Poll: Poll: Does Call of Duty deserve all the hate it gets?

[Jegsimmons]

yes, bad story, bad characters, eye strain colors and graphics, element that are just in bad taste, copy and pasted multiplayer, and lieing for saying its innovative and or new.

and a shit community.

I can't think of another shit community....

enlighten us please.

 

[Aeshi]

Hardly, most of it's hate comes from the fact that Activision (A company who is basically the very definition of "Cool-to-Bash") is involved in it's production.

Everything CoD is guilty of, another game is equally if not more guilty of.

 

[proandi]

COD is awesome. The single player is a terrible on rails affair spending 50% of the time ducking behind cover with a red screen until the next cut scene event is triggered. Online though it's brilliant, there are a lot of flaws and annoyances but it's generally one of the best online experiences.

To be good at COD you have to be exceptionally good at FPS games. Getting high end positive kill/death ratios in every game isn't that easy unless as I say you're good. Compared to other games being good at COD is harder than say being good at Battlefield. Despite the camping/hacking, one many army, noob tubes etc etc

 

[Omnific One]

No.
MW2's SP was nonsense, but I loved it.
CoD4 and CoD2 were amazing.

Most importantly of all, CoD games are fluid and fun to play, unlike so many other shooters.

Though Treyarch's games deserve the hate.

 

[JimmyC99]

Not Really

Sure its unimaginative and has used the same formula for ever. the campaign is awfully short and not really worth it. the extra bit like Zombies/SpecOps is a side attraction, but the multiplier is fun, not strategic not deep just run about and kill everything, it wont advnace gaming as a medium but its fun time killer and what else do we need from a game

 

[BboyGrylls]

COD4:MW was AWESOME!!!! but i hate them releasing new stuff every 2 weeks and expecting us to pay for it .... not cheap either

 

[Lenin211]

I came in here expecting two polls, I was disappointed. Anyway, I would say that call of duty is a fun game that gets more hate than it deserves. I do not, however, play the multiplayer because it is infinitely less fun that Team fortress 2.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

well lets look at the bad points:
-generally copypasted gameplay styles
-horrible community
-that community thinks almost all other FPSs are terrible
-they react to criticism badly.

good points:
-fairly unique maps
-a decent premise to some extent
-single player as well as multi.

so no, dont hate the game, hate the players.

 

[Laser Priest]

Nope.

I think the game is rubbish but it would be easiest to just ignore it.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

The biggest problems I have with the modern warfare series are that its very overrated and that it sells incredibly well. When you think about it those two things together are very bad for the industry... a mediocre game selling shit-tonnes and making the developer/publisher a mint is just going to set precedents for others to follow making similar mediocre games and incorporating the same mechanics in other games even where they don't really fit.

A successfully blockbuster series is almost like a disease, infecting all the other games around it.

Except that it's far, far better than the alternative, a glut of shitty games selling terribly. Which has brought the industry to a crashing halt in the past.

So, popular fun games sell great, "better" games exist, don't sell as well, versus

shit-tons of objectively shitty games, consumers get fed up, and buy nothing. Industry crashes, there are no good games.

So, I'll take the first option, thanks. Good games get made, and all you have to do is ignore the ones you dislike. There is always going to be some popular game "infecting" other games with it's mechanics, because people want to try and make a quick buck and copy the big sellers. This is the same in every medium, for every King Kong there's a "King of the Lost World" for every Matrix there's the Matrix sequels. The studios that put out shitty CoD knock-offs never would have made a great game, if CoD didn't sell as well there'd be a glut of Bioshock knock-offs, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_(video_game)], and so on, and so forth.

Anyway, sort of. CoD isn't a game series in the traditonal sense, it's more akin to a sports game with shooting. CoD fans know what they're getting, a short, adrenaline packed single player (anyone complaining about the length doesn't understand the concept of pacing) and easy to grasp multiplayer, with enough flashing points, nukes, and stat tracking to make you feel awesome when you win. The gameplay is the same as last year, with minor tweaks, but that means it can be incredibly polished. IW and Treyarch know how to make CoD games, and they can deliver polish and shine that only CoD has on a yearly basis.

Some people don't like that, obviously, because it isn't for every-body. So CoD certainly deserves some hate, because everything does, but not all of it, because 90% of the hate is people complaining about it being things it isn't and never claimed to be. "Oh, it's too short!" Can you imagine a CoD paced game at 40 hours? It would be horrible, like a three hour Michael Bay movie. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers_3]

"It's all the same every year" Again, that's sort of the point. There's a CoD game every year, and you know what to expect, same as last year, but better. More exciting set-pieces, better graphics, and hopefully the story doesn't get too fucked up.

 

[Jake0fTrades]

snip

It comes down to preference, if you don't like it, that's fine. I just ask that you don't push your preferences onto me. I play it for the multiplayer, I like the instinctive feel of "twitch-shooters", I'm not playing it for its intellectual value.

If I want an engaging story with a serious intelligent overtone, I'll go play Bioshock.

 

[Continuity]

Except that it's far, far better than the alternative, a glut of shitty games selling terribly. Which has brought the industry to a crashing halt in the past.

