This "cod hate" is getting out of hand.

[The SettingSun]

I don't dislike the game so much.

It's the community.....

 

[Sovvolf]

The hate for cod is simple, MW2 is a dumbed down

Dumbed down? in what way? From what? Did they dumb it down from World at War (the previous game) did they dumb it down from Call of Duty 4?... Please elaborate.

console game for kids and 15 old noobs, my brother 3yrs younger , he actually liked it, while i hated it.

So you question the maturity of the gamers yet your posts so far have just been childish name calling of the players. As for console game... why does that matter?

But that is simply how much you grown up, some guys 20yrs and still loving what you loved at 15yr, come on, time to move on basement kreeps, MW2 is a crap game overall.

Again childish insults.

It's selling because of the name, brand, simple as that. It's mainstream, it's for western population, they love controversy, i didn't liked the "no russian" level, not at all. It's sick.

Or maybe its because people enjoy the game? also mainstream?... Why does that matter? do we automatically have to hate something regardless of merit as soon as it becomes popular?

 

[OneEyeX]

- CoD:BLoPs is, again CoD4 MP, with 19th Century weapons,

20th

I'm not sure why people need to "hate" on anything, really. If you don't like it, don't play it; if someone else likes it, who cares? Though on the same token, I don't know why people care if other people dislike something that they do.

There are generally THREE reasons for this;
Mad-Bad: They're bad because They're terrible at the style of combat presented in CoD and dislike the fact that it's a bench-mark for Shooters.
Mad-Pretentious: They're literally too much a little girl to enjoy combat based around military firearms and competitive nature of the multiplayer. Generally they don't like multiplayer overall and complain about tacked on multiplayer.
Mad-Mad: They're just Mad about it being popular.

I play World of Warcraft, the MMORPG equivalent (almost everyone seems to play it, and almost everyone seems to hate it). I happen to like it, but I'm not going to defend it to folks who hate it. Random people on the internet aren't going to stop me from enjoying it. Anyone who assumes something of me based on the fact I play it isn't worth my time anyway, so why take it personally?

Because of the reasons above, minus Mad-Bad. Mad-Bads get put in your que-finder.

 

[Retronana]

I'm still waiting for a sequal to CoD 4 let's put it that way.

 

[Vigormortis]

OP couldn't have more selective vision if he tried. Everyone complained at Angel of Darkness? Uninformed or selective, nonsense. People were complaining as early as Tomb Raider 2, that the gameplay felt the same with nothing but slight changes like the ability to ledge-climb around corners, as a change.

And yes, half the hate is the fans. I mean ffs, I checked out the IGN youtube vid for Shadow of the Colossus HD, and no less than two comments out of the few were to the effect of, "This looks like garbage, you should play COD". I don't even have to break down the knuckle-dragging, I-only-play-COD-and-call-myself-a-gamer retardation in that. I wish that were the only time I could say I've seen that happen,but I could cite more.

So if the fanboys... sorry, the fans of COD are tired of the hate, maybe they should work on the image they project.

I liked the one reference to the fanboy worship, comparing it to Twilight fanbase. At IGN's game of the year choice, when the real debate was between Mass Effect and Red Dead, there were endless, ENDLESS comments about how COD is "infinitely" better than either. Again, a mass of simple folks who do nothing but COD multiplayer, with no real experience in gaming culture.

For the record I loved MW1+2. Didn't buy Black ops cuz as Yahtzee says "I don't give a flying shit about multiplayer and neither do a lot of people". But I can safely call myself a hater of the series' fans.

THANK YOU
I swear, it's like you're in my head. You've said, almost point for point, what I was going to say. (save the Tomb Raider and other assorted, specific examples. though I was going to bring up the IGN message boards)

As futile as the following is going to be, as the OP is not likely to actually read what I write, I have to say that I actually do hate Call of Duty. And, yes, I do mean hate. At this point there is literally nothing about Call of Duty that doesn't fill me with ire and aggravation. It's cookie-cutter, lowest-common-denominator game design at its most obscene. It's become the next Guitar Hero. By that I mean it's literally the same game as the previous incarnation with, what one could at best tentatively call, "additions". Hell, they even rehash entire scenes from previous games!

