Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare pre-orders are very low - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Exploders;50464598]Not even tying a remastered COD4 changed peoples minds about it [editline]6th June 2016[/editline] Shoulda just announced the remastered cod4, woulda probably gotten them more[/QUOTE] They should've done that Modern Warfare Mashup idea where you take all the best content from all three games and put it into the multiplayer. Dunno what they'd do for a singleplayer though.

I'd love a MW2 remake, with all the fun glitchy nonsensical stuff in it still.

[QUOTE=343N;50464579]battlefield 1 has battlefield won[/QUOTE] Would have been better if you said. "Battlefield 1 has won the Battle, doesn't even need to win the War"

[QUOTE=da space core;50465456]Im not sure precisely what caused the sudden negative reaction with this particular cod game, but with how they were treating thr franchise, it was going to happen eventually[/QUOTE] Mainly Infinity Ward. MW2 is seen as the pinnacle of CoD multiplayer for a lot of people (not including me but w/e), then MW3 was bad, and Ghosts ended up being an absolute total shitshow, nobody really trusts them not to fuck it up. I guarantee that once we get back to the year that Treyarch releases a CoD, everyone'll be jumping out of their seats to get it. Why? Because Treyarch is the fan-favorite developer right now, and Sledgehammer is sort of a toss-up because they've only got one game under their belt and it was a good idea with many flaws in the execution.

Yeah it looks fun, but a new game literally once a year from the same franchise gets old, you're bound to reach a point where people are just sick of hearing about it or buying into it over and over again. Especially when your last few games have been rather lackluster and more of the same, with other flaws to boot.

[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50465585]I'd love a MW2 remake, with all the fun glitchy nonsensical stuff in it still.[/QUOTE] Give me Terminal or give me death.

[QUOTE=Super Muffin;50465026]There's a large population of CoD players tired of future stuff who want to go back to World War 2. They've been getting progressively louder as each new game has released. Add the CoD4 remaster being a special edition only bonus and BF1 to the equation and you get perfect conditions for a shitstorm.[/QUOTE] It's not even going back to World War 2. It's the game is essentially gone completely apeshit over esoteric future nonsense to foster this hyperactive never-stop-sprinting-run-and-gun shootman gameplay. Everything from the map design to the way the entire multiplayer experience revolves around gimmicks of varying degrees of absurdity is to make the gameplay so fast and utterly chaotic it's incomprehensible at this point. To the point where it just doesn't match up with reality anymore, and most of the gimmicks require razor sharp twitch response time or fucking sight beyond sight to not instantly die from. You know what this is? [B]Quake.[/B] And the vast majority of people stopped playing Quake in the 90s. And this is Quake with auto-aim, so it's even less appealing to someone like me. I might be fucking insane, but I like to have time to enjoy or at least [B][I]fucking comprehend[/I][/B] the environment around me and what I'm doing in the game without me being required to be 110% fucking focused on 360 degree no-scopes to keep my kill-streak running so I can keep my sweet K/D up. When I play CoD. I don't even fucking care if my team wins or not. In the long run, it doesn't fucking matter. Sidestepping the fact that the writing for the campaigns is the worst it's ever been, Black Ops was a saving throw, but Black Ops 2 basically threw itself under the bus. The game now is a series of vapid and completely meaningless bright strobing lights that's painful to look at now. I'm excited for Battlefield 1 because I want to sit in a trench and shoot people. [editline]6th June 2016[/editline] And another thing, that cover of space oddity was absolutely fucking terrible and was utterly meaningless. Like it had no place being there.

Considering the lack of success Epic Games has with the new Unreal Tournament and the dozens of others trying to make battle arena shooters popular again while failing miserably. You'd wonder why they are even continuously trying at all. Yet, Halo seemed to survive rather well. During the "neigh to battle arena shooters" period we're going through. But, then again Halo's success is most likely attributed to it being the first profilic shooter on the Xbox. Less than where it's roots are from.

