My problem is that it spawned too many clones and now the market is flooded with gritty modern shooters. It's just like how they used to make too many WW2 games. Modern Warfare (the first one) was awesome because it was COD in a modern setting for the first time and had that nuke scene which is one of the best in any game ever. I think they need to move onto a new war because the modern ones are worn out.
Poll: Why all the CoD hate?
- Thread starter Al-Bundy-da-G
- Start date
repetitiveness, each game is the same and a lack of distinction from other shooters out there. Shallow experience over more tactical shooters and finally ive found the more recent games to be too full of set pieces with not enough solid gameplay.
I did love the first call of duty, an the first modern warfare, I just feel they bring out the same game every year, and I dislike the move away from realism to james bond type story lines, thats my personal view, I dont play the game online.
I did love the first call of duty, an the first modern warfare, I just feel they bring out the same game every year, and I dislike the move away from realism to james bond type story lines, thats my personal view, I dont play the game online.
People need something to hate so they hate on cod. the more popular something is the more hate it will get (halo all ready through this stage) just go on IMDB or meteoritic and try to find a single movie or game someone deos not hate or deos not love. Personally i'm fine with them because I usually wait until there like $20 (RRP $110) and just play through campaign. wich since cod 4 I have played 4 cod games wich makes a total of 16 hours of cod (and probably about 20 hours of split screen). less than a single play through of mass effect 2, having said that I have never been a fan and doubt that even cod 4 would make it into my top 50
Nope. You're talking from a point of complete subjectiveness. Maybe the stories aren't good for you, but they're action packed and good enough for me and anyone who wants a simple, action movie-alike story.questionnairebot said:
I like how Call of Duty is the culprit of the current trend of linear FPSes, when this trend started with Medal of Honor and Agent Under Fire on the PS2 and was popularized by the Halo series. Besides, Call of Duty was itself always linear, and then Modern Warfare exploded in popularity.
As for the multiplayer, I'm not a fan of the perks system. I believe they soil the "purity" of the match, when better players have even better perks than not so good players. It's like Mario Kart giving triple mushrooms to the guy in 1st and one green shell to the guy in 6th position. But still, people must like this system, otherwise it wouldn't be so successful. Annoying voice chat? Mute it. I always do.
So no. People tend to hate CoD because it's popular and just use arguments like your own
just to show they have an "intellectual" approach to the matter to those too young to remember beyond this generation.questionnairebot said:
Props to the OP for being WAY WAY more civil than the average CoD fan. That said, I find almost nothing enjoyable about the game, and then when gaming politics enter the equation, I find it one of the most despisable games series on the market.
I don't have time to go into it all, but here's some bullet points:
-game is too simple mechanically
-game plays itself and becomes an interactive movie (not a game)
-too many versions of same thing
-community is made of people who probably wouldn't play games if it wasn't CoD or Madden
-Kotick sucks and buying it makes him rich
-feels like it caters to gun-porn enthusiasts (let's hunt some terrorist! WOOO HOO /hillbilly)
-was respectable at one time, before it was popular (still didn't like it then, but that's my fault)
-higher popularity demands higher scrutiny, and it fails this test from many gaming enthusiasts.
-hype machine
I feel like I'm missing some important points, but it's 2 hours past my bed time and I work tomorrow. Need sleep.
I don't have time to go into it all, but here's some bullet points:
-game is too simple mechanically
-game plays itself and becomes an interactive movie (not a game)
-too many versions of same thing
-community is made of people who probably wouldn't play games if it wasn't CoD or Madden
-Kotick sucks and buying it makes him rich
-feels like it caters to gun-porn enthusiasts (let's hunt some terrorist! WOOO HOO /hillbilly)
-was respectable at one time, before it was popular (still didn't like it then, but that's my fault)
-higher popularity demands higher scrutiny, and it fails this test from many gaming enthusiasts.
-hype machine
I feel like I'm missing some important points, but it's 2 hours past my bed time and I work tomorrow. Need sleep.
I don't dislike it on general principle, and I can't really speak for others but I dislike CoD games for the following reasons
1. It's not just CoD, it's MoH and Battlefield as well. I dislike modern military FPS games in general.
2. They are all the same. I honestly can't tell the difference between them. The have the exact same controls, the same weapons, the same enemies, the same visuals. I know that's part of the appeal for some people, but for me it's just boring.
3. They are boring. Well, at least the ones I played. I nearly fell asleep during Modern Warfare 2. The missions were trying so hard to be "exciting" that it had the opposite effect. I felt disconnected from the game, being told to complete one arbitrary objective after another for no apparent reason, but at the same time felt like I was expected to care. Ironically, the least boring mission in the game was the slowest one (infiltrating an army base during a snowstorm) since I actually got to take a look around, feel what was happening and for a brief moment immerse myself in the narrative.
