[QUOTE=usaokay;38474160]I hope next year's CoD installment will NOT top this one. I am tired of modern military shooters.[/QUOTE]
but its in the FUTTUREEE
I'm actually kind of glad for this. I really haven't been keeping an eye on any of this at all, but from what I know it's supposedly less linear than previous games in the series, which is a step in the right direction.
[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;38474259]I'm actually kind of glad for this. I really haven't been keeping an eye on any of this at all, but from what I know it's supposedly less linear than previous games in the series, which is a step in the right direction.[/QUOTE]
It's not 100% non-linear, but it does let you make some choices that affect the storyline.
Maybe it goes like world at war afterwards and we get a last modern military shooter, then shit like 2-3 future military shooters, and goes on and on
SPACE WARFARE
[QUOTE=usaokay;38474378]Call of Duty innovated space shooters.[/QUOTE]
Call of Duty innovated Virtual-Cop style games.
Played it. Liked it. Much better than the post-COD4 garbage they've been pumping out, honestly.
Oh, and the soundtrack is fucking awesome.
deserves it has one of the best singleplayer campaigns i have played in a while
[QUOTE=Ermac20;38476170]deserves it has one of the best singleplayer campaigns i have played in a while[/QUOTE]
I preferred Black Ops 1's storyline to be honest.
The whole psychological aspect was awesome.
Still, I quite enjoyed Black Ops 2's storyline.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;38474718]Call of Duty innovated Virtual-Cop style games.[/QUOTE]
Honestly, a Call of Duty styled cop game with ridiculous chases and stopping people during heists would actually be pretty awesome.
Interestingly as Eurogamer [URL="http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-11-16-cod-black-ops-2-earns-more-money-in-24-hours-than-black-ops-1-modern-warfare-3"]pointed out[/URL] while it raised the most money in 24 hours they omitted the actual sales numbers which they have never done before.
[QUOTE=mopman999;38474173]but its in the FUTTUREEE[/QUOTE]
Future meaning weapons that already exist then putting digital camo on it. SO HI-TECH.
Can't comment on Black Ops 2, since everyone is saying this one is actually good, but here's hoping for the day that a new Call of Duty doesn't break the sales record.
Because you know, even if Black Ops 2 wasn't as great as everyone is saying, it still would have broken those same records.
[QUOTE=Zeos;38476228]Honestly, a Call of Duty styled cop game with ridiculous chases and stopping people during heists would actually be pretty awesome.[/QUOTE]
But you already have that. In CoD. It's just soldiers not cops.
I mean think about it. You are on rails the entire game. The speed of your progress is controlled all the time and you can't go back. Billion of enemies popping out when the "fight part" comes. The only difference from virtual cop is that you can move by yourself (but only on the predefined path), can look around and you have regenerating health.
However I do understand the appeal in kinda-interactive-over-the-top-action-movie. So each to his own, but the design of the game is really simplistic. "Shoot everything that moves, follow the rails to find more enemies" wrapped around in dramatic action movie plot.
Honestly I was ready and all packed to jump on the hating Black Ops 2 bandwagon. I was frustrated with MW3, it felt like a worse version of the previous title. It was bland and had little life.
I picked up Black Ops 2, as I liked the first Black Ops, however I was ready for treyarch to have taken a similar approach, and dislike the game.
That is not the case.
Plenty of fresh content, noticeably differentiating it from all previous CODs. It feels different whilst keeping the COD style of fast addictive gameplay intact.
Not to mention the campaign is half decent, and past COD 4 I have not really been a fan of the campaigns.
Also Zombies is really well designed and original (Tranzit).
The people who are giving this game grief (giving dumb and disagree ratings to anything in its favor) I presume have not played the game, and just assume Black Ops 2 is yet another rehash.
It is not. Support the fact it is not.
[QUOTE=rapmaster;38476935]The people who are giving this game grief (giving dumb and disagree ratings to anything in its favor) I presume have not played the game, and just assume Black Ops 2 is yet another rehash.
It is not. Support the fact it is not.[/QUOTE]
I've watched TotalBiscuit review the multiplayer and singleplayer of BlackOps 2, and I was impressed with the menu system, all the support and different setups for matches.
But then he plays it and I am just amazed at how bad the game is. But like he says, it's a casual everyone-can-win game with no skills required. You move ridiculously fast, you kill in seconds, you can't really miss because you can spray and pray without consequence and it's just flat out dull.
It's not my kind of game. I hate CoD because of what kind of game it tries to be. A game for everyone to be successful in. A game you don't need to train to be good at, at all. It's a game without any life or energy to it. It wants everyone to be a winner, and in order to keep people playing it keeps rewarding you for absolutely everything you do, so you feel like you're achieving something.