So, popular fun games sell great, "better" games exist, don't sell as well, versus

shit-tons of objectively shitty games, consumers get fed up, and buy nothing. Industry crashes, there are no good games.

Well, i'm not sure that is the alternative. The industry was a vastly different beast in the 80's so I dont expect a return to the bad old days under any foreseeable circumstances. What would a industry without publishers strong-arming developers into making knock off's look like? I dont know, but I'd like to think it would be filled with games such as those we get from valve, cd projekt red, blizzard, and all the fantastic indie developers that are flourishing at the moment.

So, I'll take the first option, thanks. Good games get made, and all you have to do is ignore the ones you dislike. There is always going to be some popular game "infecting" other games with it's mechanics, because people want to try and make a quick buck and copy the big sellers. This is the same in every medium, for every King Kong there's a "King of the Lost World" for every Matrix there's the Matrix sequels. The studios that put out shitty CoD knock-offs never would have made a great game, if CoD didn't sell as well there'd be a glut of Bioshock knock-offs, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_(video_game)], and so on, and so forth.

Anyway, sort of. CoD isn't a game series in the traditonal sense, it's more akin to a sports game with shooting. CoD fans know what they're getting, a short, adrenaline packed single player (anyone complaining about the length doesn't understand the concept of pacing) and easy to grasp multiplayer, with enough flashing points, nukes, and stat tracking to make you feel awesome when you win. The gameplay is the same as last year, with minor tweaks, but that means it can be incredibly polished. IW and Treyarch know how to make CoD games, and they can deliver polish and shine that only CoD has on a yearly basis.

Some people don't like that, obviously, because it isn't for every-body. So CoD certainly deserves some hate, because everything does, but not all of it, because 90% of the hate is people complaining about it being things it isn't and never claimed to be. "Oh, it's too short!" Can you imagine a CoD paced game at 40 hours? It would be horrible, like a three hour Michael Bay movie. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers_3]

"It's all the same every year" Again, that's sort of the point. There's a CoD game every year, and you know what to expect, same as last year, but better. More exciting set-pieces, better graphics, and hopefully the story doesn't get too fucked up.

I guess I agree with pretty much everything you're saying here, after all it not like this is a new trend, although the annual sequels is perhaps new. Blockbuster titles have been influencing the other games getting made for as long as i've been a gamer, which is going back to games like doom and Red alert which spawned hundreds of copy cat games, most of which were fairly poor. But yes, if you look past this there has always been and there still are good titles being made.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

Except that it's far, far better than the alternative, a glut of shitty games selling terribly. Which has brought the industry to a crashing halt in the past.

So, popular fun games sell great, "better" games exist, don't sell as well, versus

shit-tons of objectively shitty games, consumers get fed up, and buy nothing. Industry crashes, there are no good games.

Well, i'm not sure that is the alternative. The industry was a vastly different beast in the 80's so I dont expect a return to the bad old days under any foreseeable circumstances. What would a industry without publishers strong-arming developers into making knock off's look like? I dont know, but I'd like to think it would be filled with games such as those we get from valve, cd projekt red, blizzard, and all the fantastic indie developers that are flourishing at the moment.

So, I'll take the first option, thanks. Good games get made, and all you have to do is ignore the ones you dislike. There is always going to be some popular game "infecting" other games with it's mechanics, because people want to try and make a quick buck and copy the big sellers. This is the same in every medium, for every King Kong there's a "King of the Lost World" for every Matrix there's the Matrix sequels. The studios that put out shitty CoD knock-offs never would have made a great game, if CoD didn't sell as well there'd be a glut of Bioshock knock-offs, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_(video_game)], and so on, and so forth.

Anyway, sort of. CoD isn't a game series in the traditonal sense, it's more akin to a sports game with shooting. CoD fans know what they're getting, a short, adrenaline packed single player (anyone complaining about the length doesn't understand the concept of pacing) and easy to grasp multiplayer, with enough flashing points, nukes, and stat tracking to make you feel awesome when you win. The gameplay is the same as last year, with minor tweaks, but that means it can be incredibly polished. IW and Treyarch know how to make CoD games, and they can deliver polish and shine that only CoD has on a yearly basis.

Some people don't like that, obviously, because it isn't for every-body. So CoD certainly deserves some hate, because everything does, but not all of it, because 90% of the hate is people complaining about it being things it isn't and never claimed to be. "Oh, it's too short!" Can you imagine a CoD paced game at 40 hours? It would be horrible, like a three hour Michael Bay movie. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers_3]

"It's all the same every year" Again, that's sort of the point. There's a CoD game every year, and you know what to expect, same as last year, but better. More exciting set-pieces, better graphics, and hopefully the story doesn't get too fucked up.

I guess I agree with pretty much everything you're saying here, after all it not like this is a new trend, although the annual sequels is perhaps new. Blockbuster titles have been influencing the other games getting made for as long as i've been a gamer, which is going back to games like doom and Red alert which spawned hundreds of copy cat games, most of which were fairly poor. But yes, if you look past this there has always been and there still are good titles being made.

I suppose it probably is unlikely, although a quick glance at the Wii's catalog and casual games in general might cause panic attacks in some gamers.