Activision freed from its shackles and evil vivendi - Polidicks

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;42500882]Okay big difference, there have been only about 4 counter strike games in the last 13 years, while there have been 6, coming up to 7 CoD games in the last 6/7 years and in this time they have barely changed the gameplay or even the graphics at all. There is no comparison here.[/QUOTE] Which is exactly why I'm saying Counter-Strike is not competing with Call of Duty.

[QUOTE=Aspen;42501282]Call of Duty may be the same thing with each iteration But man is it fun[/QUOTE] Call of Duty on its own is a fun game. The problem most people have is how they re-release it every year with very little changes. Once you've played one, you've played them all.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;42501617]Call of Duty on its own is a fun game. The problem most people have is how they re-release it every year with very little changes. Once you've played one, you've played them all.[/QUOTE] This isn't even necessarily true, to a certain extent yeah, if you've played one Call of Duty you'll have an easy time playing the others but they do change. I don't even get what kind of big changes people expect to see in Call of Duty sequals :v:

[QUOTE=TheMrFailz;42498852]Counterstrike (Any version), Battlefield (Version), etc...[/QUOTE] Counter-Strike isn't made for consoles and Battlefield isn't nearly as arcade-y as CoD. There is an appeal to all of them, but all of them are different.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42498874]Counter-Strike hasn't changed for 13 years[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Counterstrike.wikia.com]There are 8 new weapons in Global Offensive, and there are several changes to returning weapons, regarding the firepower, rate of fire, accuracy, and movement speed.[/QUOTE] Not to mention its the first counterstrike with both an inventory and exchangeable weapons.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42498680] Can you give me an example of any fast paced multiplayer shooter doing what CoD does as good or better? There is really no competition because every game made to compete with Call of Duty is either terrible or at best worse.[/QUOTE] Quake 3 Arena. Unreal Tournament '99-2003-2004. UT3. Half-Life. Quake. DooM.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;42497192]They make great games. You just don't like them.[/QUOTE] if he doesn't like them then they wouldn't be great games in his eyes now would they????

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42498874]Counter-Strike hasn't changed for 13 years, it's not a bad game and not necessarily worse than Call of Duty but it doesn't compete with Call of Duty. Battlefield only began competing with Call of Duty since Bad Company 2 and even then I don't feel like like they fall into the same tactical shooter category, if I want to have a 10v10 player infantry match on a small map I wouldn't exactly pick Battlefield.[/QUOTE] You asked for better fast-paced shooters than CoD. I wouldn't really class CS as fast-paced, though.

[QUOTE=Drsalvador;42501749]Quake 3 Arena. Unreal Tournament '99-2003-2004. UT3. Half-Life. Quake. DooM.[/QUOTE] how about something released this decade

[QUOTE=Maxx;42501827]how about something released this decade[/QUOTE] Sorry, I forgot video games spontaneously combusted ten years after release.

[QUOTE=Drsalvador;42497432]Everyone take cover, it's the forced opinion police![/QUOTE] "i don't like this game so it's shit" uh huh

[QUOTE=Drsalvador;42501749]Quake 3 Arena. Unreal Tournament '99-2003-2004. UT3. Half-Life. Quake. DooM.[/QUOTE] Yeah but those games are 10+ years old... How can they compete with an ongoing series... [editline]12th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Drsalvador;42502119]Sorry, I forgot video games spontaneously combusted ten years after release.[/QUOTE] That's not the point, it's like saying the original Starcraft competes with Company of Heroes 2, they don't. You don't get my point. [editline]12th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=spiritlol;42501725]Not to mention its the first counterstrike with both an inventory and exchangeable weapons.[/QUOTE] Right, so it has changed, barely. [editline]12th October 2013[/editline] The only modern games that could compete with Call of Duty that I can think of from the top of my head are maybe Medal of Honor, Homefront or Crysis 2 and none of those were rather successful at it. Nexuiz is a modern throwback to the old Quake and Unreal Tournament and in my opinion pretty good but it's basically an abandoned desert.

[QUOTE=Maxx;42501827]how about something released this decade[/QUOTE] Serious Sam 3.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42502759]Yeah but those games are 10+ years old... How can they compete with an ongoing series... [/QUOTE] you could count warsow but it's playerbase/popularity is utterly miniscule compared to cod+it's a half-quake clone with some alterations (not that that's a bad thing considering that's exactly what it was made for/it's what every old quake player wants anyway).