See, where normally a developer, after releasing a multi-player-centric game, would address balance issues or add extra features through the use of patches or updates, Activision has seen fit to instead release a whole new game for their additions. No matter how small or inconsequential. Even worse, they do so at full price. (and soon, at raised prices)

And all of this is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of the problems with Call of Duty. I dare not even began a discussion as to the state of it's online community or the exploitative nature of it's DLC. I've even heard the most die-hard of fans of the game complain, almost endlessly, about the rest of the community and $15 map packs. (containing maybe four maps that the fan base plays for maybe a week before reverting to the older maps)

Yet, they keep going back for more. Why? Because Call of Duty has literally become a drug. A popularity drug. People, especially with the explosion of social networking, feel more and more pressured to "fit in" and be like "everyone else". As a result, games like Call of Duty and it's very vanilla, mass-market appeal, quickly and easily become the new social networking drug. Much like Facebook.

And, just like Facebook, Call of Duty breeds a community of people who are quickly becoming the most self-indulgent, self-absorbed people on the planet. It's all about "me, me, me". This lends itself to much of the community being confrontational and abrasive towards everyone else. Even if they're nothing like that in "real life". I know people that are very fun and kind in person, but as soon as they pick up a controller and join a match in Call of Duty, they turn into the most offensive, obnoxious jerks I've ever met.

So, Mr. OP, you ask why all the hate? We hate (or, in most cases, just dislike) because Call of Duty represents everything wrong with the gaming industry. It's a showcase of all the misdeeds, stereotypes, and misconceptions of the gaming world and those that are a part of it. It may seem harsh or extreme to put so much blame on a single franchise, and in some ways it really is unfair, but the truth of the matter is Call of Duty is far too popular for what it is or has become. It's a true celebration of mediocrity.

A couple of side notes.
First, I loved the hell out of Call of Duty 4. I still regard it as one of the finer games of the last decade. It's what has become of the series since then that irks me so.

Second, does anyone else find it suspicious that the OP's account was created just a few days ago and has since been used only to start, then comment on, this topic?

[/edit] Sorry for the lengthy rant. I've abstained from commenting on these kinds of threads for quite a while. Had a lot of pent up comments.

 

[Irriduccibilli]

The reason why so many people hate cod is because... well, not everyone likes fish you know

Lame puns aside. The reason why people hate CoD is because it's the same game every damn year, the same story, the same mechanics, and the same enemies and only a very few new additions. The only new thing I saw in the gameplay videos for MW3 was the ability to switch between red dot sights and an ACOG scope... and thats it. Also, the fact that there's a new CoD game EVERY DAMN YEAR is also why people hate it, and lets just face it, $15 dollar map packs doesnt excactly help improve CoD's image

 

[Arkyance]

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like Call of Duty? -What I saw from OP's post. Good job.

 

[bro1667]

As to the 60$ price range in COD

As TB once mentioned in a mailbox, older games liké Super Mario Bros. 10-20 years ago cost 50-90 $ ! That in my opinion, was quite alot back then. When we skip to present day, dev. in games cost more and more and we should be happy that the price is not higher. Think if they charged 70 $ or more for a game today?

I do agree that COD is NOT worth the 60 $ but aleast there not charging more for their game. (hopefully)

 

[DefinitelyPsychotic]

This "every other series that isn't Call of Duty" hate is getting out of hand.

 

[stewox]

The reason why so many people hate cod is because... well, not everyone likes fish you know

Lame puns aside. The reason why people hate CoD is because it's the same game every damn year, the same story, the same mechanics, and the same enemies and only a very few new additions. The only new thing I saw in the gameplay videos for MW3 was the ability to switch between red dot sights and an ACOG scope... and thats it. Also, the fact that there's a new CoD game EVERY DAMN YEAR is also why people hate it, and lets just face it, $15 dollar map packs doesnt excactly help improve CoD's image

indeed, but that's a local issue, the point is , they purposely did it, dumbed down for masses of people to "enjoy" ...

