Jimquisition: Defending Call of Duty

[Zero_ctrl]

Jim is just as bad as MovieBob when it comes to tact.
Or humor.

----------
I played Modern Warfare 2 on the Xbox 360.
I didn't enjoy it, but not everybody enjoys competitive reflex-based finger FPS's.

I found the game to be unbalanced with all the perks, and yes I know that's covered in his video. Let me explain. Putting new players at a disadvantage simply because they bought the game later than everybody else isn't fair. It's dumb. Also, kill streaks tick me off. The game punishes players who aren't doing well with helping the winning team do further damage. And before you go mentioning loss streaks, they never really helped me out.

I'm sure if the game had a server browser where I could have found a group of friendly people to play with, I would have had a much more enjoyable time.
However, it does not and I got fed up with being mocked on every server I went to. There may be friendly people who play CoD, but wherever they were, they weren't on the servers I played on.


So there, that's why I don't like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.
I can't say anything about COD4 or Blops.

 

[leviadragon99]

Okay... a very interesting and even convinging argument, but you did come across as something of a hypocrite by reducing those opposing your views to little more than a one-dimensional stereotype, precisely the thing you accused those same people of doing to players of the COD games.

In addition, the "thanking god for jim" running gag is going to get real old real quick, tongue-in-cheek though it may be, such massive unabashed arrogance does not make you look any more credible.

 

[ChupathingyX]

COD 4, W@W and MW2 had very fun campaigns that I enjoyed, however, I cannot agree that Black Ops did also.

Black Ops felt way too slow with all the cutscenes and constant flashbacks and the campaign just wasn't as memeorable as the other next-gen COD's.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Is Jim the new Bob Chipman? How is this different from The Big Picture? I mean, he just did his own Game Anti-thinker thing in the video, what with that stupid strawman argument about games and art.

Yeah, continue to leap to the defense of giant, multibillion-dollar franchises that don't give a crap about you.

Nobody minds that Jim likes CoD, but now he's just stating his opinion as fact while claiming the opinions of others as incorrect. There's a difference between having an opinion and being a jerk about it, but then reasonable discussion doesn't draw in viewers does it.

OH WAIT EXTRA CREDITS.

And there are plenty of "artsy" games that having nothing to do with dark messages (or any messages) about humanity.

Finally, the acting and humor portions of the video were abysmally bad.

Note: I like CoD 4. Raging against the petulant anti-fanboys that make up a small minority of people who have problems with the CoD franchise would be like raging about CoD because of the small minority of swearing teenagers who play CoD. WHICH IS WHAT YOU LAMBASTED OTHERS FOR DOING, JIM.

 

[conflictofinterests]

Commenters have already covered the balance issues (something of concern with all multiplayer activities) inherent in a playtime-based perk system, right?

That was my only gripe with this episode. Overall, better than his previous ones, in my opinion.

 

[ZeroDotZero]

"Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is a game which defined what a modern multiplayer shooter could be".

Wrong, that would be Team Fortress 2.

Jim is doing a great job of embarrassing himself. He didn't acknowledge any od the main reasons people tend to dislike COD.

Boring environments.
No innovative mechanics.
No teamwork

etc...

CoD invented perks. Perks are, whether you like it or not, one of the most popular MP shooter mechanics.

I don't really like or dislike CoD. I considered it worth my time to buy MW2 and play it a fair bit, and I enjoyed myself while I did, but it quickly got old for me, and I traded it in. It's good, but not great, based on what I thought of MW2.

 

[Hound174]

My arguement?
Call of Duty is fun, we've just had too many in over 5 years.
Everytime a new Call of duty comes out, I see the exact same game, full price, with a few brush ups. Call of duty Multiplayer is incredibly fun, but when you've played the same game over 4-5 games, you can understand the frustration when someone says "OH MAI GODZ, NEW CALL OF DUTY".
And no, they aren't talking about the campaign.

The only good thing's I see personally coming out of the franchise is:
Company makes money
People get some add ons to their game.
For those who play the campaign (like me) will actually get something close enough to the amount we paid.

What's bringing it down?:
It's the same game.
They aren't trying to make new, or better games, they are sticking to what they know.
They are finding ways to make the most money out of it (rather than the bext experience)
It's like pokie machine, they aren't fun, they're addictive. you confuse yourself with the pretty lights for fun and addiction.

Call of duty has to die. Or other developers need to ignore it, and do their own thing.

 

[SammiYin]

I loved your portrayal of the 'games must all be art man' "people" that pollute the industry, but feel I must disagree with you on problems with cod, especially the player base. I don't think I've actually played a cod game that didn't have at least one screaming child, even worse than them though are what I like to call the 'idiot Americans' who are so patriotic and need to tell everyone how inferior their country is [despite the fact that I for one don't give two shits about national pride, it's all luck anyway]. To balance this out, you also get the utterly stupid English guys, but being English myself I tend to get ignored while they troll some Americans about 9/11.

My second point is balance. Cod games [especially MW2] are horrendously unbalanced, at least in old school games everyone [once they know where all the guns are] has a fair chance of getting the powerful guns, but in cod you have the ability to start off with it [m16s I'm looking at you pricks].