4. I don't dig gun porn. Guns are cool, but I'm not obsessing over each make and model, so the draw of discharging virual replicas of real-world guns is lost on me. From what I understand, many people love this particular aspect quite a bit.
5. It's focused on bad multiplayer. And it's bad because of the community. FPS games seem to breed the worst lowest common denominator, to the point where League of Legends and Heroes of Newerth players seem downright courteous. And I don't like multiplayer that much to begin with.
6. The single player isn't worth the asking price. Too short, not enough content. Even if I was interested in the setting and the genre, it would still be bad value for money.
7. DLC is a ripoff. While DLC in general tends to have worse value than the original game, mainstream FPS games take it to a whole new level, setting outrageous prices on simple map packs.
8. FPS oversaturation. There's just too many of them. And I dislike the lack of immersion I feel in FPS games compared to third person or overhead perspectives. First person just makes me feel disconnected from my character, like I'm playing a floating camera with a gun taped underneath it.
1. It's not just CoD, it's MoH and Battlefield as well. I dislike modern military FPS games in general.
2. They are all the same. I honestly can't tell the difference between them. The have the exact same controls, the same weapons, the same enemies, the same visuals. I know that's part of the appeal for some people, but for me it's just boring.
3. They are boring. Well, at least the ones I played. I nearly fell asleep during Modern Warfare 2. The missions were trying so hard to be "exciting" that it had the opposite effect. I felt disconnected from the game, being told to complete one arbitrary objective after another for no apparent reason, but at the same time felt like I was expected to care. Ironically, the least boring mission in the game was the slowest one (infiltrating an army base during a snowstorm) since I actually got to take a look around, feel what was happening and for a brief moment immerse myself in the narrative.
4. I don't dig gun porn. Guns are cool, but I'm not obsessing over each make and model, so the draw of discharging virual replicas of real-world guns is lost on me. From what I understand, many people love this particular aspect quite a bit.
5. It's focused on bad multiplayer. And it's bad because of the community. FPS games seem to breed the worst lowest common denominator, to the point where League of Legends and Heroes of Newerth players seem downright courteous. And I don't like multiplayer that much to begin with.
6. The single player isn't worth the asking price. Too short, not enough content. Even if I was interested in the setting and the genre, it would still be bad value for money.
7. DLC is a ripoff. While DLC in general tends to have worse value than the original game, mainstream FPS games take it to a whole new level, setting outrageous prices on simple map packs.
8. FPS oversaturation. There's just too many of them. And I dislike the lack of immersion I feel in FPS games compared to third person or overhead perspectives. First person just makes me feel disconnected from my character, like I'm playing a floating camera with a gun taped underneath it.
In short: Because it's popular, not an RPG, multiplayer centric and there's a new installment every year.
In long: ...eh, couldn't be bothered. I'm sure there's a thread somewhere with a million and one pages on the subject.
In long: ...eh, couldn't be bothered. I'm sure there's a thread somewhere with a million and one pages on the subject.
Pretty much. I loved COD4, but the series has been stagnating since it's success.brainslurper said:
for me whilst I play CoD I find that other FPS are much more fun, so I dont like it
also I hate the fact that they feel to release a new game every year, they are over saturating the market and setting an example that shouldn't be followed by other game developers
also I hate the fact that they feel to release a new game every year, they are over saturating the market and setting an example that shouldn't be followed by other game developers
It's fun to play with friends and stuff... But on it's own I'd take something like Bulletstorm any day. These real to life shooters just aren't my thing. If I wanted that I'd join the army.
Pretty much this. Yeah, the games are perfectly fine, it just gets old after a while. Franchise fatigue and all that. Like the Tony Hawk games or Guitar Hero (which were also published by Activision, strangely enough. Connection? You decide!). I really think that is the source of all the hate for the series at this point.SL33TBL1ND said:
Gameplay is alright, nothing particularly special - but since I also play Borderlands, Gears of War and Halo: Reach, MW2 is sometimes very refreshing.
The only gripe I have with CoD is the same I have with Halo, being that the community is a bunch of (insert unacceptable word).
The only gripe I have with CoD is the same I have with Halo, being that the community is a bunch of (insert unacceptable word).
Because it's become nothing more then the same game with the same gameplay, same graphics and audacity to charge full price and get's a ridiculous amounts of money that dominate the market and take away from other ventures due to them not being financially sound because COD keeps crushing them. Also, I don't really enjoy the gameplay anymore, it's too repetitive and this thread has been done sooooooooooo many times...