Im just talking differently , i mean the same thing, and that rant above is not really personal against anyone here, it's just what people think, sumed up, but it has my anger when i talk, ofcourse im not happy to rant about it.



One of the biggest reasons for these discussion is when people who have no idea about the history or the point come up with some of their arguments, you should expect retalliation, of freaking course.

I was there since COD1, i ran COD2 servers, i MODDED C++ scripts for my server mod, it was a hardcore rifle-only mod, no freaking sprayers, that's why i take my balls to write here this today, i wouldn't be writting a post if i wasn't sure i was having an idea what's going on.

I think many people ... don't even know how to behave on the web, you don't start a discussion if you have NO hardcore knowledge, it is pointless to discuss with someone under-infromed about the subject.

What people defend in MW2 , is a local issue. a local issue without any SENSE. The whole issue is that it is actually a success, it's designed to make this hate and discussions and flame wars and internet abuzz , it's the design of MW2, they wanted the camps to go at fire, they wanted to screw the PC people because they knew they'll go bizerke, console gamers aren't vigilant, aren't capable of REVOLTING.

Console gamers of such ages.

Remember nintendo ... years ago, the times when hardcore console communites had a brain.

If you ask me, in my eyes, X360 is the biggest parasite in entertainment history, X360 is the biggest blame for this flame wars and kids they brought up , it's exploiting the stereotype, giving 10year old kids to play MW2 and thos kids are asking for trobule on the web, did you expect PC community to be ... okay with that ?

Microsoft has been screwing PC for a long time now, we're pissed , how we wouldn't be, Win7 is just a 300$ vista patch, the industry is turning mature gaming into monetized dumbed down social gaming.

It's an unfortunate story, why wouldn't i hate that, why wouldn't i be upset if everything in front of me is turning into shit. Im actually SAD because industry is turning into mindless slaves and stupid people in every corner you look, it is not plesant, i am unhappy because i miss the old days.

The sad part is, the PEOPLE get dumbed down , and they actually accept it. And the won't see my messeage, they're dumbed down to understand it, sadly.



and im offf to sleep (bit late ) this is just honest opinion , no offense to defenders , but i hope i explained well

 

[Arehexes]

Portal 2, Dead Space 2 and Super Mario Galaxy 2 use the previous games' engine, and are proclaimed as brilliant games. But if COD does it... apparently it means it must be banished from the Earth! Really haters, grow up.

I've heard people say galaxy 2 is good but still complain it's the same game with yoshi added (it's why I got rid of my copy after a few days and I love me some mario I tell you that). But by this logic any game that uses the Unreal Engine should be banished. The key problem is sequel beating, which Super Mario Galaxy 2 ate bad, while Dead Space 2 and Portal 2 are at least new ideas. But Call of Duty's point now is that they don't even want to try to change it up in terms of game play (You mention Portal 2, at least it added some new elements to the puzzles with the bounce gel, and speed gel, and convalsive gel). But Call of Duty from what I played felt the same (played nice mind you) but just felt the same.

OK I'm sick of talking about COD so I'm going off-topic.
No other game of 2010, and I mean NO OTHER GAME, has as many new ideas as Super Mario Galaxy 2. The overall goal of each level is the same but the levels are insanely creative. That's why it is one of the highest rated games of this generation.

It's totally obvious you didn't actually buy the game, btw. Don't worry, we all lie about owning games to make our opinions sound better

Don't put words in my mouth dude, I gave my copy to my brother and his nieces because I was tired of getting stars to save princess peach from bowser (hell they even reused a mario 64 stage). Cause hey if I hate a game I must not have owned it. I have better games to play over it on my Wii, PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, DS, PSP, and PC. And shocker they are at least different in their ideas (even it it can rehash ideas from it's genre), instead of another get X number of stars and save princess peach from bowser again.