[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50465121]Game looks interesting conceptwise, I suppose. Humans vs Humans on different planets and spaceshiipss. Reminds me of Shattered Horizon, except AAA level and actually going to have at least more players than what SH had.[/QUOTE] The story is hardly its selling point anymore. [editline]6th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=gk99;50465669]Mainly Infinity Ward. MW2 is seen as the pinnacle of CoD multiplayer for a lot of people (not including me but w/e), then MW3 was bad, and Ghosts ended up being an absolute total shitshow, nobody really trusts them not to fuck it up. I guarantee that once we get back to the year that Treyarch releases a CoD, everyone'll be jumping out of their seats to get it. Why? Because Treyarch is the fan-favorite developer right now, and Sledgehammer is sort of a toss-up because they've only got one game under their belt and it was a good idea with many flaws in the execution.[/QUOTE] MW2 worked because things were mainly simple, and you could have fun with quite a few things. It also wasn't a drag to look at like mw3, which was like a frankenstein mw2.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;50465898]The story is hardly its selling point anymore.[/QUOTE] We all know that the multiplayer is the only selling point of CoD. The campaign has been the same stuff over and over, again and again. For the several past installments. Kill bad guys, wait at designated checkpoint, kill bad guys, go to designated checkpoint, get cutscene, next level rince and repeat.

[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50465894]Considering the lack of success Epic Games has with the new Unreal Tournament and the dozens of others trying to make battle arena shooters popular again while failing miserably. You'd wonder why they are even continuously trying at all. Yet, Halo seemed to survive rather well. During the "neigh to battle arena shooters" period we're going through.[/QUOTE] Halo is on life support because 343 is jacking in MOBA game concepts to keep up with the 'in' crowd. It's also going down the tube with the way it just doesn't even really give a shit about what nonsense it's spewing to keep itself going, and just the utter bold faced disrespect it has for it's own sensibilities. Like the way it goddamn basks in suddenly being an immensely personal character driven story while having characters that you mostly don't care about. Master Chief didn't need fucking character development for you to give a shit about what was happening around him. Personally, I didn't like Reach because it felt unnecessary and unsatisfying, I liked the somber tone of the whole thing but I just could not get over how amazingly unimportant you were to the point where they had to Retcon the event to give you a purpose in the grand scheme of things. Everything after Halo 3 didn't happen in my head. Nothing. Halo Wars 2 however, might be good. Because the setting itself is actually like the one good point about the series. And Halo Wars wasn't bad, just shallow. Which isn't surprising since ensemble was shuttered almost immediately afterwords which probably should say something about the state of affairs surrounding the game.

Hmn, is the consensus that Reach was a bad Halo? It's the only Halo game I actually sat down and played a bit of and I actually liked the whole environment and level design quite a lot. The story was alright too. At least to the part I stopped at. Can't remember where though.

[QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50465963]Hmn, is the consensus that Reach was a bad Halo? It's the only Halo game I actually sat down and played a bit of and I actually liked the whole environment and level design quite a lot. The story was alright too.[/QUOTE] It was acceptable. But did not live up to my expectations, I expected a lot more showstopping fights and most of the time you were shuffling around in the background doing 'stuff' And the sabers were an amazingly short lived disappointment, they could have done more with that since one of your character's gimmicks was 'he's a pilot for the damn things' and they show up exactly -once- for literally 10 minutes.

Reach is a damn good game IMO, but mostly for the multiplayer. The campaign was okay, but to me it was the weakest campaign of the Bungie Halos.

It had a good run. A really good run, considering all the copies sold. I don't even know how many CoDs it has been since I last played it.

With all the hype over MW:R I wonder how everyone would respond to another game set in the MW universe. Keep Price and keep it boots on the ground and sales go back through the roof.

[QUOTE=Jelman;50467603]With all the hype over MW:R I wonder how everyone would respond to another game set in the MW universe. Keep Price and keep it boots on the ground and sales go back through the roof.[/QUOTE] I don't think they have any more room for Price. They could have ended the MW universe at the first game without anything needing a tie in. Then they did MW2 and despite being ok at best, it gave us somewhat of a cliffhanger with Makarov, and FYI, we never get to hear about Ramirez again. We also got a Gaz soundalike called Ghost, which was forgettable as fuck. Then we got MW3. We didn't need MW3. I didn't even finish MW3's singleplayer because of how dull it was, but that finished the series at least.

It doesn't help that the Settlement Defense Front of Infinite Warfare is basically the Helghast from Killzone, except so far less interesting due to a lack of the literal space nazi imagery. The series has reached the point where there doesn't seem to be an original bone in its body so they rip off other franchises.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;50467688]We also got a Gaz soundalike called Ghost, which was forgettable as fuck.[/QUOTE] most of the kiddies who played mw2 obsessed over ghost endlessly.

