[QUOTE=meatballfish;30835707]I don't get why you guys are so harsh on the CoD series. You're just a bunch of hipsters about it really. "I don't like it because it's popular."
Hell, you're like /v/ about anything that isn't a JRPG
apparently, i'm dumb because I have my own taste in games. Go click on my steam profile, look at my games.[/QUOTE]
Get common sense in how video game design works, its easy to tell that Call of Duty is rehashed every year to consume your money.
[QUOTE=jaykray;30858177]I can't wait until everyone loves valve and then a load of people are going to start hating them because they liked them before it was cool and now valve aren't the same as they used to be, they've sold out.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because everyone hates Activision to be cool and not because it's a bloated and greedy giant that, to a lot of people, destroyed a favorite franchise.
I think the saddest part is how cod4 was really a brilliant game, and the decline from then on has been frightening.
killstreaks work because you get to kill and kill more because you got the killstreaks and u call hell down the mothefuckers
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;30858909]killstreaks work because you get to kill and kill more because you got the killstreaks and u call hell down the mothefuckers[/QUOTE]
Post of the year.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;30858909]killstreaks work because you get to kill and kill more because you got the killstreaks and u call hell down the mothefuckers[/QUOTE]
Killstreaks don't work because you get rewarded for winning by being given the chance to win harder. Deathstreaks, added to MW2, were a poor way of trying to make up for killstreaks by giving people who were losing the chance to win. Treyarch and IW both added too many unnecessary killstreaks, the 3 in Modern Warfare 1 were fine and that's why I play barebones if I'm by myself.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;30858377]Actually, the killstreaks feel more balanced in Black Ops then they did in MW2.[/QUOTE]
MW2's killstreaks counted towards eachother, which I enjoyed.
In Black Ops, say, if you got a Sentry Turret, the kills wouldn't count towards dogs or a chopper gunner.
I personally prefer the latter but I can understand it sucks when you join a lobby and some godmode guy has a Pave Low and a AC-130 assraping the other team.
[QUOTE=TBFundy;30860153]MW2's killstreaks counted towards eachother, which I enjoyed.
In Black Ops, say, if you got a Sentry Turret, the kills wouldn't count towards dogs or a chopper gunner.
I personally prefer the latter but I can understand it sucks when you join a lobby and some godmode guy has a Pave Low and a AC-130 assraping the other team.[/QUOTE]
The problem with having stacking killstreaks is that you can technically end the game with a 6 killstreak on MW2. Harriers, Chopper Gunner, Nuke.
[editline]3rd July 2011[/editline]
and my major gripe with killstreaks is they promote camping and deter from teamwork, especially in objective games which people already treat as deathmatches even in other games that don't have killstreaks like BC2.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30835799]20 kills or something without anyone dying, the team gets faster respawns until someone dies[/QUOTE]
Probably late but, Read that out loud.
[QUOTE=Del91;30860958]Probably late but, Read that out loud.[/QUOTE]
Thatsthejoke.jpg
moderately polite predator missile inbound.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30854818]yeah except it's hypocritical to suggest that you have a smart reason to hate call of duty and then claim you're an idiot for not agreeing with them all being the same.[/QUOTE]
Are you high? How is that hypocritical? That doesn't contradict each other.
The other thing is, it's a fact that those games are basically the same, "not agreeing" with it is like "not agreeing" with evolution, you either accept a fact or you don't. If you don't, it means your judgment is clouded and I can make assumptions about your intelligence.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30854818]it's called being a twat to people and it makes me want to ignore your posts because you're only arguing because you hate people[/QUOTE]
What? :v:
Where did you get that from seriously? I argue with people when I strongly disagree with them, or when I see that they are ignorant, hypocritical or just plain wrong and when even though, they try to prove how right they are and refuse to understand the rebut.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30862497]Are you high? How is that hypocritical? That doesn't contradict each other.
The other thing is, it's a fact that those games are basically the same, "not agreeing" with it is like "not agreeing" with evolution, you either accept a fact or you don't. If you don't, it means your judgment is clouded and I can make assumptions about your intelligence. [/QUOTE]
hmm okay
so thinking that COD games have changed is akin to not believe evolution is true.
and you have the balls to make assumptions about other people's intelligence?