But again thanks for assuming what games I own/play/don't own just because I hated the game.

OK I admit I was being a bit of a dick but now I'm just really, really intrigued. I have never met anyone who has hated this game, and now I'm just interested why. I just assumed since you "love you some Mario", you would know that every Mario game has the same (not really a) storyline and that it's not about the flagpole/stars, but the levels that get you there.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 could be seen as an expansion pack as it doesn't change the core concept or collecting stars, but it is incredibly creative with the ways it constantly changes the mechanics of the game and frankly, I feel that in one hour of the game, it offers more creativity and ambition than most games do in their entirety.

Also, it's a massive game and the Whomps-Fortress homage occurs very late in the game, so you must have been playing a hell of a lot over those few days. With such a lukewarm feeling?

I'm getting frustrated because I still believe you didn't actually buy the game; how else could you say it's not different in it's ideas? You would have to be blind to not notice how every level offers something fresh and unique.

But whatever, I guess you're entitled to your opinion. EVEN IF YOUR OPINION IS WRONG!! TROLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

You can say I didn't buy it, but I did. Traded in Super Mario Galaxy 1 and Mario Party 8 for a gamestop deal to get it cheaper. And yep I did play it a lot it was fun, but I still don't like it as much as the first one. I also don't like Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time, are you gonna claim I didn't buy/own/beat that when I beat the Original one and Master Quest. The problem is I said I didn't like a game you love or like a lot and are taking offense saying I didn't even buy it. Galaxy did something I love over 64 and Sunshine, instead of a giant sprawling world where you have to find your star it's more point A to point B. But Galaxy two is good, but it's just like DLC but for 60 bucks only nintendo can pull something like that and get away with it (Other then Microsoft and ODST).

 

[Arehexes]

Portal 2, Dead Space 2 and Super Mario Galaxy 2 use the previous games' engine, and are proclaimed as brilliant games. But if COD does it... apparently it means it must be banished from the Earth! Really haters, grow up.

I've heard people say galaxy 2 is good but still complain it's the same game with yoshi added (it's why I got rid of my copy after a few days and I love me some mario I tell you that). But by this logic any game that uses the Unreal Engine should be banished. The key problem is sequel beating, which Super Mario Galaxy 2 ate bad, while Dead Space 2 and Portal 2 are at least new ideas. But Call of Duty's point now is that they don't even want to try to change it up in terms of game play (You mention Portal 2, at least it added some new elements to the puzzles with the bounce gel, and speed gel, and convalsive gel). But Call of Duty from what I played felt the same (played nice mind you) but just felt the same.

OK I'm sick of talking about COD so I'm going off-topic.
No other game of 2010, and I mean NO OTHER GAME, has as many new ideas as Super Mario Galaxy 2. The overall goal of each level is the same but the levels are insanely creative. That's why it is one of the highest rated games of this generation.

It's totally obvious you didn't actually buy the game, btw. Don't worry, we all lie about owning games to make our opinions sound better

Don't put words in my mouth dude, I gave my copy to my brother and his nieces because I was tired of getting stars to save princess peach from bowser (hell they even reused a mario 64 stage). Cause hey if I hate a game I must not have owned it. I have better games to play over it on my Wii, PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, DS, PSP, and PC. And shocker they are at least different in their ideas (even it it can rehash ideas from it's genre), instead of another get X number of stars and save princess peach from bowser again.

But again thanks for assuming what games I own/play/don't own just because I hated the game.

OK I admit I was being a bit of a dick but now I'm just really, really intrigued. I have never met anyone who has hated this game, and now I'm just interested why. I just assumed since you "love you some Mario", you would know that every Mario game has the same (not really a) storyline and that it's not about the flagpole/stars, but the levels that get you there.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 could be seen as an expansion pack as it doesn't change the core concept or collecting stars, but it is incredibly creative with the ways it constantly changes the mechanics of the game and frankly, I feel that in one hour of the game, it offers more creativity and ambition than most games do in their entirety.

