Black Ops II: it looks surprisingly good

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Yeah it does look good but after the last few games I'm not going to hold my breath that it will turn out as good as it looks.

 

[TheKaduflyerSystem]

I thought that Black Ops was the 2nd best in the series, MW was good, the sequels are the worst kind of copy pasted crap, Black Ops seemed a little... fresh, not as good as CoD 1, but it seemed better, I'm NOT buy BO2 on release, I might rent, I might cadge it off of one of my friends for a day or two.

 

[octafish]

It reminds me of BF2142, but not all that favorably, I guess BF2142 didn't have a single player campaign but that was a point in its favour. It makes me sad that DICE and EA announced a Battlefield 4 beta and not Battlefield 2143.

 

[Cabisco]

While I won't buy it I do appreciate they are trying to do something different with this game and I hope it leads to more changes to the series, but personally for me I'm done with the COD Franchise.

Saying all this, I can't help thinking it's all reminding me of another game but I can't for the life of me remember what.

 

[DJ_DEnM]

I'm not gonna judge the game until I see the Zombies trailer or some gameplay. I want to see how it's actually changed. Honestly, I'm not even gonna play the campaign, I'm going straight to zombies...good thing I'm not paying full price!

 

[sextus the crazy]

Jesus H. Bannana-Shit Dipping Christ! Am I the only who liked Black Ops around here? Compared to the story of most of the CoD games. I'd say it was pretty good.

I liked its story, if only for Gary Oldman. MP was shit though.

 

[Vanitas likes Bubbles]

Now I look at the new Black Ops gameplay, and I see things have changed: first, it takes place in the future, with futuristic guns that don't actually exist, save a few prototypes we have now.

Wow, a game set in the future, no ones ever done that before. /sarcasm

I don't see the whole appeal behind the "oh, wow this game is set in the future and it's browner and has more bullets coming out of guns than ever before" attitude.

The setpieces are actually really great this time around

Set pieces should be used rarely and be used to invoke an emotional response other than "Oh, a building just collapsed, and now I have a massive boner" at least for me anyway.

the addition of choice in what route you take through the levels is something COD has never done before.

"What will you do? Will you jump down to the floor or snipe them?". Yeah, great amount of choices. Games made ten years ago already did this. In fact, COD 4 even did this..... a little.

Overall, it looked less like generic COD and a little more like Killzone.

Is that supposed to be a point in its favour? Don't get me wrong, I like Killzone but it's just not as enthralling as other games I play.

PS: Black Ops 2 still looks generic, at least in my opinion.

Also, the new HUD looks cool.

The HUD looks cool, that's a great improvement.

They're expanding Zombies too.

Okay, I do like zombies and it is the only reason why I'm renting it. They should just get rid of all the other features and just concentrate on the zombie mode. No sarcasm this time.

Overall, the game, at least for me, looks just like all the other COD games.

 

[Alternative]

Im going to reserve my judgement untill i have seen more of it.
But so far it looks like its going to try going in a different direction from the rest of the COD series by focusing on its single player.

Captcha: Question everything
[image height=200 width=150]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llkcx9V5eI1qfc207o1_400.gif[/IMG]

 

[ToastiestZombie]

COD games always do.

Me? I probably won't be buying it. Why? Because they didn't put me in charge of multiplayer design, and I'm starting to think I'm the only ************ capable of making it not terrible.

Maybe if they ditch the support package, go back to the old map design and quit this proficiencies nonsense I'll get it. Maybe.

I think they might be changing it back to the black ops system, whilst keeping the stuff from MW3 like being able to use your 3 killstreaks when you want and being able to see how far you've got to go till your next one, which are improvements instead of the shit that was the killstreak system of MW3. Looks like they may be making the right choice when it comes to killstreaks this time. And the ten point system for create a class is very different and new for the multiplayer of a military shooter. Doesn't mean it'll be any different.

No, it's not new or different. You still make your class out of a selection of perks, weapons and attachments. You just select them in a way that allows for slightly more experimentation. It's not innovative or different at all.

It is different, there's no denying it. No other shooter's multiplayer let's you use only a secondary, or have no perks, and many other combinations. If you can name one other shooter that doesn't restrict the player to the one primary, one secondary and so on then you'll be right.

 

[Captain Pirate]

Not gonna lie, the trailers definitely look interesting.
As new and amazing as it looks, I still have the feeling it'll play identically to the others, and, even with all the new stuff (including the new 10-slot class system which looks incredible) I imagine it'll end up just feeling like the last 4 games.
Still, I'm keeping hopeful.
If the customization is back en masse I'll definitely consider it.

 

[Patrick Buck]

They could have litrally just taken a picture of a turd, for the trailer, and I would buy it.

I'm playing zombies DAMNIT. I WILL PLAY ZOMBIEs.

 

[Tropicaz]

I enjoyed BlOps. Tbh, i enjoyed mw2 aswell, hopping in a ground war with 7 or 8 mates or playing team tac as a group of 4 is always great fun. Running as a full team, you pretty much always win, aswell.
BlOps 2 looks like i might give it a shot for one main reason - the trailer had a guy with a knife equipped. If they've removed panic knifing, my biggest gripe with cod, i'll probably love it. Though with the new counter strike on the horizon i might just be playing that.