Thirdly, the etiquette of play. People are so concerned with getting uber kill streaks [I don't understand the appeal to be honest, maybe for every nuke you get the game sucks you off] but they will eschew playing and supporting their team mates to sit in a corner for the entire game capping anybody who has the misfortune not to check for them. Also there's the general attitude to the objective based games, one game of sabotage I played on MW2, the first words one of my team mates said were "Ok guys, let's not plant the bomb too soon, we need to rack up our K/D" Que me and my friends blasting him about how much of an idiot he is, and that if he wants K/D he should do fucking Team Deathmatch.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy call of duty and really like the campaigns and just LOVE zombies, but it's nowhere near perfect, and there are far superior shooters out there.

 

[Yopaz]

I am glad I kept on watching this. It's not the best series ever, but it really improved each episode. I would even call this good.

 

[shadowform]

There are two basic types of games: ones based around narrative (most RPGs, for instance) and ones based around challenge (Tetris as a prime example). CoD is a challenge game, and as with most games in this category, problems arise when you try to look at it's narrative. Certainly there are games that dip into both (Valve is fantastic at doing this), but generally games seem to rely on one or the other to prop themselves up.

The thing is, though, as a game where the primary enjoyment comes from overcoming a challenge doesn't really NEED any sort of narrative - most early NES titles had at best arbitrary stories, but that doesn't make them any less fun. To use a more recent example, Marvel vs. Capcom 2 has next to no justification for existing, yet it was (and still is) one of the most beloved titles on the PS2.

The issue that the Call of Duty franchise is that it tries with the utmost sincerity to maintain a cohesive storyline with defined characters and story elements, when it would be much better served by an approach more akin to, say, the Swat series: a collection of generally unrelated missions with clearly defined objectives, allies, and opponents. I know that I can't speak for everyone, but by about the third time that Modern Warfare 2 tried to trick me into thinking I was going to die, I completely stopped worrying about the welfare of whoever I was playing and the people around me, which utterly sunk a later moment where the game actually DOES kill you.

Similarly, in Black Ops, I quickly became frustrated with the long, uneventful sequences that contained no gameplay, no decision making on the part of the player, and exposition that couldn't be barked out in ten seconds over a radio. The thing about this, though, is that Bioshock did the exact same thing several times (the descent to Rapture could be a cutscene, as could meeting your first Big Daddy, and the initial encounter with Andrew Ryan) without feeling out of place at all. Why? Because, from the beginning, Bioshock sets itself up not as a series of challenges, but as an exploration of a strange and marvelous new world. It isn't centered primarily around overcoming its obstacles, so segments where there simply are no obstacles aren't an issue.

Even beyond this, though, the stories presented by the games behave as though they want to be taken seriously while being utterly ludicrous. To use another related example, the story in Crysis 2, from the start, throws a monkey wrench so large into the modern-setting-military-shooter formula that you really have no way to say "You know, this particular plot point doesn't make much sense" because you've been killing squid-headed aliens while wearing a high-tech suit that can turn invisible. The game, at no point, puts on airs of being realistic. Possibly due to it's roots, Call of Duty does - and for the first few games, that's fine. We can't dispute them because they're based on events that actually occurred. Once you try to cross a series grounded in reality from a historical setting into a speculative future setting, though, you begin running into problems - and in a bit of irony, it's the brand recognition that's responsible for this.

If MW2 had been set in a clearly farcical setting, it's single player campaign would be fantastic. The unreasonable nature of it would have been explained away perfectly if the game had only stated at the start, "We know this isn't a realistic portrayal of anything, but it is very cool, and that's all we really want to do."

 

[Wither]

I feel that too often Jim strays into the realm of broad sweeping statements that have very little to back them up, i.e. the statement that Black Ops has a well paced narrative, but I agree with the overall message regarding their merit. However, I think you could have said a bit more about the multi player

 

[Pegghead]

I gotta say, this is the first time I've watched Jimquisition and I thought you made some great points.

Onto the other videos I suppose...

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

Don't know why I'm still awake but this was a pleasant surprise.

And also nice to see someone defend this franchise for a while. Black Ops was my first COD- game and I clocked a total of 150 hours. It was a simply good game.

And I'm not a hardcore online shooter fan.

Black Ops was your first CoD game? I feel bad for you, conidering how much better CoD4 and MW2 were. You missed out. I recommend picking them up.

 

[TestSubject4]

I think COD:MW was a great game, But I never went so far as to buy the other two. I play them a lot at friends places but there is no way I could justify 130 dollars for what looks and feels like an expansion. Oh and top work on ripping on the games must be art crowd.

 

[coakroach]

I did not find this funny, informative or entertaining.
Way to make a whole bunch of points everyone is already aware of in the most condescending way possible, really good work.
Everything went downhill after CoD4 except for the budget, I'd rather see someone go in depth and explain that rather than have someone harp on about how much they hate the minority of folks that hate it for less than valid reasons.
/whine

 

[mikev7.0]

Jim since I know you at least sorta' keep up with the escapist can I just ask what you think of Moviebobs Gameoverthinker piece "Worst Person Shooter?" and what you honestly think of it?

A friend here sent me some links to your earlier show and I just want to ask why the change? I know I've been critical but I think that's due to the much more harsh tone in this show and maybe the ever present homage to "V" which is a great work I grant you if only for the worlds longest yet coolest aliteration but still, the other stuff I have seen you do is just a lot more obvious about the joke and I think the reason I didn't get your humor at first is because I didn't get that the image was all humor.

Wow. Could this mean that the real Yahtzee could just possibly NOT hate nearly every game in existence?

Nah.