Also, it's a massive game and the Whomps-Fortress homage occurs very late in the game, so you must have been playing a hell of a lot over those few days. With such a lukewarm feeling?

I'm getting frustrated because I still believe you didn't actually buy the game; how else could you say it's not different in it's ideas? You would have to be blind to not notice how every level offers something fresh and unique.

But whatever, I guess you're entitled to your opinion. EVEN IF YOUR OPINION IS WRONG!! TROLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

You can say I didn't buy it, but I did. Traded in Super Mario Galaxy 1 and Mario Party 8 for a gamestop deal to get it cheaper. And yep I did play it a lot it was fun, but I still don't like it as much as the first one. I also don't like Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time, are you gonna claim I didn't buy/own/beat that when I beat the Original one and Master Quest. The problem is I said I didn't like a game you love or like a lot and are taking offense saying I didn't even buy it. Galaxy did something I love over 64 and Sunshine, instead of a giant sprawling world where you have to find your star it's more point A to point B. But Galaxy two is good, but it's just like DLC but for 60 bucks only nintendo can pull something like that and get away with it (Other then Microsoft and ODST).

I completely disagree with everything you just said, but you know what? I don't care. I'm going to sit down, fall in love with the game again, and be happy that Nintendo made it. If Galaxy 2 is DLC for $60, then I guess I wish there was more DLC for $60 in the industry.

I could care less if you agree with me or not I stand by my reason for not liking Galaxy 2, but don't get all fan boy on me going "Well you must not have even owned the game if you didn't like it", if I don't like a game you like then just deal with it, I can dislike any damn game I please and I don't need someone claiming if I owned it or not just because he is butt hurt that someone doesn't like his game he loves. Hell if I had your attitude I would throw a fit when people say they don't like games like Disgaea, or Etrian Odyssey or any of the 200+ games I own that my friends/people of the internet don't even want to think about playing. And it's sad your getting in such a fit over the fact a random guy you will never meet said he hated a game you love, how does it feel to be a fan boy on such a level such as yourself. To be honest I don't wanna know cause I'm done with you, to me you are a stain. I lump you with the Final Fantasy 7/6 fanboys who rage over which is best or insult or make stupid claims to those who don't like either series.

In short:Get over your self and just enjoy your stupid game, you don't need EVERYONE to love your favorite game for you to enjoy it.

 

[Rpground]

-snip-

I'm sorry, did you mean to describe CoD? Because last time I checked, an "arena" style game is one where the only objective is "KILL KILL KILL THEEM AWL!", unlike Battlefield's objective based games. and THIS is where I find your hypocracy (how does Chrome not register that as a word!?):

REPLY - i agree,i chose poorly with my wording it should have said a "team battle objective deathmatch" would have been at least more appropriate...

online arena team type army game.you cant change too much or you'll alienate your audience too much.

So, you're flaming Call of Duty for not changing it's formula (Let's be serious, who plays it for it's campaign?), yet you defend Battlefield 3's refusal to change it's formula on the basis of "it might make fanboys RAGE!" (which is pretty much what you said). Seriously, if you're going to flame something, at lease don't flame it for the same reasons you defend something else, that's just pathetic.

So it's not really biased at all, it sounds more like you're being a fanboy over this game and you can't hold it in anymore.

REPLY - lets look at this,i also said 3-5 or so games are in the battlefield series. when you look at CoD there is like 20 of the games! for years with all those games! at least battlefield gave a few new ways to play around like a grappling hook >.> in CoD its the SAME weapons and the SAME people you kill over and over and over again. only recently in modern warfare you got to fight NEW people and got MODERN weapons to play with...until they started to milk it already for all its worth...see what im getting at? so no its not flaming,its fact...sorry thats just how it is,i dont like it anymore then you do :/

 

[Sovvolf]

Those insults are not insults, but are perfect description, for example if you(general you= someone) in whole your life have only a few gamer-friends, they're obviously going to be okay with, but would you got an actual civilized friends who would all have gfs and got laid bazillion times, having great holidays , freaking life and ... then you'll be sitting home playing MW2 ... it wouldn't be long when these people would start saying that, and im just saying what would probably be the result , you can't be more than 18 and playing MW2, it's for 15 and less, that would be more reasonable.

