Author Topic: Why is Call of Duty still getting hated on?  (Read 4413 times)

  I have just watched a 9 minute video of Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare and the graphics look beautiful and up to date, the new jumping mechanics are neat, the futuristic weaponry is nice, the character models look realistic, etc. But when I look to the comment section of the video, all I see are people saying that the game has absolutely horrible graphics , and that it's going to be the same game as last year or that it's copying off of Halo just because of the futuristic setting or Titanfall because of the jumping, despite the fact that this game was being developed before Titanfall was even announced.

  So when Call of Duty does something familiar, it's all, "hurr they nvr do change!!!!!!!" But when they actually change people are like " why are they copying other games? why don't they just go back to their ww2 setting?!"

  "Oh they just do it for the money." You mean to tell me, that companies make a product, and expect you to pay for that product?! What an absolute travesty!

  If any of you guys can give me a really good reason why Call of Duty still deserves all the hate, then that would be appreciated.

Video in question.

 

Because it's boring. Because the multiplayer is an unbalanced mess. Because the single player is ultrapatriotic horsestuff.

Because the single player is ultrapatriotic horsestuff.
Actually in this game, you play as a PMC against the USA.

CEO of Sledgehammer:"Okay, everybody. Pitch some ideas for the new COD, Activision gave us the contract."

Seasoned Developer: "Alright, so I was thinking something futurist-"
New Developer: "Don't you think that the futuristic thing is kind of overdone? What about something along with the Revolutionary War that doesn't focus too much on technology and weapons but simple war strat-" New Developer is tilted back into a tube downwards to a shark tank with realistic fish AI.


CEO: "What a kid. We all know what gets everyone!" CEO threatens to press the red button again; everyone nods.

Seasoned Developer #2: "How about we have America involved?!?!?!" CEO nods.

New Developer #2: "I was thinking... why not have the main character be a non-American gu-" CEO moves toward the button. "No! America is still good!" The CEO rests back into his seat.

CEO: "Hmmmmmmmmmm." CEO looks toward the hype experts. "Can you calculate how much hype this will get?"

Hype Expert #1: "Uh.... yessirithinkso. Wemustdothisveryfast.... sticktooldtactics:showcampaignallfuturisticyeso kay.............. wecanshowtechnologyandwithmai ncharacterbadguy....... wecouldpossiblymakepeoplethin kthegameisdifferent! 80%hype90%dissapointedcalculatedsir"

CEO: "Alright!" CEO looks around the room. "Anyone reject the game idea?" CEO's hand hovers over the red button. Everyone is silent.

New Developer #3: "I am seriously thinking about it... how about we focus on different mechanics, totally revolutionizing the multiplayer and singleplayer experience by working on a new en-" New Developer #3 is angled back and dropped into the tube to the shark tank with fish AI.

CEO: Twitches. "WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO MAKE AN ENGINE...." CEO looks towards a security camera that zooms in on him. He shudders and listens into his earpiece.

ACTIVISION CEO: "MIIIIIIIIIIIIILKTHEEEEEEEEEEE EEEMONEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEYCOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!"

Because it's boring. Because the multiplayer is an unbalanced mess. Because the single player is ultrapatriotic horsestuff.
hope youre not talking about black ops 1 and 2.

Well, considering Ghosts was stuff and the other sledgehammer game MW3 was just as bad, people don't have high expectations. There's also a considerable anti-cod circlejerk going on these days as well.

I think the game looks amazing though, i saw the e3 gameplay or whatever and it looked really refreshed in terms of graphics and gameplay so much that I thought it was some new IP i havent heard of. I'm personally looking forward to it.

hope youre not talking about black ops 1 and 2.
blops 2 mp is unbalanced though.
like do you even remember the loving pdw?

hope youre not talking about black ops 1 and 2.
Black Ops 1: Ghost Pro, Sleight of Hand Pro, Ninja Pro with a silenced Galil.
That was too forget OP. Never played Blops 2 though.

As for Advanced Warfare, I think it looks like a refreshing change for COD. They could seriously use an Engine update though. Activision should seriously get a team to work on that.

I don't like the futuristic thing though, never got into that. So they don't really have my purchase.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2014, 10:04:32 PM by AfterShock »

hope youre not talking about black ops 1 and 2.
dude those both have cheat code weapons (aks74u, Ballistic knife [1], AN-94)

in any case in response to the absolutely hilarious and totally cool and rad novel up there on the page, a revolutionary/civil war game would be entirely story because horrible inaccuracy that would have to be programmed into every weapon, and the actual minute-long reloads for the rifles. An all-story game would completely alienate the CoD fanbase, and from what I've seen you play as a mercenary with no allegiance to any country and the future aspect allows for much, much more creativity

It looks like crysis 2

Does it still have killstreak rewards built for doubling your killstreak?

CEO of Sledgehammer:"Okay, everybody. Pitch some ideas for the new COD, Activision gave us the contract."