I think the failure of CoD is that it has lost sight entirely of its original purpose - Call of Duty 1 was a game that tried to be about average soldiers and their average weapons just going and fighting the war without your player character being some godly supersoldier. Call of Duty was a commentary about WW2 that no other shooter offered at the time, and even if it was a "hurr greatest generation durr patriotism" type of commentary, the game still at least tried to say something about war. Even Call of Duty 4 echoed popular perceptions about Iraq through its "U.S. invades a middle eastern country and everything goes wrong" narrative. I think a good, honest CoD game that takes on Vietnam or Korea through the lens of CoD1 would be great, or maybe even a revisit to WW2 campaigns not explored in CoD1, UO, or 2 (and there are still tons left out). Future fighters with spooky future space technology has been overdone for at least the last decade - probably far more than WW2 shooters even. A return to simplicity would be nice.

[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;50464982]Not surprising, but I don't get why everyone dislikes it. It doesn't really look that different from the past two CODs and I actually like the space combat look. I doubt it's going to be any good, but whatever[/QUOTE] Not really, ever since BO2 (with the slight inclusion of MW3), all cods are in a futuristic setting now don't get me wrong, there's nothing bad about being all about the future, you get a big canvas to play around with and your not restricted by the limitations of reality but there comes a time when people kind of want to start playing within the bounds of reality, where shooting someone from across the map with your high powered rifle with quanto bullets starts to become a tad silly it's why bf1 is getting so much praise right now and i suppose a lot of preorders. BF3 and BF4 were done in a modern setting but not as over the top as CoD, but DICE knew that to keep the game fresh they couldn't go down the same path as Activision and pump out a futuristic BF they wanted to grab the attention of upset CoD fanboys who wants the franchise to return to the olden days of combat, and that's exactly what they did People are growing tired of the future, it's now so fucking overdone that people want to look at the past again, I'd say it's a trend that's dying off and thank fuck for that

This is surreal to me because it's the same terrible thing that's happened to a lot of my favorite franchises, but in reverse. I hate when niche games go "mainstream" to reach a bigger audience but end up losing the core gameplay and/or themes that drew me to the original in the first place. This CoD is going "niche" (in terms of arena/mobility-heavy/fast-paced shooter gameplay, the kind of games I enjoy) to appeal to a bigger audience while losing the core gameplay/themes that the mainstream audience loved. This is the first CoD game that's interested me, it's just weird to see this all play out.

[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50467748]most of the kiddies who played mw2 obsessed over ghost endlessly.[/QUOTE] And I have no idea why. Gaz was sort of memorable, dunno why anymore though. Ghost on the other hand didn't even have a face. Aside from the cringey edgy name which didn't even fit him, he was just another npc, that died later on. Even Corporal Dunn and the NPCs like the seargent that are with you during the russian invasion of the US are way more memorable and awesome than Ghost. They might have not been all that amazing as npcs, but you sort of developed an attachment for them, imo. At least a bigger attachment than anyone else other than Price. Oh, remember Soap's reveal? Revealed to have a fucking mohawk. Everyone was like "what the fuck? Why?"

[QUOTE=RikohZX;50467747]It doesn't help that the Settlement Defense Front of Infinite Warfare is basically the Helghast from Killzone, except so far less interesting due to a lack of the literal space nazi imagery. The series has reached the point where there doesn't seem to be an original bone in its body so they rip off other franchises.[/QUOTE] While killzone isn't all that imaginative either (not in comparison, just overall), I still quite like it. The only thing I don't like it is that its on a console and I CAN'T AIM FOR SHIT :( Anyway, I think they should had went with replicants or something of the sort for this cod. Not space nazis or second rate helghast copies. The story could be something predictable, like humanity evolves so much that it creates self aware androids that are almost exactly like humans, who live together up until some clash between humans and androids, which causes the androids to be shunned to another planet, where they build up an empire, and then try to invade and enslave Earth. Some bullshit like that. [editline]7th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=usaokay;50468700]Ghost was popular primarily from his appearance. That's it.[/QUOTE] Are you fucking serious? Oh my god :v:

Ghost also got a fucking tie-in comic for some reason, as if he was some bigger star than Price despite him pretty much being a generic 'cool assist NPC' role. And MW3 even has another character with the same voice actor doing the same general shtick, but even less notable.