Okay, I'm honestly finding it extremely hard to understand you... possibly the broken English (I understand that its not your first language according to a post a few pages back) however you seem to be under the assumption that if you play and enjoy a game like call of duty MW2 its impossibly for you to have a life... That doesn't make sense. You do realize that the people that play these games do have lives right? do have girl friends, do go on holiday and do generally socialize with people outside their basements.

You can't be more that 18 and playing MW2? why?... I don't understand...

You don't make any sense, I'm not sure if this is the bad English or general ignorance. Your entire argument lies in the fact that you believe, without merit, that anyone who plays this one specific game are just basement kids who have no lives... Yet the other CoD games before that are exempt from this? Simply "Because"?

That's one side of it, the other is the mainstream, those are sunday gamers,

Yet they're so hardcore that they sit in their basements all day not having lives... Consistency.

they don't understand gaming below that, they don't know IW, they prolly never heard of COD before COD4, they don't know MW2 is a crap game,

They don't know that MW2 is a crap game? Why is that grounded in fact now? Maybe they play it because they find it a good game.

they think this is so popular they MUST get it too (that's how mainstream works, by popularity, a really stupid way to go), they might play the game for like a month or so.. even less, they don't know what went on before, they don't visit forums, they just use gamefuckingtrailers.com to get their basic news and that's it, they don't contribute to the community, they don't mod anything ,they don't map they just sit there and have biased opinions about games based on their inexperience, they might love the game just because they don't know anything else that's better out there, if you presented them COD4 and MW2,

Or maybe they thought it looked good and bought it. Then a bunch of other people thought it looked good and bought it too... Eventually it gets popular and there you go its in the mainstream. That doesn't make a game bad. Also your attacking people because they don't want to mod, map or visit forums?... So... What as this got to do with the quality of MW2?

The third thing is fanboyism, they're going to like the sequel even if it's ... how COD4>MW2 is, it's natural to happen to anyone at 15yrs or sooner, depending on your willingness to grow up, some people still living with parents will not get over it at even 25. Sad, but it's still not my problem.

Again the assumption that all MW2 players live in their parents basements, have no lives...
These are, again, baseless childish insults. I would expect this kind of argument from an ignorant 13-14 year old fanboy.

Even im not old enough , i wouldn't be saying this here wasting time because the internet is wrong, have to say that's exactly what's going to happen very soon, stopped caring about what internet thinks, it's a waste of time trying to explain something to them, that's why all the hardcores just grew up, stopped caring about this depressing things, ...

Yep, the internet is wrong and you right. Dispite the fact that you failed to really address anything in my argument, just through out baseless, ignorant statements and insults then tried to act like your the smart mature one. Most of your hatred seems to be because Cod 1-3 aren't being recognized by people playing MW2 (why do you assume this? because its popular and thus they don't... for whatever reason). You just come off as an angry fanboy, you've not really gave any reason as to why MW2 is bad, you've just ranted on with childish insults thinking they're a perfect description.

As for hardcores growing up... I thought these MW2 fanboys were so Hardcore that they stay in mommies basement playing it all day with no friends... Yet they also only play it for a month then screw it off to play something else... Do you see the inconsistency in your argument here.

Though is there any point in writing this reply, is this going to make an affect on you at all? I don't think so. Yet I do it anyway.

 

[Your Nightmare]

You have made your point but you have also not really contradicted mine. CoD (and wow for that matter) just like soap operas is mainstream and features accessibility, it also targets a broad audience but, like soap opera It does so by catering to basic enjoyment mechanisms to the nth degree. To draw a cuisine analogy soap opera and CoD are like a bucket of chips, enjoyable, satisfying, and addictive but ultimately unsophisticated and devoid of artistic merit.

