Activision Discusses Call of Duty Fatigue "All the Time"
- Thread starter Brian Albert
- Start date
Oh my...that is INCREDIBLY transparent marketing.
'We're just one of the guys!'
'We listen to your concerns, and we learn thanks to you!'
'We're doing this for the community, not for ourselves!'
'The game is going to be great, because we know what you want!'
'It's only going to get better, because you fans make us great!'
Hitting all the soft spots at once is a simple way to raise suspicion. All that's missing there is a 'please hold, your support is important to us.'
Or, if he's really being sincere (which I doubt, but it's possible), he may want to be a bit more objective with his phrasing.
'We're just one of the guys!'
'We listen to your concerns, and we learn thanks to you!'
'We're doing this for the community, not for ourselves!'
'The game is going to be great, because we know what you want!'
'It's only going to get better, because you fans make us great!'
Hitting all the soft spots at once is a simple way to raise suspicion. All that's missing there is a 'please hold, your support is important to us.'
Or, if he's really being sincere (which I doubt, but it's possible), he may want to be a bit more objective with his phrasing.
Ok, teamwork and destructable environments were the wrong words to use, I was going to say more balanced gameplay, as Cod multiplayer is infamous for several overpowered classes that you can make, but had already mentioned balance earlier in my post.SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
I actually quite enjoy the fast-paced rambo style Cod has going for it, but every time I play I can't help but think how much better it would be if a few things were added and removed. I think it would actually benefit a good bit from destructable environment, as it would shake up the gameplay a bit, allow for less corners to camp in, let you have cool moments where you blow up a wall, run through the hole and kill people inside, etc.
The problem I get with Cod is that it is kind of a game where each player is using an overpowered character (Knifers who lunge 15 feet, Quickscopers, Noob-tubers, grenade spammers, etc.) and they all tend to cancel each other out, so everyone just ends up getting frustrated when their loadout fails against someone elses, to which they accuse them of playing unfairly and being overpowered. In order to change this you would have to basically remove all the loadouts, because by removing or nerfing one, you just make the other classes more powerful in comparison and restrict gameplay, so the only way to fix it is a complete overhaul of the system, not small tinkering in between each game. (although to their credit the new points system may help greatly)
I do like Cod, I just think it needs to be a lot less... balance abusive, and I think that could be achieved while retaining the feel of Cod, but not without a large overhaul of the game.
No, no! They're totally serious! Not many people know this, but they're actually turning it into an RPG/diplomacy sim where you're supposed to use civil discourse to solve your problems. The final level ends on a high note where the protagonist realizes that despite the fact that an arabic soldier killed his brother, they aren't all that different after all.imnotparanoid said:
...nah, I'm kidding you. You murder like a BILLION people in the same way as they did before. And let's face it, it's our fault. Remember back when they drastically changed how DA2 played? That was pretty innovative. What happened when people saw how innovative it was? We should be so happy that there was still a company around to make the next Mass Effect instead of a smoldering ruin that still smells faintly of Mountain Dew and sweat.
"Call of Duty's developers don't think the franchise is heading the way of Guitar Hero."
Well, I don't mean to burst your bubble, Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software, but when a game franchise already has become broken and stale; and then you claim you're being innovative, yet announce you're bringing in elements from previous titles, THEN giving yourselves little over 6 months to create the sequel with the same, guns, perks, characters, voices, gameplay and engine (of which, might I add, was broken and buggy due to the lack of testing the last time around, IW!); I really don't see you pulling out the FPS equivalent of Skyrim or creating something as innovative as BF3 is to BF2. Besides, a game a year with little change really is what sank the mighty Guitar Hero ship; and I liked GH before GH4.
I'm sorry, all 4 developers with their fingers in the CoD pie, but you're full of lies and Bull-. CoD1,2,4 were epic, CoD3 & 6 were abysmal and CoD 7 flopped but had massive potential. I will not be buying CoD8 and I think it would be pushing boundaries to sell MW3 as a budget game like ODST (which had a new campaign, same multiplayer and a new gametype. Ring any bells??) let alone as the most expensive game of the year. I do not want our games industry plagued by over-expensive remakes.
You would also be lucky, Activision, if I ever buy one of your published games again. As you are the money grabbing machine this whole escapade centres around; like a devastating, game ruining, developer bad-naming hurricane.
Well, I don't mean to burst your bubble, Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software, but when a game franchise already has become broken and stale; and then you claim you're being innovative, yet announce you're bringing in elements from previous titles, THEN giving yourselves little over 6 months to create the sequel with the same, guns, perks, characters, voices, gameplay and engine (of which, might I add, was broken and buggy due to the lack of testing the last time around, IW!); I really don't see you pulling out the FPS equivalent of Skyrim or creating something as innovative as BF3 is to BF2. Besides, a game a year with little change really is what sank the mighty Guitar Hero ship; and I liked GH before GH4.
