I predict it'll be MW2 with a different solo story and maybe a few new toys. I'm more looking forward to Reach for a change of pace.
Activision Shells Out More Than Ever Before for Black Ops Launch
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
I haven't played MW2, although I did rent it the other night so I'll see. I actually got it for Christmas but returned it because I would rather get something different. And after hearing how it's more of the same (and less for SP) than the first, I am SO glad that I did.
Now with this new Black ops, I don't know, I haven't followed it whatsoever, but are we really going to go more[/] modern warfare, as in, more of the same? I don't like Halo really, or have interest in Reach, but I hope it smacks this new COD around because at least it's something more unique from the sounds of it.
Now with this new Black ops, I don't know, I haven't followed it whatsoever, but are we really going to go more[/] modern warfare, as in, more of the same? I don't like Halo really, or have interest in Reach, but I hope it smacks this new COD around because at least it's something more unique from the sounds of it.
New art which means:shaboinkin said:
2D artists, 3D artists, World builders.
Updated shaders within the engine which means:
Shader engineers
Core Engine Tech
Updated UI means:
UI scripters
UI Engineers
UI Artists (might be separate from the 2D artists)
New levels mean:
Event scripters
Minigame Engineers
Minigame scripters
AI scripting
AI Engineering
Core AI Tech
New title means:
Testers
TCR requirement team
Not to mentions:
Audio
Mo-Cap
Light techs
Design overall
-Character design
-systems design
-level design
-feature design
Production
Script writers
All that is off the top of my head even with a re-existing engine to build on.
I am in no way defending Activision, but just pointing out from an industry standpoint that just because you have an engine doesn't mean you don't have to do a lot and have a lot of expenses.
This is a Call of Duty game, so it will sell very, very well. However, because Treyarch has gotten a bad rap in the past (seriosuly, look at Youtube comments regarding Black Ops and you will see more than a few people saying that they will not buy this game because, apparently, games developed by Treyarch carry a horrendous STD) and it probably won't sell as well as MW2. But this is new territory for Call of Duty games and Treyarch's games in the series have been pretty damn solid. I can understand the anger towards Activision and its dick head CEO, but I'm not going to let that affect me. I've been a loyal Call of Duty supporter ever since Finest Hour was released and I have gotten a CoD game for my birthday every year since Finest Hour came out (they've always been released just days before my birthday). I know that Black Ops will make a fine 21st birthday present along with Medal of Honor and God of War: Ghost of Sparta.
A lot of uninformed people (or should I say sheeple) in this thread. Why don't you actually wait and see what the game ends up reviewing like? I think the major mistake everyone is making is lumping it in with MW2. It's been pretty clear from interviews and teasers that Treyarch took a lot of the complaints to heart.
Also, a big LOL to whoever said they'd pick Reach for a change of pace. If you want an actual change of pace, play a Valve game.
Also, a big LOL to whoever said they'd pick Reach for a change of pace. If you want an actual change of pace, play a Valve game.
I've played the last 3 CoD games, and here is my overall opinion on them and on what comes next for the series:
CoD 4- Absolutely amazing. Possibly the best FPS I've ever played.
WaW- Decent, and basically half of it was ripped of from CoD 4.
MW2- Good for a time. Campaign was way to short and not nearly as good as CoD 4's. Multiplayer lost it's luster after a while, and the map packs are still way overpriced.
Black Ops- This will (again) rip off half of it's ideas from MW2, and be the worst game of the last 4 because of it.
MW3- Will be made by the remnants of Infinity Ward, and will probably just be bad. It'll sell well, but people will realize it's not good and probably get tired of CoD games.
Treyarch's next game- Absolute shit. It'll copy half it's ideas of off a bad game, and will barely have any redeeming qualities. This probably won't even sell well, as people will be tired off CoD by now. This will be the game that kills CoD for the mainstream, while hardcore gamers will have been complaining about the series for years.
Meanwhile, Respawn Entertainment will make an absolutely amazing FPS that everyone will move to.
CoD 4- Absolutely amazing. Possibly the best FPS I've ever played.
WaW- Decent, and basically half of it was ripped of from CoD 4.
MW2- Good for a time. Campaign was way to short and not nearly as good as CoD 4's. Multiplayer lost it's luster after a while, and the map packs are still way overpriced.