Theatre and film have the potential to be edifying and in their finest form can be savoured for their qualities like a meal prepared by a Michelin chef...

or, there is a bucket of chips.

I guess this boils down to the fact that I believe that objective quality exists where as you only seem to be recognising popularity. To employ Reductio ad absurdum, it follows from your logic that if sticking forks in our legs were popular then it would also be a good thing to do.

Pardon me for not wanting to stick forks in my legs.

I know what your saying, but just because this is what you think doesn't mean this is what everyone else thinks. I know their are a lot better games out there, but everyone has different tastes. I'm just guessing here, but lets say Mass effect was your favourite game. In contrast, it's the 5 star meal. However, if you give this to someone who really enjoys CoD (Which is a lot, breaking its own records) you can bet that a handful of them would find the game dull and boring and would rather play CoD over ME any day.

Plus it's not right for you to go degrading CoD without really considering what each game brings to the table. They're all unique games. Here is a post I made earlier if you're interested.

Spoiler

Now, just because they use the same formulae to success as each other, does not mean they don't make any changes and it would be stupid to say so otherwise. You only have to play MW and WaW to tell that each game has a very different atmosphere from the other. WaW is a great representation of how brutal the war was, helped by the murky feel to the game and the high level of gore. Did MW feel like this? No. It is what it is.
MW2 again feels nothing like MW or WaW. Blops only feels a lot like MW2 because they have a similar visual style (Graphically, it's at a high standard) But it still has a sense of uniqueness to it.

You have no argument with the story. Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean they're no improvement over the other. I personally loved the World at war campaign and I know a lot of people enjoyed MW.
Plus WaW adds zombies. MW2 has Spec ops, Blops again had zombies. They're all very individual games.

But when you think about it, they have their successful formulae for their games - being an arcade shooter. There isn't much for them do add to the game other than a new story, weapons, maps and tweaks.
I appreciate a lot of people don't like the general CoD fan for thinking they're some 12 year old thinking they're some gun expert, but that's just who the game appeals to and you can't change that. For the record, yes I enjoy playing CoD when I'm not playing anything new and I don't have a problem with that. I have a set up so I can plug my ipod into a docking station which normally plays music from the TV and boom - I don't have to listen to anyone talk.

I bet a Masochist might enjoy sticking a fork in their leg...and just because everyone else is doing it doesn't mean you do to.

 

[Continuity]

snip

Well I take your points and you're right, but the point I'm making is not so much that there is anything wrong with CoD itself, its an OK game albeit nothing too special. Its the way that CoD is consumed thats the problem, so many people treat CoD as the beginning and end of computer gaming and disparage other games basically because they're not CoD.

That pattern of consumption and that attitude is bad for gaming in every way; and this is where my analogies come in, its not so much the nature of a soap that is the problem with them, it the way that people tend to watch them religiously and do so to the exclusion of other programming, similarly there is nothing wrong with eating chips, but eating just chips all the time and refusing other foods because they're not chips is just not health behaviour (not to mention you're missing out on many other fine foods).

Its because CoD fosters this behaviour that I don't like it, I love games, I love the vast and broad scope of the myriad genre and IP, I'm simply awed by the millions of hours of original gameplay available out there... and to see all of that tossed aside as irrelevant in the name of one average game is somewhat annoying to say the least.

 

[Your Nightmare]

snip

Yeah I agree, but you can't change who buys and plays the game. And while it might be pushing over games aside, it does have its positives. If you take away all of the teenagers from the game, you will find a lot of adults. If you haven't watched the new Extra Credits, do so.

The game is fun and accessibly, it doesn't require a lot of thought and rather relies on reflex. Due to this, my dad will often hook up with his friends from work and they'll play a few matches. Gaming wouldn't normally be something he would be interested in.

