Call of Duty

Wait a minute, I thought the Call of Duty series worked the other way around...?

If you want realism then try something like Rainbow Six or the ARMA series, Co D is nothing but an arcade shooter compared those two!

I don't hate Call of Duty, but I don't exactly like the type of gamer that it attracts.

Eating a Vanilluxe will give you frostbite.

Agreed. I don't hold any ill will towards the series (or the genre in general). I actually kind of pity it, since Activision is likely going to run it into the ground like they did music rhythm games.

However, I had to put up with a fan of CoD and Battlefield all summer who thought it was hilarious that the game I'm most looking forward to this year is Zelda.

Im eagerly waiting for the new Counter Strike thought,

http://steamcommunity.com/id/Xan-Xan/

Call of Duty is one of those games that likes to pretend its realistic, and a number of its fans think it is, but its actually fairly unrealistic.

This. I actually like some of the games, but the Vocal Minority of Jerkass Fan Dumb leaves me with a bitter taste in my tongue.

Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.

Since I agree with what has been said so far almost 100%, I'll say that I do really like the Call of duty series and enjoy it regardless of what anyone else says. I don't want to argue about it to fanboys or any of that matter. Quite a few fans of the series are annoying gits and way too many kids play this game. It is good fun if you play with friends, though perhaps I should just leave it that.

People hate call of duty for specific, anecdotal reasons, and then, an overriding kind of feeling of waste.

See, when call of duty modern warfare came out, and obliterated sales records, we were just seeing a resurgance of new I Ps in the gaming world, a new wave of creativity in mechanics and themes.

Then, call of duty dropped, shattered all sales records, and the MB As who run big publishers like activision, but have criminally little sense as far as actual gamers go, have all since leapt onto the 'Next COD' bandwagon. Thus you see EVERYTHING re-imagined as a first person shooter. Linear, cinematic manshoots released from all the big publishers, EA, Activision, etc, constantly.

The hatedom isn't really for JUST COD. I'd put it squarely in the realm of samey, military manshoots, where brown is real, and have a singleplayer campaign consisting of "you're staring down ironsights for five hours" and it's over.

You literally didn't have to PLAY the first few levels of modern warfare 2. Your AI allies did all the fighting, even at the hardest setting. I remember experiencing this for myself, and making a hard rule never to buy another military-themed FPS.

The me-too bandwaggoning is something that hits games especially hard, and the only other backlash that occured happened in the 80s and devestated the industry. I predict the hatedom for this style of game will only grow.

Hopefully people will soon quit trying to be 'the next modern warefare' and we can get back to games getting better. The indie movement blowing up is a great example of how sick people are of carbon copy manshoots.

The older CO Ds weren't so bad as mentioned before. I'll admit the the ORIGINAL Modern Warfare was great. The shooting mechanics were incredibly smooth.

The problem is that it doesn't innovate. It's the same everytime. No new game mechanics. No evolution of the core gameplay. Nothing. The next game might have a new gun and might have a new game mode, but not much else. You're basically buying a $60 map pack.

I love first person shooters, but COD has degraded severely. With Battlefield on the horizon, there isn't any reason to keep buying COD. If you want an arena shooter, there are plenty out there.

Except most people aren't. The opinions on this board are in the extreme minority.

edited 21st Sep '11 12:49:35 PM by TheProffesor

I wouldn't say that. Most other boards I'm on have expressed similar level of disdain for Co D.

edited 21st Sep '11 1:26:44 PM by Rynnec

I don't have heard that one often. At least the fans don't think that. It's worse with Battlefield fans, who think that Co D is arcade but that when you play Battlefield you come out as a shell shocked veteran.

If any question why we died/ Tell them, because our fathers lied -Rudyard Kipling

Maybe one way to phrase it, is that a lot of people don't like Co D because of the Madden Effect. Activision isn't just making sequel after sequel, they are largely trying to make a "series" where people buy the new game even though its barely different from the prior one. Sure, its not quite there yet, but just wait.

( either that, or they'll make it a subscription-based game, with single player levels doled out slowly over time. . . )

Home of CBR Rumbles-in-Exile: rumbles.fr.yuku.com

Perhaps this will make you laugh at least.

So that's where GHETTo_oVERLORD from the battle.net forums went after all these years. I see he's gotten better at web design since his Geocities/Freewebs days.

edited 21st Sep '11 5:30:45 PM by MajorTom

NECROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Activision announces that CoD is officially shifting to a 3-year development cycle, Sledgehammer Games has joined as the third studio. Ghosts has been promoted to sub-franchise; Sledgehammer is developing 2014's game.

Really not a fan of the third year being used for "more time to focus on DLC and micro-DLC;" although the "more time to polish" certainly can't hurt things.

edited 6th Feb '14 4:34:53 PM by TheAirman

PSN ID: FateSeraph | Switch friendcode: SW-0145-8835-0610 Congratulations! She/They

Well hey, if it allows each COD dev to have more time, then I'm cool with it.

IT will at least give Treyarch the extra time they need to polish up Black Ops 3.

I'm slightly surprised at the news. Though I'm interested to see what Treyarch has cooking up, I don't really care anymore about anything else. :|

The current rumor is that Sledgehammer has taken over Modern Warfare.

But I don't care as long as BLOPS 3 gets more dev time.

They do have medals for almost, and they're called silver!

I think you may setting yourself up for disappointment. Black Ops 2 kinda resolved all the plot threads, unless they pull a massive retcon out of their ass concerning one or more of the endings/paths being canon there's really nowhere to go.

Same deal with Modern Warfare. There's really only one plot angle to go from that one and it's so damn expected that it'll disappoint from the sheer expectedness.

Also, Tough Act to Follow is in full effect on both subseries.

This. Honestly the only existing thread I can think of for Black Ops is Operation Charybdis, which is somewhat of a Foregone Conclusion thanks to BLOPS 2. Still, everything in 2 came out of nowhere and was great; so whatever Treyarch is working on, I'm sure they'll make it work.

PSN ID: FateSeraph | Switch friendcode: SW-0145-8835-0610 Congratulations! She/They

I like Call of Duty.

Where on the Internet am I likely to be savaged?

But seriously, Modern Warfare was one of the best games i've ever played, and its sequels weren't bad, honestly speaking. This from a guy who never played multiplayer.

Black Ops 2 had perhaps the world's worst PC port though, so I didn't play that past maybe 3 levels.

noisivelet naht nuf erom era srorrim

If they don't turn it into acceptable G.I. Joe clone, then I see an opportunity for such a game.

You sure? From what I've heard, Black Ops 2 had a pretty decent PC port. If any game in the series had horrible PC ports, it was definitely Ghosts or Modern Warfare 3 or even the original Black Ops initially.

Black Ops 2 was my favorite entry in the series, even more than COD 4. Though I do agree post MW 2 is when things slid down. The best thing I can say about Ghosts were the underwater and space levels. And one pretty cool tank sequence.

Stand Fast, Stand Strong, Stand Together

^ Modern Warfare 2 had one thing no subsequent game had or otherwise retained: Good AI.

In MW 2 your allies can actually shoot, throw grenades right, breach and clear buildings, use flashbangs and utilize cover effectively while still being useful. They were aggressive yet intelligent. Pity they're outnumbered so badly so much of the time.

The first Black Ops did away with that. Your allies when present are rarely capable of doing anything. Even on the one level they run a competent AI (which is really they were running the same scripts from World At War), they don't seem to do much.

MW 3 retained the Illusion!Reznov ineffective AI script for nearly everyone even the red shirts you get from time to time.

Black Ops II applied it to everyone and it shows. Often you literally have to do absolutely everything yourself.