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30862497]What? :v:
Where did you get that from seriously? I argue with people when I strongly disagree with them, or when I see that they are ignorant, hypocritical or just plain wrong and when even though, they try to prove how right they are and refuse to understand the rebut.[/QUOTE]
you're a hypocrite for saying that other people should respect your opinion while bagging on other people's opinions and you're a twat because you insult random people's intelligence based on the concept of a game
you need to be taken down a couple of notches because you are nowhere close to how smart you think you are
[QUOTE=TBFundy;30860153]MW2's killstreaks counted towards eachother, which I enjoyed.[/QUOTE]
No that was fucking dumb
[QUOTE=thisispain;30862970]hmm okay
so thinking that COD games have changed is akin to not believe evolution is true.[/QUOTE]
Yes. Both are not accepting the facts. Plain and simple. It's not a matter of opinion at all.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30862970]you're a hypocrite for saying that other people should respect your opinion while bagging on other people's opinions[/QUOTE]
What? :v:
Read my posts, I'm ok with your [I]opinion [/I]that CoD games are enjoyable. But I'm not OK with a claim that those games aren't practically the same, because it's not a matter of opinion but a matter of not accepting facts. You just can't fucking read.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30862970]and you're a twat because you insult random people's intelligence based on the concept of a game[/QUOTE]
No? I make assumptions about their intelligence based on their ignorance and fallacies. It doesn't matter about what.
And now the lol part.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30862970]and you have the balls to make assumptions about other people's intelligence?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=thisispain;30862970]you are nowhere close to how smart you think you are[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=thisispain;30862970]you're a hypocrite
[/QUOTE]
Wow.
Didn't they say Black Ops was to have a "different" killstreak system, and all they did was basically rename and reclassify them?
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30863500]Yes. Both are not accepting the facts. Plain and simple. It's not a matter of opinion at all.
What? :v:
Read my posts, I'm ok with your [I]opinion [/I]that CoD games are enjoyable. But I'm not OK with a claim that those games aren't practically the same, because it's not a matter of opinion but a matter of not accepting facts. You just can't fucking read.[/QUOTE]
throwing an insult about my reading comprehension is stupid because i can clearly see your whole attitude towards people on this forum. i haven't even bought any of the call of duty's myself because i don't like them but you act like a prick and have a giant complex to boot.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30863500]No? I make assumptions about their intelligence based on their ignorance and fallacies. It doesn't matter about what.[/QUOTE]
i'm telling you to stop attacking other people and analyze your own flaws, mainly insulting people's intelligence over video games even when you don't even know them.
and i don't see any fucking fallacies when it comes to the similarity of call of duty. in fact an irrelevant conclusion is a fallacy itself and you're arguing in circles.
call of duty's games do have differences and allow me to be intentionally ironic by pointing out that if you don't see them you're either blind or a complete liar who's never even played the games he's willing to go attack other people on a forum over
my guess is the second and you get off acting intelligent which is where the second part comes from
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30863500]And now the lol part.
Wow.[/QUOTE]
it's not hypocritical because i never made an assumption about your intelligence, but you very obviously have a high opinion of yourself that you are certainly not matching
[QUOTE=thisispain;30863858]throwing an insult about my reading comprehension is stupid because i can clearly see your whole attitude towards people on this forum. i haven't even bought any of the call of duty's myself because i don't like them but you act like a prick and have a giant complex to boot. [/QUOTE]
But your reading comprehension is poor. You see a hypocrisy when there is none, you think I'm attacking people because they like the game I don't, and I've said that it's not the case numerous times. Credibility of any of your assumptions about me at this point is equal to zero.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30863858]i'm telling you to stop attacking other people and analyze your own flaws, mainly insulting people's intelligence over video games even when you don't even know them.[/QUOTE]
Why does it matter if someone is ignorant when it comes to seeing differences in video games or anything else? It's like "you can't attack people's intelligence over, I don't know, anything, fucking colors", I can and I would assume that someone who can't see the difference between red and blue is either retarded or colorblind.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30863858]and i don't see any fucking fallacies when it comes to the similarity of call of duty. in fact an irrelevant conclusion is a fallacy itself and you're arguing in circles.
call of duty's games do have differences and allow me to be intentionally ironic by pointing out that if you don't see them you're either blind or a complete liar who's never even played the games he's willing to go attack other people on a forum over
my guess is the second and you get off acting intelligent which is where the second part comes from[/QUOTE]
Okay, you said you have never bought any of those games, but you claim to know for certain that they are different. You also claim that I'm either "blind or a complete liar who's never even played the games". The problem with this is that I actually do have MW1, MW2 and Black Ops, and I've spend over 100 hours in each one of them so I do have an insight that you don't. And any further argument whether those games are significantly different from each other is void because you don't know what you are talking about, while I do.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30863858]it's not hypocritical because i never made an assumption about your intelligence, but you very obviously have a high opinion of yourself that you are certainly not matching[/QUOTE]Didn't you say that I'm not as smart as I think? Twice? The second time just now? Like, just after saying that you don't make assumptions about my intelligence?
