified.
(cookie points to those who can spot which game im referring to on those 4 points)

it's like innovation is out of the window, if it works, let's copy it into our game!


i used to play CoD (with smc in MW2), then BF (with Dom and Draca and others). they are very different games, only thing the same is the fact you attempt to shoot people shaped pixels. by that logic, i'd like to compare Tribes Ascend to CoD or BF, and i think Tribes is a far superior game, for one there's no sign of consolification!

 

Couldn't agree more about Rage. Such a dissapointment and from my all time favourite developer as well.

I played MW2 quite a bit because a few friends had it, and it definitely was a love/hate thing. I enjoyed it because I could laugh at how bad I was with friends, but in truth I always found the whole idea that the better you got, the easier the game was for you, counter intuitive.

My overriding memories of playing it was of the constant interruption from helicopters or air-strikes or the similar. All I wanted to do was shoot people but instead I had to hunker down for a few minutes until it was all over. After a while, I started just running around to see how many times I could die in a single bombardment, just because it was more fun than hiding.


No comment on the sound: although it does seem the argument is from two different directions. 3lusive's argument is the COD sounds add more to the gameplay, but the BF3 backers claim its sound is more realistic (time delay, doppler effect etc.). But the two are opposite ends of different spectrums, and trying to say which "wins" is comparing apples and oranges. Just my uninformed two cents.

 

To lighten to mood: I used to play COD/BF then I took an.......

I do agree with the death to consolification. Having really only just become a PC Gamer I see the benefits of the power I have sitting under my desk. rather than the XBOX360 gathering dust in my cupboard!

 

How about this:

From Wikipedia

And

However I'm not a proponent of BF realism, I think it is slightly pantomime, or if you prefer exaggerated. The most important thing I hear is the grumbling of tanks, tipping me off to run away, if I do not have C4 or Rockets. The only real world experience I have is of construction where multiple loud (although significantly quieter than small arms fire) noises in some circumstance just turn to noise. Not played CoD, but that killstreak guff doesn't look appealing in anyway. Which leads me to the aspect of why I like BF3, it plays in a chess like manner. Back to the sound thing, as I said I think BF3 is pantomime, and the audio should be thought of as part of that experience, whereas CoD audio is an integral part of the gameplay mechanics - so they are ultimately incomparable.

 

Jesus, there's a hell of a lot of self-righteous people commenting in this thread (not naming names, let's see who reacts to that statement first...).

Y'know what this all reminds me of?

My God is better than your God.
My Social System is better than your Social System.
My Colour is better than your Colour.
My Dad is harder than your Dad.
My Argument is more infantile than your Argument.

FFS - they're games. Stop p*ssing and moaning about them and play them.

 

Hell, no!

Eat sh!t, and GTFO, you maturity fanboi!

 

We piss and moan my dear friend because they hold back the entire FPS genre. And games in general. Why should we remain quiet and let the game companys think they are getting it right? They. Are. Not. They assume they are because people lick up their well polished turds. But how long can that last? Even the fanbois will tire of eating sh*t after a while.

Innovation, it is being stamped out by the big companys..what they fail to realise is that in the long run they are crippling themselves. Interesting games are what made this medium expand to this point. Lose that and it will fall back into mediocrity, with only the tiny indy companys making any profit.

Films were the new books..I want to see games become the new films...in terms of the medium. Gaming is mainstream now...and many people still look at you like you are a freak for gaming.

 

Yes, that's all well and good, but instead of constructively addressing everyone's issues to those that matter we get people going back and forth on a forum degrading each other's opinions and insulting them due to their prospective age and/or maturity. How is that going to convince Mr E.A or Mr Activision to change the recipe? It won't.

All I say is, don't try and hide silly willy-waving behind a legitimate cause of campaigning for better design. It's this lack of being able to constructively argue a point without resorting to pettiness that helps keep our industry as an 'immature' one.

 

You know to be honest, I have no qualms with consolification. What I have problems with is the constant desire and need to make something unfied and singular. That is the problem to me. We wouldn't have consolification if each platform was seen as a different entity.

In other words, if we look at it from a perspective where it isn't one causing the death of another, but rather as two things that are not necessarily compatible, then perhaps it would actually lead somewhere.

My point is, it's only natural on a for profit business to try to horizontally integrate everything. Thus we even have consolification. But remember, we ourselves asked for big game companies, asked for more and more. And we got it. Gaming's a business folks and because it is, expect things to be quite frankly more and more accessible and dumbed down. After all, it isn't what's cerebral that sells. Just what's aesthetically attractive or momentarily sparkling.

 

In the end, Activision will just destroy the brand as they do every time they touch something. Do you remember the Guitar Hero series ? Activision milked it to death. 24 titles and they put the whole series on hiatus because no one was buying it anymore. Do this with COD for 3-4 more years and it will have the same fate.

 

Since MW I do not expect innovation I just expect o get home from work and play a relax game that has a decent although simplistic storytelling.
From my point of view, having to spend the entire day in the office I do not care that I play a supper innovative game, I am expecting to have some fun...that is all, and yes I like to spend some of my time playing COD...

Although I might have low standards in fact I consider that nowadays games should follow two paths, one concerning innovation event attached to hardcore gaming other for casual players that just look for some fun.

At some point the casual path should meet the innovative path, but that is not always required, event Diablo 2 and Skyrim are not innovative.

However this does not mean that companies should discard innovative projects, not at all, again they should keep both of the paths and cross them from time to time.

cumps,
ziza

 

Some of my best gaming memories are from MOHAA, COD & COD2

Now its just a steaming turd.