Call of Duty: Black Ops 2. Only a money ploy to beat Halo 4? - General

I swear as soon as a new installment of Halo comes out, some Call of Duty game comes out. I'm not sure if it's some plot planned by Treyarch just to beat Halo sales, or if it's just to get money. I'm sure you can recall when Halo: Reach came out so did CoD Black Ops around the same time. I honestly feel that Cod Black Ops was a new idea that Treyarch was bringing alive, but Black Ops 2? Ooooh no, this is not the case. This is clearly just a money ploy to milk the profit of Black Ops. Not only that, but also just to be assholes, they're trying to beat Halo Sales. They're releasing it on the same month as Halo 4 and I'm sure that they will bring out new patches anyways, so why rush it? Treyarch should just take their time and not release it at the same time as Halo 4. They know that some Halo fans play Cod, so they release it around the same time to lower the Halo 4 population and sales so that Bungie/ 343 studios (Yes I know Bungie has no ownership now) will not make any more Halo games. Therefore having the gaming community at their fingertips and racking in the dough. That's my opinion, now I want to hear your's on this. Halo 4 or Black Ops 2? Agree or Disagree? Lets hear it.

They have released a new title every year I don't think this is a conspiracy.

It is a money ploy, but not necessarily targeted at Halo 4. More so targeted at Koticks wallet.

They're aren't even close in the timespan. Yes, they're both "futuristic" but Halo is in 2552, while Black Ops 2 is in 2025. Huge difference their. Just because there is robots it means it's copying Halo?

[QUOTE=All0utWar;35814647]They're aren't even close in the timespan. Yes, they're both "futuristic" but Halo is in 2552, while Black Ops 2 is in 2025. Huge difference their. Just because there is robots it means it's copying Halo?[/QUOTE] I meant the games are both being released in November -_- I didn't mean the dates in the games are the same :s

[QUOTE=RayneMan;35814672]I meant the games are both being released in November -_- I didn't mean the dates in the games are the same :s[/QUOTE] CoD is always released in november.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35814722]CoD is always released in november.[/QUOTE] What exactly is so special about November anyways?

Pre-holidays. No one really likes releasing games mid-December anymore, as of about three years ago. It all either comes in November or January/February.

[QUOTE=Banned?;35814765]Pre-holidays.[/QUOTE] Ah, I am quite understanding now

Black Ops 2 = Total 2142 RipOff , Even The Two Leg Robots , And The Graphics Engine Are STILL the same from cod 4

Well I think this thread has run it's course.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;35814840]Well I think this thread has run it's course.[/QUOTE] Time to start a new thread about Pink Floyd..

[QUOTE=RayneMan;35814741]What exactly is so special about November anyways?[/QUOTE] Market research indicates lucrative business during this time

Adding to that, Halo 4 is the first major Halo game since the original to release in November. It's Halo's fault for treading on COD's release, not the other way around.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;35814525]They have released a new title every year I don't think this is a conspiracy.[/QUOTE] Pretty much this. They only announce their games so that they can release it as soon as the sales of the previous game have dropped

I wouldn't be so negative against new Call of Duty games if they would stop using the same engine every year.

Halo 4 is least likely to lose out to Black Op 2 in terms of XBOX 360 sale but when it comes to multi-platform, Black Ops 2 have the upper hand since it's not limited to just one console. But I doubt Black Ops is a ploy to overthrow Halo in the market since MW have made most people forgotten about Halo nowadays.

I seriously want to give you boxes OP... One game has nothing to do with the other [B]at all[/B]. Its not a conspiracy, its nothing. Just 2 titles being released. And pardon my agressiveness, but I've heard people comparing BO2 to Halo and that is just completely retarded.

[QUOTE=MaikkiBoi;35818378]I wouldn't be so negative against new Call of Duty games if they would stop using the same engine every year.[/QUOTE] yes , why they dont use their fucking money and make a better story , better engine , or a better fucking game

[QUOTE=MaikkiBoi;35818378]I wouldn't be so negative against new Call of Duty games if they would stop using the same engine every year.[/QUOTE] The engine works fine. Making a new one takes a lot of R&D time, effort, testing and money, which is something that I don't think their schedule permits. It shouldn't be changed just for the just for the sake of changing or become some whiners on the internet don't realize what a huge investment making a new engine is.