I'm sorry, all 4 developers with their fingers in the CoD pie, but you're full of lies and Bull-. CoD1,2,4 were epic, CoD3 & 6 were abysmal and CoD 7 flopped but had massive potential. I will not be buying CoD8 and I think it would be pushing boundaries to sell MW3 as a budget game like ODST (which had a new campaign, same multiplayer and a new gametype. Ring any bells??) let alone as the most expensive game of the year. I do not want our games industry plagued by over-expensive remakes.
You would also be lucky, Activision, if I ever buy one of your published games again. As you are the money grabbing machine this whole escapade centres around; like a devastating, game ruining, developer bad-naming hurricane.
Each MW game fixes balance issues, adds a new chapter in the storyline (and I've grown quite fond of the story and the characters), adds new maps, new weapons, new perks and let's not forget that both Modern Warfare games so far had terrific music.
And how about the new Spec Ops challenges? And how about Survival Mode? Proximity mines?
I'm worried about the state of human kind if you people truly cannot see innovation in each CoD title. You're are probably just watching the gameplay and going "hurr, it has the same engine and graphics, hurr, same game." Or at least 70% of CoD haters do.
Sure, there isn't any revolutionary innovation but it is still there. As for the core game, CoD does what it is trying to do and it does it in a compelling way. I have fun with it, in the end. And that is all that matters.
And how do you explain arguements such as "Modern Warfare 2 was better than Black Ops" or "MW1 was better than MW2" if you think they're all the same?
- Someone who likes CoD and is a rational person
And how about the new Spec Ops challenges? And how about Survival Mode? Proximity mines?
I'm worried about the state of human kind if you people truly cannot see innovation in each CoD title. You're are probably just watching the gameplay and going "hurr, it has the same engine and graphics, hurr, same game." Or at least 70% of CoD haters do.
Sure, there isn't any revolutionary innovation but it is still there. As for the core game, CoD does what it is trying to do and it does it in a compelling way. I have fun with it, in the end. And that is all that matters.
And how do you explain arguements such as "Modern Warfare 2 was better than Black Ops" or "MW1 was better than MW2" if you think they're all the same?
- Someone who likes CoD and is a rational person
Yea, because Modern Warfare 2's MP was so fantastic. And don't get me wrong, Black Ops was crap to, but at least they attempted to change it up a little. Modern Warfare 3 feels exactly like Modern Warfare 2 in the sense that they changed almost nothing except for the weapons and maps.Ser Imp said:
Why in the heck do everyone and there mother insist on changing a formula that isnt broken. its like trying to fix a perfectly good car you can only screw it up. if you dont like the runny and shooty aspect of call of duty then why do you play it? why do you want them to take the tried and true formula of shoot at things and they die and mix it up. i dont get it. why do you want them to fix something thats not broke? sure they SHOULD make tweaks in the multiplayer to make it more fair but why doesnt anyone realize that some things dont need changing. i, for one, am glad that they dont try and change the gameplay because that could possible break the entire system. seriously has no one ever heard the old, dont fix what isnt broke, saying? its a good saying. i wouldnt want to try and fix a perfectly good car by overhauling it just because it makes an annoying squeaking noise in the tire its not worth going through the effort. alas sadly no one will ever realize that, but it doesnt matter. i like the games and gameplay and i wont let anyone change my mind because as long as i'm having fun no one elses opinion will matter
It's happened. The CoD event horizon has been passed. An eternity of Call of Duty. Spinning box-art, countless 'new and improved' guns, 'nades galore, MW256...
An eternity of Call of Duty.
An eternity of Call of Duty.
"That's why it's all about innovation."
Sorry. I've read that a dozen times and every time I burst out laughing every time. I'm saving that so that when I get sad about something, reading that will make me laugh.
Them giving press releases like that makes me think they are in fact worried. Then again they probably should be, they have big competition with Battlefield 3 and that's not even mentioning West and Zampellas unknown project. If I remember correctly West and Zampella left EA and made Call of Duty and essentially destroyed Medal of Honor. And now they've left Activision and are working on a new game.
Sorry. I've read that a dozen times and every time I burst out laughing every time. I'm saving that so that when I get sad about something, reading that will make me laugh.
Them giving press releases like that makes me think they are in fact worried. Then again they probably should be, they have big competition with Battlefield 3 and that's not even mentioning West and Zampellas unknown project. If I remember correctly West and Zampella left EA and made Call of Duty and essentially destroyed Medal of Honor. And now they've left Activision and are working on a new game.
And it will still out sell Battlefield 25 even though Battlefield 25 features, fully destructible skyscrapers with fully detailed interiors, dedicated servers that can support 5000 player matches, and drivable battleships, aircraft carriers, and submarines.Da Orky Man said:
Edit: And a dinosaur survival mode.