Can we give the new Call of Duty a chance?

[ChaosBorne]

I could be wrong, of course. It might just be the same as every other COD game. But with this one, I just think we should give it a chance. This series might actually be growing in an interesting way, and I'd hate to see it smothered for the wrong reasons and revert to old habits (like Saw 6.)

how many chances would you give an abusive parter before you left?
i for one have had enough of the CoD franchise for a long time, if it wants me back it will have to do more than show pretty pre-rendered vids, it has to show some damned innovation and preferably that the campaign has had some effort put into it, the last couple of games of theirs were blander than a handful of sawdust and i'm just not willing to go back to that.

 

[MirenBainesUSMC]

I was never a fan of rince-and-repeat game play, to me, its a virtual hamster wheel for one's self.

I do like going through the MW campaign games though, MW,MW2,MW3 ect... of course those titles are what now... 10-15 bucks?

I suppose I'll wait for this one as well to become a good deal to get, it shouldn't take too long for I already see a price drop.

 

[Solsbury_Grille]

Call of Duty....the most ecologically-friendly game franchise in history...over 99% recycled material.

 

[ChaosBorne]

On the funeral scene. Yup, it's fucking stupid, though the whole "pay respect to a guy you don't care about" thing is actually bullshit. The guy was the main characters(as an aside, jesus christ Troy Baker's face is fucking everywhere, guess it became a dual package with his VO) best friend since before they joined the army and the guy ate shit on their first mission, where he saved your guys ass. So while the player doesn't feel attached to the guy, the writing itself is fine. Still hilarious, but atleast it makes sense in-universe.

if the character is so meaningful to the character you're playing then why not just make the paying of respect happen automatically, why have any player interaction in a cutscene at all? it's stupid and poorly used.

I personally don't hate on CoD just because it's CoD and it's the hip thing to do, i hate on CoD because i've tried it again and again and again and it's just kept disappointing me, the multiplayer is boring and doesn't interest me and the single player campaign is an insult to gamers everywhere.
(i like CoD4MW because i liked the change from WWII shooters, but it's just been the same boring shit after that.)

 

[Mad World]

Honestly, i think the series is running successfully on brand establishment at this point. Not a whole lot they could do to loose money now that the series has the brand it does. It's fucked up, but it is what it is.

I agree. It has to be that. To beat a dead horse, they change very little with each Call of Duty game. It really is nothing special. I guess that it's the Counter-Strike for consoles; 6 versus 6 for the most part (or 9 versus 9 in the large-battle mode {whatever it's called}). In other words, simple skirmishes every round.

Because besides being modern military shooters, Call of Duty and Battlefield are quite different. I mean, the BF singleplayer wants to be CoD so bad, but on the multiplayer side they're different.

Yeah - they are quite different. It troubles me as to how successful Call of Duty is when compared to Battlefield 4. If Battlefield 4's launch would have gone better, it possibly would be closer to the level of popularity of Call of Duty. This is all based on the assumption that Call of Duty is still insanely popular, and that Battlefield, while still successful, isn't even close to Call of Duty with respect to sales and concurrent players.

Let's hope that Battlefield's multiplayer doesn't follow the trend of its singleplayer (emulating Call of Duty).

 

[Shoggoth2588]

Once they hit $20 or lower, I'm willing to give any CoD title a chance. Granted I haven't given a CoD a chance since MW2 though ironically, I played COD4: Modern Warfare after MW2. I probably won't give Advanced Warfare a try until after I get a PS4 which will take at least a year (plenty of time for a price drop) considering it's not on the Wii U and I'm not sure about buying any game that's on the PS3 AND PS4. Total Biscuit was surprisingly nice to COD:AW though which caught me off guard so I could very well end up playing this one before Ghost or Blops2.

 

[MirenBainesUSMC]

Aaand what do you know, as usual, there is always those early gamers whom play something for 3 hours then rage sell. Scooped it up at 30.00. Nice.

 

[Evonisia]

Yeah - they are quite different. It troubles me as to how successful Call of Duty is when compared to Battlefield 4. If Battlefield 4's launch would have gone better, it possibly would be closer to the level of popularity of Call of Duty. This is all based on the assumption that Call of Duty is still insanely popular, and that Battlefield, while still successful, isn't even close to Call of Duty with respect to sales and concurrent players.

Let's hope that Battlefield's multiplayer doesn't follow the trend of its singleplayer (emulating Call of Duty).

Ghosts, while still quite popular, was pretty much dead compared to its predecessors a few months in. For comparison, the 360 Black Ops II still had between 150,000-170,000 online people during the UK night time in the past two weeks or so. Ghosts had already fell below 100,000 a few months in on the 360, and on the Xbox One it was only at 50,000 at Christmas.

Now, I don't know how that stacks up against Battlefield 4, and I'd have to ask my BF fan friends how many people are on it, but Ghosts collapsed in on itself pretty quickly (and quite rightly so, if you're going to do the Call of Duty style of arena sized maps with levelling based gameplay, you should at least do it right).

Never mind that it's DLC, why the fuck have Sledgehammer done Zombies? Unless Activision really is that desperate for sales that they'll try gutting Treyarch's next game to sustain this one.

Are you honestly asking why a developer added in a game mode that lots of people enjoy? One that a ton of people were complaining was not in every game?

Because apparently the game mode is different, and they're trying to scoop in the fanbase based on the existence of there being Zombies at all. Depending on the response that can harm the game mode when it actually comes back because people will dislike it for not being like it was in Sledgehammer, or will not play it because Sledgehammer turned it to shit. Activision is money hungry, after all, and as evidenced by Ghosts' state and the price raise of MW2 they will just pull that because they can.