Because Halo is the only futuristic game ever, right? I don't think that Activision's annual CoD routine would change due to Halo.

[QUOTE=Ziron;35838076]The engine works fine. Making a new one takes a lot of R&D time, effort, testing and money, which is something that I don't think their schedule permits. It shouldn't be changed just for the just for the sake of changing or become some whiners on the internet don't realize what a huge investment making a new engine is.[/QUOTE] This right here. The engine is fine, they just need to reinvent the game itself. With Treyarch claiming they are redesigning the multiplayer instead of copying, makes it sound promising, along with them using the multiplayer engine for Zombies instead of using a separate thing for zombies. In the end it's going to be Zombies that makes me keep or sell it. I think they are going to spend more time on it than just throwing in unbalanced zombie types and slapping on the price tag, though I am probably wrong. I just don't want a repeat of the gas zombie. Or Moon. Or Shangri La.

[QUOTE=certified;35817070]Adding to that, Halo 4 is the first major Halo game since the original to release in November. It's Halo's fault for treading on COD's release, not the other way around.[/QUOTE] Halo 2 came out on November 9th, but that's the only other November release date. The rest are released in September.

Someone's already said it, but holiday sales. Although, if I remember correctly, Reach was released in September, right around my birthday. I don't think they're similar games in any way at all further than having guns in them. You can't really say that any game set 20 minutes into the future must be trying to steal Halo's market, especially when the two games are so different from each other. [QUOTE=MasterAenox;35814813]Black Ops 2 = Total 2142 RipOff , Even The Two Leg Robots[/QUOTE] If you think Blops 2 is going to be a 2142 ripoff you've never played 2142. Are you seriously going to say that 2142 is the only media on earth that has ever used two-legged tanks? Is that the only feature you're going to use to compare the two? Don't even mention how 99% of the vehicles are remote-controlled or how the earth hasn't frozen over in Blops 2, don't mention the Titan gamemode or how leveling up and unlocking new weapons is handled in 2142. Hell, just skip right over turning invisible and EMP airstrikes. [QUOTE=MasterAenox;35814813]And The Graphics Engine Are STILL the same from cod 4[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=MaikkiBoi;35818378]I wouldn't be so negative against new Call of Duty games if they would stop using the same engine every year.[/QUOTE] What's wrong about re-using an engine? Even if it's been around for a long time it's powerful and versatile enough to compete. It looks nice enough, considering Call of Duty isn't a game that focuses on graphics as much as gameplay, and the gameplay is very solid. Don't start crying about the gameplay being bad because it's not the style you prefer, that's like ripping on Tetris because there isn't enough variety or criticizing a movie because it's a comedy when you wanted more romance. If you don't like the gameplay, play a different game. I for one love how smooth it is and how it's more about positioning and reflexes than whether you've got a plasma-based or lead-based weapon and whether the guy you're shooting at has a flak vest on or if he's got +15 DT or whatever. Every game begins on an even playing field, even when you've got a level 1 player and a level 80 player, as far as gunplay goes. If you're going to complain about a series of games using the same engine for years and years running, you'd better start attacking Valve. Half-Life 2, Episode 1, Episode 2, Lost Coast, HL2DM, Counter-Strike: Source, CS:GO, TF2, Portal, Portal 2, Day of Defeat: Source, Left 4 Dead, and Left 4 Dead 2 are all on the Source engine. In fact, the Source engine has been used by third-parties to make games that were then sold on Steam: Garrysmod, Zeno Clash, EYE, The Ship, Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, and more. Getting technical, the Source engine was built directly from the GoldSRC engine, which was used in even more Valve games: Half-Life, Half-Life: Blue Shift, Half-Life: Opposing Force, Counter-Strike, Counter-Strike: Condition Zero (and CZ Deleted Scenes), Team Fortress Classic, Day of Defeat, and yes, Ricochet counts too. Saying that a game is bad because it's on an older engine or an engine that has been used in several games is a completely invalid argument. You're a hypocrite for using it and a bandwagoner for believing it. I've got legitimate gameplay and even functionality complaints about the Call of Duty series, but that's mostly little things that hardly affect my enjoyment of them. I also enjoy the Battlefield and Halo series. I'm not a fanboy and it aggravates me when I see fanboys on either side of a debate, but it's worse when I'm accused of being one. tl;dr you're wrong

[QUOTE=MasterAenox;35814813]Black Ops 2 = Total 2142 RipOff , Even The Two Leg Robots , And The Graphics Engine Are STILL the same from[B][U] CoD 2[/U][/B][/QUOTE] Fixed. @cccritical When you use the same engine for 8 years and make almost no improvements to it whatsoever.