Just a random thought but a big argument here is that the last good Call of duty game was the first MW, then MW2 came out and people began to complain that all they do now is rehash the last game, change a few textures and resell the game.
That statement seems kind of flawed, if you only count the IW games (I've never really enjoyed the treyarch games, black ops was ok but shitty PC support more or less killed it for me) that means they've came out with one "new" MW game since the first... The improvements with the next MW could end up actually making the next game really good... more or less what I'm saying here is don't expect the next game to be crap, wait for it to come out then decide for your self.
Either way I'll be playing BF3 on pc, and mw3 will be on the console (simply because it's the only game i play with my roommates and friends other then guildwars.)
[QUOTE=Pig;30836408]Stop complaining about their not being a boatload of new gameplay changing features. Call of Duty isn't the only game known for this. Take for example: Assassin's Creed as stated, Gears of War, [b]Pokemon[/b], and Half-Life 2 just to name a few. There's a new pokemon game pretty much every year and they release TWO on the same day without many differences between the two.[/QUOTE]
Half life 2. What? Half life 2 is one game, not a series, and Ep1 and 2 are expansions, not entirely new games. Even then, the episodes aren't $60 bucks each like CoD games. I'm pretty sure there are as much people bitching about pokemon anyways. Never played Assassins Creed or Gears of War more than once or twice so can't really say anything about that.
[editline]edit~[/editline]
Haha, Black Ops killstreaks aren't balanced, you can completely rape the other team if one person gets a chopper gunner or whatever it is called. The match is basically over when that happens.
I want a black El Camino with flamethrowers
Has anyone else noticed WaW literally is a rehash of CoD4? They barely changed the killstreaks, changed the ui, added a few new perks or modified current ones, and replaced the CoD4 teams and models and maybe changed some weapons around. That's it. Most of the weapons - or at least the equipment - are exactly like their CoD4 replicas. The maps are different, but only slightly.
If any game is a rehash in the CoD series, WaW is it. It literally is, not this "Oh mw2 is just like CoD4!!" bullshit.
[QUOTE=Reimu;30871367]Has anyone else noticed WaW literally is a rehash of CoD4? They barely changed the killstreaks, changed the ui, added a few new perks or modified current ones, and replaced the CoD4 teams and models and maybe changed some weapons around. That's it. Most of the weapons - or at least the equipment - are exactly like their CoD4 replicas. The maps are different, but only slightly.
If any game is a rehash in the CoD series, WaW is it. It literally is, not this "Oh mw2 is just like CoD4!!" bullshit.[/QUOTE]
The campaign of WaW is different
Yeah but the multiplayer isn't, and who plays CoD for the sp anwyay :v:?
[QUOTE=EvilMattress;30835732]I'll play it and I'll [i][b]NEVER GO ONLINE[/b][/i][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;30841817]You could count Battlefield, except that BC1 --> BC2 --> BF3 were major changes. Mostly in graphics, and new gameplay features such as destruction.
Compared to other games coming this year, MW3 doesn't look impressive at all to me.[/QUOTE]
Hnnnnggggghhh
The Bad Company series is completely separate from the rest of the Battlefield series.
[QUOTE=CommieTurtle;30872099]Hnnnnggggghhh
The Bad Company series is completely separate from the rest of the Battlefield series.[/QUOTE]
It's still a good example of engine advancement between games in a series, even the gameplay will probably be a bit similar.
also
[img]http://gyazo.com/57915e66d207a86cc3ce31972c14c907.png[/img]
boohoo
Maye so, but that doesn't make it part of the main series.
Exhibit A:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/XX825.png[/IMG]
I believe with the engine development and new gameplay aspects, BF3 will play slightly more like a BC3 than a BF2, but I'm sure there's a comfortable 'in-between' somewhere.
I really hope so, I'm not a huge fan of BC2. Having played most of the games since BF1942, the formula of the early games is much better.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.