Number one reason:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FanHater
Also a lot of this (not in the MW community, but among haters who claim that the game is dumbed down/easy/stupid/poorly balanced/not as good as game x/for ritalin-popping ten year olds/etc.):
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StopHavingFunGuys
And a healthy dose of:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OpinionMyopia
I also enjoy complaints about how they just push out a title every year. There have been two MW games. TWO. And one game with similar mechanics set in Vietnam during the Cold War. And between MW1 and 2 was World at War, which was WW2, not MW. And it's not really the same game at all unless you decide to discount the changes, graphical updates, and entirely new single-player story (this seems like a lot to discount). People need to stop acting like CoD is just like Madden with minor texture updates and an updated roster.
I for one deeply enjoyed MW2. The campaign was short, but well-paced with a lot of variety, some great set pieces, and good production values. Multiplayer was fun, with a sense of progression often lacking in FPS games, but designed well enough that newbies still stood a chance (especially with weapons like the noobtube, which was much less effective than a good player with more or less any other weapon, but gave newbies the chance to get the occasional kill, keeping things fun), albeit less of a chance than players who had been playing for a while, which gave you something to look forward to as you kept playing.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FanHater
Also a lot of this (not in the MW community, but among haters who claim that the game is dumbed down/easy/stupid/poorly balanced/not as good as game x/for ritalin-popping ten year olds/etc.):
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StopHavingFunGuys
And a healthy dose of:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OpinionMyopia
I also enjoy complaints about how they just push out a title every year. There have been two MW games. TWO. And one game with similar mechanics set in Vietnam during the Cold War. And between MW1 and 2 was World at War, which was WW2, not MW. And it's not really the same game at all unless you decide to discount the changes, graphical updates, and entirely new single-player story (this seems like a lot to discount). People need to stop acting like CoD is just like Madden with minor texture updates and an updated roster.
I for one deeply enjoyed MW2. The campaign was short, but well-paced with a lot of variety, some great set pieces, and good production values. Multiplayer was fun, with a sense of progression often lacking in FPS games, but designed well enough that newbies still stood a chance (especially with weapons like the noobtube, which was much less effective than a good player with more or less any other weapon, but gave newbies the chance to get the occasional kill, keeping things fun), albeit less of a chance than players who had been playing for a while, which gave you something to look forward to as you kept playing.
CoD. aka Generic shooter number 219.
MULTIPLAYER:
Prestige: Stupid and pointless, you gain nothing from it. Also resets all the unlocks you have worked for each time you prestige.
Leveling system: Stupid as it makes the game unbalanced by making some guns and kill-streaks only available to higher levels leaving it hard for lower levels to kill. This in turn makes lower levels be 'n00bs' for using other frowned upon and easier techniques to kill people (n00b tubing) just so they can level up.
Spawning: Have spawned in the middle of gun-fire many times. Im not the only one who has.
Skills: Shit like 'quick hand pro' and all those other skills unbalance the game as it makes people better in certain areas of combat. Better skills are only available to higher levels unbalancing the game for lower levels even more. When you level up and unlock the skills you then prestige, resetting all the skills you unlocks you just worked for making prestige and all that work pointless, and for what? a higher number next to the word prestige just so you can boast about how much time you have wasted playing such a stupid game?
Community: Mostly made up of people who think the only things that makes a good game is guns and realistic graphics. A good game is made up from. good immersion, a good story, decant gameplay that isnt just spray n pray or just shooting for that matter and good graphics that can be cartoony if it wants to be as long as it fits in with the story and immersion. A lot of 'hardcore' CoD players think all nintendo and non-fps games are stupid despite the fact that a lot of them actually have what it takes to make a good game. sure a lot of those games are not aimed at 'gamers', but that doesnt make those types of games shit.
Example: http://chzmemebase.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/memes-lets-go-to-corneria-instead.jpg
SINGLE PLAYER:
The story is only about 6 hours long, linear and repetitive. (also they use quick time events, personally i think they are shit). They claim CoD its realistic. In MW2 you jump off a cliff over a massive gap on a snow mobile and land, wow realistic. Not to mention being shot at, hiding behind a wall and just spontaneously healing is VERY realistic aswell...
Single player/campaign needs to be longer and if they claim its realistic they need to stick to it. I WILL give them points for immersion though, but thats it.
OTHER:
The healing system is so damn retarded. Get shot, hide, heal within a few seconds then go back out guns blazing. Health bars are better then this stupid system. Get shot, you stay hurt. Also makes people think more tactically about there life other than running out, spray bullets everywhere, hiding then repeating.