He also pointed out that the Singleplayer campaign is indeed [I]better[/I], but it's still a streamlined corridor shooter, but unlike Medal of Honor at least you are able to kill lots of people. It's improved a bit but that doesn't make it good. And the multiplayer component that everyone plays it for in the first place, is exactly the same as it's always been.
[QUOTE=GoldenBullet;38474149]oddly enough this one kinda deserves it, it's fun[/QUOTE]
and the other ones with the same gameplay aren't?
I prefer the Battlefield series by the way. I am not some COD fanatic I just think this one is quite good.
[QUOTE=dgg;38477152]
But then he plays it and I am just amazed at how bad the game is. But like he says, it's a casual everyone-can-win game with no skills required. You move ridiculously fast, you kill in seconds, you can't really miss because you can spray and pray without consequence and it's just flat out dull.
It's not my kind of game. I hate CoD because of what kind of game it tries to be. A game for everyone to be successful in. A game you don't need to train to be good at, at all. It's a game without any life or energy to it. It wants everyone to be a winner, and in order to keep people playing it keeps rewarding you for absolutely everything you do, so you feel like you're achieving something.
[/QUOTE]
Eh, somewhat true. Going into pub matches with everything unlocked and spraying people down with SMG's is easy, and there isn't really a problem with that (you thinking the game is bad doesn't actually make it bad fyi) as long as it's balanced for that type of experiences.
That said, CoD has quite a high skill ceiling. It's been blunted somewhat over the years due to additions to the game but for a time CoD2 was the highest tier competitive FPS around. CoD4 promod also delivered some amazing high-skill gameplay. The potential is there, it's just not in matchmaking.
Exactly. It's easy to pick up and play and do alright at, but to do well (and I mean competitively well), it takes a lot of time, patience and learning
[QUOTE=Raidyr;38479389]That said, CoD has quite a high skill ceiling. It's been blunted somewhat over the years due to additions to the game but for a time CoD2 was the highest tier competitive FPS around. CoD4 promod also delivered some amazing high-skill gameplay. The potential is there, it's just not in matchmaking.[/QUOTE]
No, it does not. Recoil is non-existent, bullet drop is non-existent. You just pick up any gun you like and they all handle the same. Spray and pray is the most useful thing you can do. Single or burst firing and aiming at the head are stupid things to do that will just lower the chances of getting a kill.
Pointing at something and holding in the button is not skill based. And you don't have the same movability of Quake 3 so you don't need sick aiming and prediction skills either. It's flat-out easy.
Also I didn't say CoD was a bad game because I don't like the game. I'm saying I hate CoD personally and I think it's a bad game. But it's a good game at doing what it does, I just hate it's very existence and purpose.
[QUOTE=dgg;38479461]No, it does not. Recoil is non-existent, bullet drop is non-existent. You just pick up any gun you like and they all handle the same. Spray and pray is the most useful thing you can do. Single or burst firing and aiming at the head are stupid things to do that will just lower the chances of getting a kill.
Pointing at something and holding in the button is not skill based. And you don't have the same movability of Quake 3 so you don't need sick aiming and prediction skills either. It's flat-out easy.
Also I didn't say CoD was a bad game because I don't like the game. I'm saying I hate CoD personally and I think it's a bad game. But it's a good game at doing what it does, I just hate it's very existence and purpose.[/QUOTE]
Quake didn't have recoil. Unreal didn't have bullet drop. It's a fair point that CoD doesn't move as fast (close to Unreal speeds though) but it's not as simple as pointing at something and holding down a button. Yeah you will get kills, you might even do good in that specific match, but that doesn't prove how skillbased a game is or isn't. It's interesting that you say single or burst firing are stupid things to do when quickscoping is such a powerful force, atleast in the Modern Warfare titles.
What exactly is your competitive experience with CoD anyway?
[QUOTE=dgg;38479461]No, it does not. Recoil is non-existent, bullet drop is non-existent. You just pick up any gun you like and they all handle the same. Spray and pray is the most useful thing you can do. Single or burst firing and aiming at the head are stupid things to do that will just lower the chances of getting a kill.
Pointing at something and holding in the button is not skill based. And you don't have the same movability of Quake 3 so you don't need sick aiming and prediction skills either. It's flat-out easy.
Also I didn't say CoD was a bad game because I don't like the game. I'm saying I hate CoD personally and I think it's a bad game. But it's a good game at doing what it does, I just hate it's very existence and purpose.[/QUOTE]
Not really. It's one of those games that's easy to learn but hard to master. Trust me - if it were that easy, there wouldn't have been a competitive community built over the series.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;38479548]Quake didn't have recoil. Unreal didn't have bullet drop. It's a fair point that CoD doesn't move as fast (close to Unreal speeds though) but it's not as simple as pointing at something and holding down a button. Yeah you will get kills, you might even do good in that specific match, but that doesn't prove how skillbased a game is or isn't. It's interesting that you say single or burst firing are stupid things to do when quickscoping is such a powerful force, atleast in the Modern Warfare titles.