[QUOTE=daschnek;50467750]I think the failure of CoD is that it has lost sight entirely of its original purpose - Call of Duty 1 was a game that tried to be about average soldiers and their average weapons just going and fighting the war without your player character being some godly supersoldier. Call of Duty was a commentary about WW2 that no other shooter offered at the time, and even if it was a "hurr greatest generation durr patriotism" type of commentary, the game still at least tried to say something about war. Even Call of Duty 4 echoed popular perceptions about Iraq through its "U.S. invades a middle eastern country and everything goes wrong" narrative. I think a good, honest CoD game that takes on Vietnam or Korea through the lens of CoD1 would be great, or maybe even a revisit to WW2 campaigns not explored in CoD1, UO, or 2 (and there are still tons left out). Future fighters with spooky future space technology has been overdone for at least the last decade - probably far more than WW2 shooters even. A return to simplicity would be nice.[/QUOTE] WW2 is still a bit too fresh in my mind, but I'd really rather have that than futuristic shit. Plus, I'm probably the only person who sees space fighting stuff as a really boring thing. [editline]7th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=RikohZX;50468718]Ghost also got a fucking tie-in comic for some reason, as if he was some bigger star than Price despite him pretty much being a generic 'cool assist NPC' role. And MW3 even has another character with the same voice actor doing the same general shtick, but even less notable.[/QUOTE] I don't remember him in mw3 at all. Only Gaz matters, and even then, he doesn't really matters all that much either.

i still think my idea from the pre-trailer leak was better than what they're doing now literally time travel hijinks and mind screw stuff that mixes world war ii, the vietnam war and other cold war conflicts, futuristic stuff and otherwise as a gigantic crossover of everything Call of Duty. literally, 'infinite' warfare. Instead infinite means space and it's time for Advanced Warfare + Halo + Killzone instead.

Sounds very timesplintery? Which isn't bad. The only thing I'm interested in seeing is the remaster.

[QUOTE=goon165;50465751]It's not even going back to World War 2. It's the game is essentially gone completely apeshit over esoteric future nonsense to foster this hyperactive never-stop-sprinting-run-and-gun shootman gameplay. Everything from the map design to the way the entire multiplayer experience revolves around gimmicks of varying degrees of absurdity is to make the gameplay so fast and utterly chaotic it's incomprehensible at this point. To the point where it just doesn't match up with reality anymore, and most of the gimmicks require razor sharp twitch response time or fucking sight beyond sight to not instantly die from. You know what this is? [B]Quake.[/B] And the vast majority of people stopped playing Quake in the 90s. And this is Quake with auto-aim, so it's even less appealing to someone like me. I might be fucking insane, but I like to have time to enjoy or at least [B][I]fucking comprehend[/I][/B] the environment around me and what I'm doing in the game without me being required to be 110% fucking focused on 360 degree no-scopes to keep my kill-streak running so I can keep my sweet K/D up. When I play CoD. I don't even fucking care if my team wins or not. In the long run, it doesn't fucking matter. Sidestepping the fact that the writing for the campaigns is the worst it's ever been, Black Ops was a saving throw, but Black Ops 2 basically threw itself under the bus. The game now is a series of vapid and completely meaningless bright strobing lights that's painful to look at now. I'm excited for Battlefield 1 because I want to sit in a trench and shoot people. [editline]6th June 2016[/editline] And another thing, that cover of space oddity was absolutely fucking terrible and was utterly meaningless. Like it had no place being there.[/QUOTE] Preach it, brother! You hit the nail on the head there. I'm going to be talking solely from a SP perspective now. Pacing is a thing that the CoD series doesn't really grasp any more. Running constantly on adrenaline for 3 hours straight is exhausting. Like you said, it's hard to take in information about the atmosphere and the connection to the characters, or even the mission you're undertaking. In the end it just turns into just another rail-shooter littered with explosions with someone constantly shouting in your ear. Looking back at many of the old WWII shooters that came in the early/mid-00's, I can remember that many of them plopped you in a map with, sometimes, multiple different routes you could take to explore the surroundings and finally reach the objective. The stealth level in Return to Castle Wolfenstein is still my favourite SP FPS shooter map of all time. [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOmEXr1W3Vs]Though I must say that the game looks pretty ok considering it is 15 years old.[/url]

[QUOTE=usaokay;50468778]Sunglasses and skull mask? ofc While his personality was basically Gaz 2.0, I think his appearance is what won kids over. His Xbox Live avatar outfit is one of the top 10 best selling. Why do you think fucking IW made that shitty Ghosts game based around a bunch of dudes with the skull masks? They were trying to capitalize on the appearance.[/QUOTE] That was the idea behind Ghosts?! Oh my god...