Black Ops 2 Trailer - General

[QUOTE=Raidyr;35782747]This has been status quo for the FPS genre for years now. Changing engines every development cycle (mostly) died with the passing of the arena shooter phase. It will become a more common occurrence considering the massive cost of game development these days. So 10 years ago I'd agree. Today? It's hard to fault developers for not wanting to take risks or massively upgrade their base when the stakes are as high as they can often be.[/QUOTE] This is not the answer to the question but excuses for releasing what used to be expansions as new games.

Wasn't meant to be an answer nor an excuse, just stating facts.

You are giving me reasons why this is happening in a tone of "come on, give them a break" of course you are giving excuses. The reason why they do this doesn't matter. It's still releasing THE SAME GAME with new models, maps, stats and sounds as a NEW GAME. Those things are expansions or mods and I will always treat them as such. I mean holy crap, apparently I can take an FPS, learn how to make models and maps for it, record some sounds and I can create entirely new games which would be worth 60$ a copy. And if your development cycle takes 1 year it's only natural that you won't be making engines every year. Maybe what they should do is to release them less often then? Maybe, just fucking maybe, the game wouldn't be rehash of last year's rehash in that case. It's not the harsh reality of the market as you are trying to make it. Activision chose to release those games every year. It's not like they can't take some more time and make a [I]new [/I]game.

Why would they make a new game when the current one is working so well for the publisher and the fanbase? [editline]1st May 2012[/editline] Also I never said give them a break, I'm being entirely neutral here. Their games don't change yet sales go up. Why on earth would they start changing them? The free market is clearly not in demand for crazy innovation and prefers it's standard CoD style template year after year.

What does that have to do with anything? First we are talking why this is a rehash/mod/expansion and now you go with "why would they make a new game?". I love talking to CoD fanboys. The the moment they feel they are loosing an argument they go "but the activision is doing very well thanks to the way they are doing business". We're not talking about that. We're talking about releasing expansions as new games. And they don't have a reason to stop releasing the same game every year. It's the best fucking thing ever for a company to sell the same thing 5 times. And I like how you changed from "well that's just how the market works now, they don't want to take risks" to "well that's just the way they do business and it's going well for them, why change?". So it's not "they are forced to develop games like that" but "they want to develop games like that because its profitable" ? [editline]1st May 2012[/editline] You are the biggest white knight of CoD on facepunch and you are saying that you are entirely neutral? Give me a fucking break.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;35783231]We're talking about releasing expansions as new games. [/QUOTE] To which I say a lot of games these days do this. Sorry. [editline]1st May 2012[/editline] Fanboy? White knight? Arguments? What the fuck are you on about? I'm just pointing out Activision is successful with their business model.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;35783345] Fanboy? White knight? Arguments? What the fuck are you on about? [/QUOTE] Hah. Well first I replied to some guy how the game is a rehash to which you replied "that's how they do things now" and to which I replied "that's not an excuse" and then you went "it's a successful business model, why would they change?". I think there was an argument somewhere in there. [QUOTE=Raidyr;35783345]I'm just pointing out Activision is successful with their business model.[/QUOTE] Business model as in rereleasing the same mindless casual(as in you can play for short periods of time and it won't affect anything) game every year with minimal changes between releases while spending more or equal cash on advertisement than on the development? Yeah I honestly agree, it's a successful model. Though people who don't like paying for the same thing 5 times might get pissed off but there is enough people that don't mind to earn a nice sum before they catch up or get bored. I mean, dude, if you can make people pay you for the same thing 5 times, it's a successful model.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;35783548] Business model as in rereleasing the same mindless casual(as in you can play for short periods of time and it won't affect anything) game every year with minimal changes between releases while spending more or equal cash on advertisement than on the development? Yeah I honestly agree, it's a successful model. Though people who don't like paying for the same thing 5 times might get pissed off but there is enough people that don't mind to earn a nice sum before they catch up or get bored.[/QUOTE] This is more or less my point, with slightly less thinly-veiled contempt.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;35783571]This is more or less my point, with slightly less thinly-veiled contempt.[/QUOTE] I don't hide that I don't like the way they do business but what you just quoted is an adequate, objective assessment. This is exactly what they are doing. I like how you rated me funny. So it's not what they are doing? So you are arguing against your own point now?

The thing that's wrong with CoD series is that they make a game each year. The formula leads to fun gameplay and it works, but they base a new game on it each year.

[QUOTE=Tinter;35783664]The thing that's wrong with CoD series is that they make a game each year. The formula leads to fun gameplay and it works, but they base a new game on it each year.[/QUOTE] Honestly it hasn't been fun or worked for me since CoD4

The best thing out of black ops was the zombies. Make an entire game based on zombies, would be awesome if they let players become special zombies and fight against the other people playing humans, but then everyone would say its copying l4d and get all sassy.

[QUOTE=Pandamox;35783679]Honestly it hasn't been fun or worked for me since CoD4[/QUOTE] Well CoD4 was fun. And the multiplayer for all sequels have been based on CoD4. If you never had played CoD4, and had started with mw2, you would've probably found it fun. I think I can pretty safely say that the reason you don't find the other games fun is because it's mostly the same gameplay. [editline]1st May 2012[/editline] I honestly can't precisely remember the point I was trying to make. [editline]1st May 2012[/editline] I think it was something like, it's not the gameplay that's the problem, it's the gameplay being the same each game.

[QUOTE=Tinter;35784618]Well CoD4 was fun. And the multiplayer for all sequels have been based on CoD4. If you never had played CoD4, and had started with mw2, you would've probably found it fun. I think I can pretty safely say that the reason you don't find the other games fun is because it's mostly the same gameplay. [editline]1st May 2012[/editline] I honestly can't precisely remember the point I was trying to make. [editline]1st May 2012[/editline] I think it was something like, it's not the gameplay that's the problem, it's the gameplay being the same each game.[/QUOTE] Multiplayer was tweaked to a limited number of killstreaks in MW2. I perferred the old type more. Not to mention the maps felt more fun in my opinion.