Since CoD 4 all the developers have done is, reskin their previous game, add a few new pointless things or minor details and then release it as a brand new game. Theres less change per CoD game than between Fallout 3 and its expansion packs. Each CoD game is being released within about a year of each other, wow shows how much time and effort has gone into each of the games.
CoD is generic, unbalanced and full of retards. Sure it IS a fun game but so is every other generic and unbalanced fps. There are other, MUCH better games out there that are worth my money and praise.
If you have read all this then well done, you are more intelligent then the average CoD player and buyer!
MULTIPLAYER:
Prestige: Stupid and pointless, you gain nothing from it. Also resets all the unlocks you have worked for each time you prestige.
Leveling system: Stupid as it makes the game unbalanced by making some guns and kill-streaks only available to higher levels leaving it hard for lower levels to kill. This in turn makes lower levels be 'n00bs' for using other frowned upon and easier techniques to kill people (n00b tubing) just so they can level up.
Spawning: Have spawned in the middle of gun-fire many times. Im not the only one who has.
Skills: Shit like 'quick hand pro' and all those other skills unbalance the game as it makes people better in certain areas of combat. Better skills are only available to higher levels unbalancing the game for lower levels even more. When you level up and unlock the skills you then prestige, resetting all the skills you unlocks you just worked for making prestige and all that work pointless, and for what? a higher number next to the word prestige just so you can boast about how much time you have wasted playing such a stupid game?
Community: Mostly made up of people who think the only things that makes a good game is guns and realistic graphics. A good game is made up from. good immersion, a good story, decant gameplay that isnt just spray n pray or just shooting for that matter and good graphics that can be cartoony if it wants to be as long as it fits in with the story and immersion. A lot of 'hardcore' CoD players think all nintendo and non-fps games are stupid despite the fact that a lot of them actually have what it takes to make a good game. sure a lot of those games are not aimed at 'gamers', but that doesnt make those types of games shit.
Example: http://chzmemebase.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/memes-lets-go-to-corneria-instead.jpg
SINGLE PLAYER:
The story is only about 6 hours long, linear and repetitive. (also they use quick time events, personally i think they are shit). They claim CoD its realistic. In MW2 you jump off a cliff over a massive gap on a snow mobile and land, wow realistic. Not to mention being shot at, hiding behind a wall and just spontaneously healing is VERY realistic aswell...
Single player/campaign needs to be longer and if they claim its realistic they need to stick to it. I WILL give them points for immersion though, but thats it.
OTHER:
The healing system is so damn retarded. Get shot, hide, heal within a few seconds then go back out guns blazing. Health bars are better then this stupid system. Get shot, you stay hurt. Also makes people think more tactically about there life other than running out, spray bullets everywhere, hiding then repeating.
Since CoD 4 all the developers have done is, reskin their previous game, add a few new pointless things or minor details and then release it as a brand new game. Theres less change per CoD game than between Fallout 3 and its expansion packs. Each CoD game is being released within about a year of each other, wow shows how much time and effort has gone into each of the games.
CoD is generic, unbalanced and full of retards. Sure it IS a fun game but so is every other generic and unbalanced fps. There are other, MUCH better games out there that are worth my money and praise.
If you have read all this then well done, you are more intelligent then the average CoD player and buyer!
I hate it because i know that any game i buy wont be profiting the guys who ACTUALLY designed CoD originally.
fucking activision.
oh and its the same game for over 5 times now
fucking activision.
oh and its the same game for over 5 times now
I guess the only thing i have against cod is it seems to be such a monster i have never played a single cod game so my view point is probably far from fair/unbiased but none the less i shall give my 2cents.
The only thing that really annoys me about cod is the fact that so many people in my office play it which isn't a bad thing by any means. But the second you try adn suggest another game they should play they imediatley defend cod even though it was just a suggestion.
I dunno i don't hate cod persé but i feel its creating a slightly stagnent shooter pool just my thoughts.
The only thing that really annoys me about cod is the fact that so many people in my office play it which isn't a bad thing by any means. But the second you try adn suggest another game they should play they imediatley defend cod even though it was just a suggestion.
I dunno i don't hate cod persé but i feel its creating a slightly stagnent shooter pool just my thoughts.
Well i don't hate it but the thing that gets me is a the storyline only being 6 hours (i selected other i guess i could have selected gameplay for that), the storys fairly well laid out but considering these games stay at the same retail price for months, maybe even 12 months depending which one (new £40, even the used ones are around £30)i would expect a longer campaign, and not just a short story with nothing else but online.
![Violator[xL]](https://eg-forums-escapist-data.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/24/24558.jpg?1620210777){kind=avatar}
This is just like Republicans/Fox whining about a liberal agenda. There isn't really one, but when you repeat yourself enough people actually start believing in it.