What exactly is your competitive experience with CoD anyway?[/QUOTE]
But Quake had the speed, that was my point, in Quake you need to predict your opponents movement constantly, knowing where on the on the map they're coming from, how fast and when they jump. In CoD that speed isn't there and your enemy shows up on the radar every now and again and you usally have big areas of sight wich cancels out the movement speed, so the only challenge is people poking out from doors or corners.
Also yes, when you are guaranteed to get a kill by just simply aiming at the body of a target and holding down the button and nothing more, then it is inferior as a competetive game in comparision to games like Counter-Strike and Shootmania.
Quickscoping isn't single-firing or burstfiring. It's zooming in on your target, I don't see how you related that to single or burstfiring. You're still just spraying the target with every shot you have until it's dead without single or burstclicking to shoot.
Why would I need competetive experience with a game to see that it's mechanics are not at all competetive?
[editline]16th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Stopper;38479849]Not really. It's one of those games that's easy to learn but hard to master. Trust me - if it were that easy, there wouldn't have been a competitive community built over the series.[/QUOTE]
Or maybe it's just such a popular game played by so many that a competetive stage got built from it's popularity?
I'm not saying you can't win over someone with more skills, I'm saying that you don't require skills to win.
[QUOTE=dgg;38479887]
Why would I need competetive experience with a game to see that it's mechanics are not at all competetive?[/quote]
if you are going to insist on arguing that CoD has a low skill ceiling then I'd like to imagine you know more about the game than what you glean from Totalbiscuit reviews where he doesn't even use the term "skill ceiling" correctly.
[QUOTE=dgg;38479887]Or maybe it's just such a popular game played by so many that a competetive stage got built from it's popularity?
I'm not saying you can't win over someone with more skills, I'm saying that you don't require skills to win.[/QUOTE]
Yes, it's easy to pick up, hard to master, that's what a skill ceiling is. It's really easy to load up CoD, get matchmade into a pub and kill people and do well spraying and praying but that doesn't mean the game doesn't have a high end competitive level.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;38479953]if you are going to insist on arguing that CoD has a low skill ceiling then I'd like to imagine you know more about the game than what you glean from Totalbiscuit reviews where he doesn't even use the term "skill ceiling" correctly.[/QUOTE]
I've played Call of Duty myself, I said I had watched TB's video of Black Ops 2, that's for arguments about the difference between Blops 2 and every other CoD game.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;38479953]Yes, it's easy to pick up, hard to master, that's what a skill ceiling is. It's really easy to load up CoD, get matchmade into a pub and kill people and do well spraying and praying but that doesn't mean the game doesn't have a high end competitive level.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying it's impossible to play it competetively, I'm saying it's not really a competetive game because there are so many mechanics stripped away from it.
I think it's not competetive for the same reason I don't find tetris to be competetive. People have absolutely found a way to make it a competetive game, being the fastest and best, but it's not really a competetive game because it's so stripped down, bare and easy. Anyone can play and win CoD and Tetris, not anyone can play and win Counter-Strike and DotA2.
Yeah, I just finished the totaliscuit video. He isn't using the word skill ceiling properly. It doesn't describe how easy it is to play on a below average or average level. A skill ceiling is the level at which a players personal skills such as hand eye coordination and reaction times factor into the game. When played with competitive rules/mods and at a high tier CoD is an amazingly competitive and skillbased title, it's just that you nor TB have actually looked into it.
[editline]16th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=dgg;38480038]Anyone can play and win CoD and Tetris, not anyone can play and win Counter-Strike and DotA2.[/QUOTE]
Right, anyone can play and win CoD. In a pub. Like any other FPS.
But you would get [B]demolished [/B]by a high tier player. So would I.
[editline]16th November 2012[/editline]
Also, I'd argue that on a list of tiers CoD and DotA 2 are both "more competitive" than any CoD title. Same with Quake. That doesn't mean high-level CoD play doesn't depend on skill.
Oh god, I started a COD discussion war.
Hopefully the series will one day be returned to its former glory where everyone thinks it kicks fucking ass.
Doubt it though :/
[QUOTE=Raidyr;38480065]That doesn't mean high-level CoD play doesn't depend on skill.[/QUOTE]
Gosh darn, I never said that either.
I said "People have absolutely found a way to make it a competetive game, being the fastest and best, but it's not really a competetive game because it's so stripped down, bare and easy."
I'm not saying the competetive players don't have more skills. I'm saying they have more skills in something you hardly need skills in, in the first place.
A CS player needs skills in reducing recoil, aiming at the head, spotting the enemy, reacting fast, hear his enemy, know sweet spots for different kinds of grenades, bomb plants and sniping spots.
A CoD player needs skills in aiming at a person, spotting the enemy and reacting fast.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