Seasoned Developer: "Alright, so I was thinking something futurist-"
New Developer: "Don't you think that the futuristic thing is kind of overdone? What about something along with the Revolutionary War that doesn't focus too much on technology and weapons but simple war strat-" New Developer is tilted back into a tube downwards to a shark tank with realistic fish AI.


CEO: "What a kid. We all know what gets everyone!" CEO threatens to press the red button again; everyone nods.

Seasoned Developer #2: "How about we have America involved?!?!?!" CEO nods.

New Developer #2: "I was thinking... why not have the main character be a non-American gu-" CEO moves toward the button. "No! America is still good!" The CEO rests back into his seat.

CEO: "Hmmmmmmmmmm." CEO looks toward the hype experts. "Can you calculate how much hype this will get?"

Hype Expert #1: "Uh.... yessirithinkso. Wemustdothisveryfast.... sticktooldtactics:showcampaignallfuturisticyeso kay.............. wecanshowtechnologyandwithmai ncharacterbadguy....... wecouldpossiblymakepeoplethin kthegameisdifferent! 80%hype90%dissapointedcalculatedsir"

CEO: "Alright!" CEO looks around the room. "Anyone reject the game idea?" CEO's hand hovers over the red button. Everyone is silent.

New Developer #3: "I am seriously thinking about it... how about we focus on different mechanics, totally revolutionizing the multiplayer and singleplayer experience by working on a new en-" New Developer #3 is angled back and dropped into the tube to the shark tank with fish AI.

CEO: Twitches. "WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO MAKE AN ENGINE...." CEO looks towards a security camera that zooms in on him. He shudders and listens into his earpiece.

ACTIVISION CEO: "MIIIIIIIIIIIIILKTHEEEEEEEEEEE EEEMONEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEYCOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!"

They had 3 years to work on this game.

Does it still have killstreak rewards built for doubling your killstreak?
I feel like killstreaks should be built to do the opposite of what they're designed to do and make it harder for the player instead of easier, so as to make it really rewarding.

The problem with Call of Duty is twofold, in my opinion.

1) The game relies on challenge. That's why shooters exist (I'll get to this). The problem is that the game is so badly balanced, it's way too easy. I don't want to imply I'm a pro player by any means, but frankly the game doesn't require much skill over:

- Identify target
- Choose appropriate method/direction of disposal
- Eliminate target

That list might sound expansive, but in practice it's about 2 button clicks (move forward and press trigger to shoot). There's no significant skill; it's just a matter of being able to see things faster and move your fingers. It doesn't help that the selection of weapons are all essentially the same within their respective classes, with minor changes in values, perks that offer no major advantages and have no disadvantages for their use and the majority of killstreak rewards which are completely stupid (you're going to reward kills with more kills?).

It doesn't help that CoD has the Dominant Strategy problem. It's completely possible to win with any weapon, so why bother changing strategy? This makes the game boring, because your patterns are never challenged, and as such there's no point continuing to get better.

2) Games teach skills (see my "What is a game" topic thing). What does Call of Duty teach? Survival skills. The problem is that 90% of the people playing this game probably go to school, work in an office, live at home etc. They're in safe places. They don't need to hunt for food or run from a animal chasing them because they're not primal like our great ancestors. This game is teaching us to do things that are no longer relevant to human life.

The 10% of military personnel who play this game will easily tell you that CoD is NOTHING like real combat. There's no lessons in CoD that can be applied to their active duty. CoD essentially glorifies fighting and makes it seem much easier and more fun than it actually is.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 03:03:00 AM by McJobless »

The problem with Call of Duty is twofold, in my opinion.

1) The game relies on challenge. That's why shooters exist (I'll get to this). The problem is that the game is so badly balanced, it's way too easy. I don't want to imply I'm a pro player by any means, but frankly the game doesn't require much skill over:

- Identify target
- Choose appropriate method/direction of disposal
- Eliminate target

That list might sound expansive, but in practice it's about 2 button clicks (move forward and press trigger to shoot). There's no significant skill; it's just a matter of being able to see things faster and move your fingers. It doesn't help that the selection of weapons are all essentially the same within their respective classes, with minor changes in values, perks that offer no major advantages and have no disadvantages for their use and the majority of killstreak rewards which are completely stupid (you're going to reward kills with more kills?).

It doesn't help that CoD has the Dominant Strategy problem. It's completely possible to win with any weapon, so why bother changing strategy? This makes the game boring, because your patterns are never challenged, and as such there's no point continuing to get better.

2) Games teach skills (see my "What is a game" topic thing). What does Call of Duty teach? Survival skills. The problem is that 90% of the people playing this game probably go to school, work in an office, live at home etc. They're in safe places. They don't need to hunt for food or run from a animal chasing them because they're not primal like our great ancestors. This game is teaching us to do things that are no longer relevant to human life.

The 10% of military personnel who play this game will easily tell you that CoD is NOTHING like real combat. There's no lessons in CoD that can be applied to their active duty. CoD essentially glorifies fighting and makes it seem much easier and more fun than it actually is.
Because games should be more realistic than fun. That's what you're saying, right?