Black Ops- This will (again) rip off half of it's ideas from MW2, and be the worst game of the last 4 because of it.
MW3- Will be made by the remnants of Infinity Ward, and will probably just be bad. It'll sell well, but people will realize it's not good and probably get tired of CoD games.
Treyarch's next game- Absolute shit. It'll copy half it's ideas of off a bad game, and will barely have any redeeming qualities. This probably won't even sell well, as people will be tired off CoD by now. This will be the game that kills CoD for the mainstream, while hardcore gamers will have been complaining about the series for years.
Meanwhile, Respawn Entertainment will make an absolutely amazing FPS that everyone will move to.
I can't help but think they're chiefly doing this not just to combat the IW loss and all that, but also in an effort to bury Halo: Reach. If gamers pick Black Ops over it, they'll hurt the Halo franchise, or so the logic might go. Hurt Halo, and at this stage, Microsoft doesn't have too many tricks left in the hardcore bag, which means relying on third-party companies like... Activision. Win-win, and you get the people you kicked in the jim-jams to help pay you for the effort it took to kick them.
Of course, that gets into the question of this; when the 'casual frat bros', as some people like to paint the audience both game series share and enjoy, have to pick between Halo and Call of Duty... who REALLY has them by the jim-jams? Banking on beating Halo just sounds to me like a risky venture, even if it's an attempt that has to be made to hold greater dominance over the business area both games share.
Of course, that gets into the question of this; when the 'casual frat bros', as some people like to paint the audience both game series share and enjoy, have to pick between Halo and Call of Duty... who REALLY has them by the jim-jams? Banking on beating Halo just sounds to me like a risky venture, even if it's an attempt that has to be made to hold greater dominance over the business area both games share.
Considering that the Halo Reach Beta had like, what, a total of 2,7 million unique players over it's two week period, it's safe to say that there's a lot of players are going to buy that game regardless of what Activison spends on the launch of Black Ops. Halo Reach has got a tremendous amount of content, and user friendly, user customizable as well. I doubt that Black Ops could top that, considering that they've never had anything more than a campaign feature and online multiplayer.
Hmm, Halo : Reach. Bungie's last halo game in which they've poured all their resources into making the best send off they could even going as far as to give us videos showing the pretty aweinspiring things they've managed to pull of on a console (forge world?)
Or Black Ops, a game that runs of the MW2 engine, had a MW2 weapon TOTALLY unchanged in the trailer (AUG H-BAR)Is basically just a re-release of that game with a new campaign and a crossbow and to top it all of is basically an Activision experiment to see just how much they can charge in DLC and games and get away with.
All CoD has going for it is the 'tactiCOOL' paint job, it's basically Halo gameplay set in modern times so kids can act out their dreams of being a soldier and think its true to life. In fact Halo is probably a far more realistic depiction of combat seeing as it actually has an explanation as to why you can sprint ridiculously fast, hold huge heavy weapons with ease and jump to massive heights while instantly killing people with melee.
Or Black Ops, a game that runs of the MW2 engine, had a MW2 weapon TOTALLY unchanged in the trailer (AUG H-BAR)Is basically just a re-release of that game with a new campaign and a crossbow and to top it all of is basically an Activision experiment to see just how much they can charge in DLC and games and get away with.
All CoD has going for it is the 'tactiCOOL' paint job, it's basically Halo gameplay set in modern times so kids can act out their dreams of being a soldier and think its true to life. In fact Halo is probably a far more realistic depiction of combat seeing as it actually has an explanation as to why you can sprint ridiculously fast, hold huge heavy weapons with ease and jump to massive heights while instantly killing people with melee.
I've found that the lack of dedicated servers has meant MW2 feels a pretty empty experience. With other games, I've found regular servers to play on and made lifelong friends. After the initial enjoyment, I now don't play MW2 much at all.
That plus Activision's massive cockmungery has guaranteed I won't be getting any MW2 DLC.
That plus Activision's massive cockmungery has guaranteed I won't be getting any MW2 DLC.
Why is Activision getting so damn cocky with Call of Duty? You had success, but that doesn't mean you should throw all your eggs in the next basket. Activision's gonna be pretty messed up if Black Ops isn't the amazing success they think it will be.