[QUOTE=Usernameztaken;35851518] When you use the same engine for 8 years and make almost no improvements to it whatsoever.[/QUOTE] If you can't see the improvements to it you're blind. Just because the player models still look like humans in modern BDUs (hint: that's what they're supposed to look like) doesn't mean you've made no improvements to it. Are you saying that the gunplay is still the same? Maybe for assault rifles and sniper rifles, but look at pistols, SMGs and shotguns. Look at the variety of gun mechanics and gameplay-altering attachments. Akimbo, extended magazine, tactical knife? All of them change how the weapon is used. Pistols go from backup in extreme emergencies to mainstay weapons, SMGs become room-clearers, shotguns can be full-automatic buckshot machineguns. Look at the riot shield. Look at the semtex and throwing knife. You also need to consider killstreaks, perks, and weapon proficiencies. They haven't been in every installment and everything that has been in more than one game has changed heavily in the next. If you think there's no variety in the Call of Duty series, and that Call of Duty 2 and MW3 are practically the same game, you're lying to yourself.

[QUOTE=cccritical;35851656]If you can't see the improvements to it you're blind. Just because the player models still look like humans in modern BDUs (hint: that's what they're supposed to look like) doesn't mean you've made no improvements to it. Are you saying that the gunplay is still the same? Maybe for assault rifles and sniper rifles, but look at pistols, SMGs and shotguns. Look at the variety of gun mechanics and gameplay-altering attachments. Akimbo, extended magazine, tactical knife? All of them change how the weapon is used. Pistols go from backup in extreme emergencies to mainstay weapons, SMGs become room-clearers, shotguns can be full-automatic buckshot machineguns. Look at the riot shield. Look at the semtex and throwing knife. You also need to consider killstreaks, perks, and weapon proficiencies. They haven't been in every installment and everything that has been in more than one game has changed heavily in the next. If you think there's no variety in the Call of Duty series, and that Call of Duty 2 and MW3 are practically the same game, you're lying to yourself.[/QUOTE] You're right. Call of Duty 2 and Modern Warfare 3 are completely different. On the other hand, ever since Modern Warfare 2, the rest of the Call of Duty series thus far has been basically the same thing (at least for multiplayer).

[QUOTE=cccritical;35851656]If you can't see the improvements to it you're blind. Just because the player models still look like humans in modern BDUs (hint: that's what they're supposed to look like) doesn't mean you've made no improvements to it. Are you saying that the gunplay is still the same? Maybe for assault rifles and sniper rifles, but look at pistols, SMGs and shotguns. Look at the variety of gun mechanics and gameplay-altering attachments. Akimbo, extended magazine, tactical knife? All of them change how the weapon is used. Pistols go from backup in extreme emergencies to mainstay weapons, SMGs become room-clearers, shotguns can be full-automatic buckshot machineguns. Look at the riot shield. Look at the semtex and throwing knife. You also need to consider killstreaks, perks, and weapon proficiencies. They haven't been in every installment and everything that has been in more than one game has changed heavily in the next. If you think there's no variety in the Call of Duty series, and that Call of Duty 2 and MW3 are practically the same game, you're lying to yourself.[/QUOTE] None of those things change the gameplay enough to warrant 60 dollars, not even remotely close, they warrant a DLC pack to the game at most.

To be completely honest they don't really need a ploy to beat the Halo series in sales souly for the reason that the halo series are xbox exclusives while the call of duty series is on every platform.

On the engine argument, Halo 4 (Along with Halo Reach and the Bungie-era ones) is using an incrementally upgraded version of the same engine that Bungie (And now 343I) had been using since 2001 with the release of the completely unrelated game Oni. Hell, adding to that, the decision to make a new engine from scratch rather than upgrading the existing engine is one of the main reasons Free Radical was killed. To be honest, completely making a new engine for every new game is extremely foolish. COD's dev teams might not be the best, but they aren't idiots. That's a large investment time and money to be making a new engine on when your publisher has set a precedent of a <2 year development time to work with.