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42502759] That's not the point, it's like saying the original Starcraft competes with Company of Heroes 2, they don't. You don't get my point. [/QUOTE] Why doesn't it? Do you not compare modern movies to older movies? Or do you mean they don't compete in sales figures?

I feel this is relevant to the current discussion... [t]http://i.imgur.com/0uE1mEL.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=Drsalvador;42501749]Quake 3 Arena. Unreal Tournament '99-[B]2003-2004[/B]. [B]UT3[/B]. Half-Life. Quake. DooM.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Maxx;42501827]how about something released this decade[/QUOTE] TF2.

[QUOTE=zakedodead;42506619]Why doesn't it? Do you not compare modern movies to older movies? Or do you mean they don't compete in sales figures?[/QUOTE] Nobody thinks "Should I buy Unreal Tournament '04 or Black Ops 2?", not only do they not compete in sales figures but the arena shooter genre is pretty much dead these days - which sucks -, there is no competition either in sales figures or in interest. The same goes for Starcraft and Company of Heroes 2. [editline]13th October 2013[/editline] Starcraft 2 and Company of Heroes 2 definitely do compete. [editline]13th October 2013[/editline] But Quake and Call of Duty does not. [editline]13th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Rossy167;42507933]TF2.[/QUOTE] That's a decent example, yeah a pretty good one actually.

[QUOTE=zakedodead;42506619]Why doesn't it? Do you not compare modern movies to older movies? Or do you mean they don't compete in sales figures?[/QUOTE] Hm.. should I go see Star wars VI or VII at the cinema in 2015? oh wait VI is too old to be shown at the cinema

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42508223] That's a decent example, yeah a pretty good one actually.[/QUOTE] And it's free

[QUOTE=Ayane-152;42502835]Serious Sam 3.[/QUOTE] That solves that then. All CoD players should move to Serious Sam 3. [QUOTE=Rossy167;42507933]TF2.[/QUOTE] 2007 "this decade" I'm not even a CoD fan but I just don't understand all the hate. They found a formula that works. They're sticking to it. Who cares.

I don't really get all the dumbs, lol, what am I saying that doesn't make sense.

Guys I like Valve too but CS is more or less the same, there's no doubt about that.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42509541]I don't really get all the dumbs, lol, what am I saying that doesn't make sense.[/QUOTE] You seem to be descibing that you play games because of how new they are, how well they sell, and how popular they are, but not because of their content. [QUOTE=proch;42510013]Guys I like Valve too but CS is more or less the same, there's no doubt about that.[/QUOTE] Compared to Source, CS:GO is pretty radical to be honest. The basic game-play is essentially the same with the only big change being the molotov/incendiary. But they absolutely changed the meta-game with the implementation of kill reward value; Like everyone knows, counterstrike is not a game where every weapon is meant to be equal so a handful of guns are very common, some are very rare, and some are in the middle. But in go, the common and rarer guns now give you more money per kill leading to more people using them especially in competitive. You could buy a more expensive weapon for the better stats but risk dying immediately and losing it without earning the cost back, or you could play safe and buy a cheaper weapon and if you were to get any kills make profit easily. This plus minor stat changes has led to go becoming much more varied in weapon use and strategy than 1.6 and source. But immediate gameplay, it stays around the same per game as cod does.

[QUOTE=lanhacker1488;42508517]Hm.. should I go see Star wars VI or VII at the cinema in 2015? oh wait VI is too old to be shown at the cinema[/QUOTE] You say that but cinemas near me have been known to do special showings. For example back in 2010 they had all 3 Back to the futures showing to celebrate 25 years since the first one. In 2007 they played all the star wars films to celebrate its 30 year release. So you might not be able to go watch an old film at any time, but don't take that to mean you never can.

[QUOTE=spiritlol;42517033]You seem to be descibing that you play games because of how new they are, how well they sell, and how popular they are, but not because of their content.[/QUOTE] When exactly have I implied this?

cod is terrible and all games in the style of cod are terrible such as blacklight retriblabla

[QUOTE=Drsalvador;42501749]Quake 3 Arena. Unreal Tournament '99-2003-2004. UT3. Half-Life. Quake. DooM.[/QUOTE] you listed 7 arena shooters and half life to compare against an arcade shooter why

I found Blacklight Retribution to essentially be CoD but free, with better gameplay and setting.

[QUOTE=Maxx;42508748]I'm not even a CoD fan but I just don't understand all the hate. They found a formula that works. They're sticking to it. Who cares.[/QUOTE] I don't mind formulas so much, but CoD isn't so much a formula as a bunch of photocopies.