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

Jesus H. Bannana-Shit Dipping Christ! Am I the only who liked Black Ops around here? Compared to the story of most of the CoD games. I'd say it was pretty good. I never had any trouble following the narrative and it kept me playing because I wanted to see what would happen next. As for BL2, I'll pick it up. The setting and story have gotten me interested.

No, you`re not the only one. I thougt it was way better than the crap they started with MW2 storywise and it has
... dramatic pause...
a main character who`s finally able to speak, yes. That alone made me liking it. I always hated when as soon as you took over Mc Tarvish he seems to have lost his tongue. Silent maincharacters in games with talking NPCs are always pissing me off more or less and i doubt that your main guy is meant to be a mute. Not that this would be a problem when he would answer to everyone with notes, drawings or his hands. No reaction isn`t immersive in the slightest to me, it just increases the feel of just beeing a floating pair of hands.
Bring this up in Half Life3 and i buy a pc for it.

 

[Swyftstar]

It's not surprising. They always LOOK good. That's what they do, they look and sound good and have great cutscenes to get your blood boiling and interesting set pieces to get you excited. Then you play it and you realize you just spent the last 6 hours snap targeting hundreds of faceless drones just so you could watch the cutscenes and hear good voice acting instead of playing an actual shooter. The last COD I paid and will pay money for was Modern Warfare II.

 

[General Twinkletoes]

The setting is original for cod, but really not original. Neither are any of the designs of well.. anything.

And none of this will fix the generic as hell gunplay, which doesn't seem to have changed.

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

and a huge amount of thinly veiled xenophobia.

From where? Every time you died in MW2 the quotes were choice selections compared to the random "war" related ones you saw in CoD4 and previous instalments. These selections were highlighting the dangers of patriotism, aimed quite squarely at the United States. At the same time all of the Modern Warfare games show the protagonists performing highly morally questionable acts as well as the bad guys.

OT: I never understood the hype about the zombies. Every time it's served as little more than a novelty. "Nazi Zombies" I saw in WaW. Haha, I like that. Then it got dull. "JFK, Castro, Nixon and McNamara team up to fight zombies" I saw in Black Ops. Haha, that's amusing. Then it got dull. There just isn't much to it after the initial novelty value. Black Ops 2 won't even have any historical precedent to base it off, which is gave the zombie modes the initial novelty value in the first place.

 

[Darren716]

I'm not buying Black Ops 2 until after I'm able to play it for a bit to see if Treyarc actually did change as much as they promised and tried to fix the hilariously broken multiplayer from MW3

 

[LordChhaya]

Am I the only one who thinks the plot is just a more retarded MGS4? At least the last few chapters of it anyway; Bad guy uses macguffin to take control of an armies weaponry and use it against them, lone badass has to stop him or something bad will happen yadda yadda yadda

 

[Uriain]

I'll take a stab at that, I guess.

So... we can mostly agree that Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare was pretty decent, right? It brought the mainstream FPS genre out of the 1940's, had pretty solid gameplay even by today's standards, and had a story that was sort of like a Tom Clancy novel as directed by James Cameron with a Harry Gregson-Williams soundtrack to boot. With each game that's come out since then in the series, it seems like they (Infinity Ward in particular, but Treyarch is certainly guilty of it too) have been treading further and further away from the Tom Clancy roots and straying closer and closer to Michael Bay territory. With each new game the goal seems to be setting up the story to do nothing more than provide bigger set pieces than the last. The result is a shorter game that boils down to nothing more than a chain of set pieces loosely strung together by giant fiery explosions, the corpses of dead player characters, and a huge amount of thinly veiled xenophobia.

So I guess that's my answer. Each game ups the stakes over the last one, and that's more or less what differentiates them. You want to see bigger and more ridiculously outlandish set pieces in your Call of Duty game, you get whichever one has the biggest number at the end until you reach the point where you're suspending so much disbelief that you actually begin to feel physical pain (from all the facepalming, most likely). Story and gameplay only really exist to introduce various types of brown-skinned or Russian stereotypes (that you'll likely gun down without remorse) and string you along to the next big fiery explosion fest.

But who really plays CoD for the story, right? It's all about the MULTIPLAYER, man! In that case, you're paying $60 each year for new set of maps and some new weapon skins for weapons that are functionally more or less the same as the previous game anyway (see: MW2 FAMAS vs. MW3 Type-95).

And note that I actually like the CoD games. Sometimes I need to just come home from work, turn off my brain for a while, and smile like an idiot at all the pretty explosions.

This is pretty much bang on for the CoD series since MW2.

I also dont mind the the CoD games, and having a fun "brainless" time while shooting people is great. I just can't be bothered to spend 60$+ anymore after MW3 and the issues I had with it.

 

[baddude1337]

It's quite an interesting take having a future CoD. Still, it looks the same as the rest. Alternate paths? Still most likely linear. Not like the fairly open ended missions that CoD2 had a bit of (The Silo, anyone?)

I am interested more in the campaign than multiplayer. As Michael Bay like as they've gotten, MW2 and 3 weren't TOO bad, but BLOPS was a pile of shit. Not even gonna touch the multiplayer, its been terrible since MW2.