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

CoD:AW indeed looks incredibly fun to play.

It's just too bad that on PC there are a number of technical issues holding me back from the purchase. From what I hear the lag is extremely bad due to lack of dedicated servers, mouse acceleration issues, and also what is up with the 90fps lock?

I get very easily turned-off buying a game when the devs obviously consider my platform as an afterthought and do a half-assed job of porting it. Obviously compared to Ghosts one could call CoD:AW an amazing PC port, but only because the standard for CoD PC ports is so fucking low to begin with.

Console players can go crazy I guess.

 

[Gali]

I will give CoD a change if they drop sprint + aiming down the sight. Those mechanics are not my cup of tea at all. But they never will of course. It's CoD.

Also, correct me if am wrong, but didn't the series stop having a meaningful ranking system and also uses join in progress? Those aspects are also a big no no for me when it comes to multiplayer. It makes it really hard to have any meaningful matches. Having a ranking system is a no brainer, and when it comes to join in progress: Why do people quit? Because their team sucks and/or there is no real penalty to it (lack of a ranking system). So what matches are you likely to join in progress? Yeah... I prefer to have a fresh game. At least give me the option to not having to join a match in progress.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

Why? Seriously, why?

We know what COD is. It hasn't and won't change. Each change looks significant only when placed alongside the other CODs exclusively. We know everything there is to know about COD. We also know its fanbase will send death threats over an unnoticeable change in the rate of fire.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Not really in the mood to give CoD the time of day, sadly. It doesn't have anything to do with the series' overall adherence to certain mechanics - I'll be the first to admit that on a purely technical level, the first Modern Warfare was awesome - but it's the ideology that's permeated the series that bugs me.

The Western world's always at the brink of war, America is in the thick of it because of course it is, and we get our requisite muddled alliances and political tensions. The protagonist doesn't really require development because who cares, right? We've got the Free World to save from the Foreign Threat of the Year!

It's just - it's War Porn, and that bugs me. The whole "Pay your Respects" kerfuffle really exemplifies that for me, seeing as I don't really enjoy the notion of a game romanticizing a soldier's death. "Oh, but it was a buddy of yours!" I can already hear the game say, "now you're required by the plot to be super stoked for vengeance!"

Yeah, no. The Borderlands series packs an infinite amount of guns and technically is the most Gun Porniest game series ever created, but it doesn't glorify its own take on warfare. It's just *there*, and it's a thing that happens in-between jokes about Space Rednecks and bogans and dubstep music. In the meantime, the Call of Duty series tries to play dramatic fiddles with one hand and dives straight into warfare like it's about to turn into a televised bloodsport with the other.

"Look, Ma! I'm with the USMC!
- That's cute, honey. Now turn off the Nintendos and come have dinner."

Besides, with Kevin Spacey being Troy Baker's apparent boss in this game, can I take a fairly wild guess and assume that we realize we're being led on by Spacey's guy to sort of become the singular orchestrators of all conflicts on the planet, thereby making mucho dinero out of everyone's misery? Can I assume Troy Baker goes rogue or something and you spend the rest of the game frantically trying to bust a cap in CGI Kevin Spacey's ass?

So, yeah. The newest game might have the tightest FPS controls ever and actually end up as a technical masterpiece that I wouldn't play it. I'm sick of game narratives going "Russian = Dodgy or Evil" and generally sick of seeing the same old Michael Bay or Jerry Bruckheimer proceedings get drawn out game after game after game.

 

[momijirabbit]

This Circlejerk is really stupid to be honest.
Oh no, call of duty games are similar, there isn't any other games such as pokemon or mario that have been doing the same thing for 20 years.

 

[happyninja42]

I've never given any of the CoD's a chance with my wallet, and I don't intend to start with this one. So no, it gets no chances from me!! xD

 

[Artaneius]

By now, hating a new Call of Duty game before it even releases is becoming an internet tradition. The rationale behind it is, it's not about the game, it's about what it represents: another annual shooter, bland in every way yet still a system seller.

But this one actually looks different.

This is, after all, from Treyarch, aka the company that's actually trying to change things every once in a while. Black Ops 2 might not have been that good, but it was trying as hard as it could to come up with something new, and this one looks to be trying even harder. After the brown note of COD Ghosts, people were rightfully disappointed, but I hope people realize that Infinity Ward was to blame, and that this doesn't stop them from giving CODAW a fair trial.

I could be wrong, of course. It might just be the same as every other COD game. But with this one, I just think we should give it a chance. This series might actually be growing in an interesting way, and I'd hate to see it smothered for the wrong reasons and revert to old habits (like Saw 6.)

I hate CoD because of it's casual game mechanics. It allows casual gamers to escape the reality of paying your dues and getting pwned by your superiors. Quake, UT, and Halo forced casuals to either get better or lose forever which is how it fucking should be. I hate CoD because it took away the rights of competitive gamers to pwn those worse than them. Unless CoD becomes a arena shooter where the most skilled will always win and everyone else is their ***** I will never support CoD and I will do everything in my purchasing power to make sure CoD sooner or later fades away to obscurity.

 

[TheArcaneThinker]

Why do you want to drag the mainstream gaming industry back to linear games again ? Was it not enough for Spec Ops : The line to tell you that ?

 

[Atmos Duality]

Hmmm...
How about 'NO'.

Even if I wanted to give the single most self-derivative shooter franchise in history a chance, I'd have to wait for the PC version; y'know, the version that Activision gives zero fucks about.