People who worship CoD like the ways you mentioned should just be ignored. If they think it's the perfect game, well to them - it's the perfect game. In reality, there is fun to be had elsewhere but if they don't want to listen then just leave them be. As I said, to some players like my dad, CoD is all they want as it offers no complications. He once watched my play Fallout NV for a while and he was essentially bored out of his mind and would rather watch paint dry. But I don't care because at least he is sharing an interest in my favourite pass time.

As for the people who are not adults, so the 12 year teenagers - just ignore them. They'll grow up and develop with new games in time.

 

[Rpground]

-snip-

I'm sorry, did you mean to describe CoD? Because last time I checked, an "arena" style game is one where the only objective is "KILL KILL KILL THEEM AWL!", unlike Battlefield's objective based games. and THIS is where I find your hypocracy (how does Chrome not register that as a word!?):

REPLY - i agree,i chose poorly with my wording it should have said a "team battle objective deathmatch" would have been at least more appropriate...

online arena team type army game.you cant change too much or you'll alienate your audience too much.

So, you're flaming Call of Duty for not changing it's formula (Let's be serious, who plays it for it's campaign?), yet you defend Battlefield 3's refusal to change it's formula on the basis of "it might make fanboys RAGE!" (which is pretty much what you said). Seriously, if you're going to flame something, at lease don't flame it for the same reasons you defend something else, that's just pathetic.

So it's not really biased at all, it sounds more like you're being a fanboy over this game and you can't hold it in anymore.

REPLY - lets look at this,i also said 3-5 or so games are in the battlefield series. when you look at CoD there is like 20 of the games! for years with all those games! at least battlefield gave a few new ways to play around like a grappling hook >.> in CoD its the SAME weapons and the SAME people you kill over and over and over again. only recently in modern warfare you got to fight NEW people and got MODERN weapons to play with...until they started to milk it already for all its worth...see what im getting at? so no its not flaming,its fact...sorry thats just how it is,i dont like it anymore then you do :/

Actually, going by complete games AND expansions, there are exactly 20 BF games (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_(series)), going by new releases/game changing expansions, there are 13 BF games ("Game Changing Expansions" means BC2 Vietnam, as far as I know). Going by CoD's non-expansion or handhelds (because MEH), there are only 8. So there are actually more BF games than CoD. Alright, there has been more variety in enemies you kill in BF, one game has you in the future. All the other games are either modern, Vietnam war or WW2. No, think about how many WW2 BF games there are. TONS. How many WW2 CoD games? 4. I am of course ignoring the expansions and handhelds, the wikipedia page didn't have a timeline that included them.

so your including the expansions of BF into this...expansions/booster packs arnt a NEW GAME! its called an EXPANSION for a reason cause its NOT a full game...also your being biased because you dont include ALL the CoD games into the mix here,you said so yourself.i checked that wiki page for CoD,it has over 12 separate games most,minus like 3 games, are revolving around WW2...none expansions or booster packs!

Battlefield takes you to different places and different time lines! sure there are about 10 of the games,but they are VARIED! hell one of them is based in the future with giant mechs that are incredibly weak cause you can take em down with a knife! (no joke...) xD

and i DIDNT include any expansions or boosters for either franchise,so its fair...im sorry you lost it there with that last comment.

when you EVER compare something to ANYTHING else you should do it FAIRLY and UNBIASED.

oh and i should mention that time lines mean nothing for games creation seeing as that has nothing to do with the TOTAL game made anyway >.>

gg

 

[Th37thTrump3t]

Eh... I never really liked the multiplayer of COD, nor the campaign. I only got Black Ops for the Zombies, which shockingly has a better and deeper story line than the actual campaigns...

 

[Gunner 51]

Honestly most franchises outhere are doing it and no you wont see any advance in techology on dated consoles when the gam runs on 60 fps. What is so weird about that?

The only majorly noticeable improvement in graphics either comes from a completely new console (with improved hardware) or with better understanding of what a console can and can't run. (Gained by the passing of time.)

But I think you are right in your second post that developers have now reached the apex of what our current consoles can handle in terms of graphics and performance.

PS: Thank you, Bloodychimp for saying my first few paragraphs were spot on.