Zero Punctuation: Call of Duty: Ghosts

[gjkbgt]

Haven't brought a CoD game since 4
After watching this video i decided to look up some gameplay videos on youtube.

I was surprised by just how dated it looks. I mean if anything it's been simplified since CoD 4.
I mean, compare Ghosts to Farcry 3 (from last yeah). Both are first person shooters.

Ghosts gives you no tactical options all you can do it aim and shoot. you don't even get to choice what gun you use.
And don't say Farcry 3 is sandbox that only means that doesn't anything in moment to moment gameplay.

I don't care about quality of gameplay but games are getting better why isn't this series.

 

[Tim Chuma]

"Call of Duty Dog!", sorry just had to say it.

Shacktac did en interesting mission where one of the players was a dog and could only communicate by barking and chewing on the zombies.

For the life of me I can't find the exact video with the dog, but Beagle, Dslyecxi and CHKilroy have good Youtube channels. They are still playing a seven year old game (ARMA 2), but with special mods such as for the radio to make it more realistic, but not "milsperg" like some people do.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

But what about the multiplayer, Yahtzee?

He's made it a point in several other reviews that if a game can't hold its ground in single player, fuck it.

 

[TheUnbeholden]

so call of duty Ghost isn't a attempt to reinvigorate the franchise with some life, and attempt at a lower calibre coherent dark storyline, but rather the same shit they've done before with different gimmicks this time around... I think we know Infinity Ward well enough now.

Developers with the brains of a publisher.. a scary thing. The series has had some good moments in its clusterfuckness but I think its time to open up the windows, spray some air freshner,
fire a few people and start to get serious about this god damn series!

 

[Mahoshonen]

I am shocked, SHOCKED, that no one posted a link to the Monty Python sketch Yahtzee referred to in his review.

 

[mrdude2010]

Anyway, Yahtzee, did you seriously expected Ghosts to actually feature a weakened US? Everyone pretty much figured from the first trailer that it wasn't going to be any different from the previous one.

One can always hope.

I'm still waiting for the game where some US analogue is treated as the bad guy and the protagonist is horribly outnumbered and out teched.

 

[saiyanwarrior]

I will never understand the appeal of the call of duty games

 

[glider4]

And this is why I don't play COD campaigns. However IF's last 2 attempts at multiplayer were also awful and people are saying this one is too so It's a miss. At least Treyarch's multiplayer and zombie modes are fun.

 

[TheArchbishopJubilee]

I don't know. I haven't played COD games for so long maybe I'm out of touch. I thought the game was fun from simply a shoot 'em up stand point.

It seems like you are taking things way too seriously by expecting "realism" and plausible story-lines, etc. Can't I just shoot some bad guys and look at some cool graphics and maybe for two seconds not feel so bad about spending $400 on a game system that has no games?

I can't believe you injected race somehow into this. I didn't even notice. That you did I think says something about you. How many black guys are appropriate? Tell me. Maybe you can set up a committee that determines the proportion of women to men that need to be in each game. Then once you've achieved your fantasy ideal mix of race and sex, you can then go on to complain that the game doesn't focus on game-play.

Yahtzee, I think in some ways you yourself sold out on this video. You bought a COD game and now you are complaining that it's a COD game. What did you expect?

 

[mlow44]

I don't know. I haven't played COD games for so long maybe I'm out of touch. I thought the game was fun from simply a shoot 'em up stand point.

It seems like you are taking things way too seriously by expecting "realism" and plausible story-lines, etc. Can't I just shoot some bad guys and look at some cool graphics and maybe for two seconds not feel so bad about spending $400 on a game system that has no games?

I can't believe you injected race somehow into this. I didn't even notice. That you did I think says something about you. How many black guys are appropriate? Tell me. Maybe you can set up a committee that determines the proportion of women to men that need to be in each game. Then once you've achieved your fantasy ideal mix of race and sex, you can then go on to complain that the game doesn't focus on game-play.

Yahtzee, I think in some ways you yourself sold out on this video. You bought a COD game and now you are complaining that it's a COD game. What did you expect?

So because we were all expecting a bad game means we should forgive it for being a bad game? Cogent argument, my good sir, complemented brilliantly by pointing out that Yahtzee created the lack of racial diversity by directing your attention to its existence. And the way you proudly proclaimed you wished for mindless next gen bliss? Quite inspiring. Really, never have I seen such an intelligent and insightful comment on these forums.

 

[ninjarafter]

I am shocked, SHOCKED, that no one posted a link to the Monty Python sketch Yahtzee referred to in his review.

Tried to play it. Got a 33 second ad for a 45 second video and I closed the shit out of that window.


As for the review, I thought it was pretty funny in the first half, then I saw the implication that including a German Shepard was part of a racist agenda and the stupidity knocked me out for the remaining duration of the video.

So, I guess I'm giving this five minute video a 5/10, since the first 2.5 minutes were funny(and thus they get a full score) and I never saw the other 2.5.

 

[_Russell_]

But if COD really wanna score points with me I wanna see the US invaded by te Clangers.

Look a them... what are they planning up there?

HA!

That's easiest the funnest thing I've seen on the Escapist.

 

[Westonbirt]

Everytime I hear the story of one of these Spunkgargleweewee games, I see this scene.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oEA6zK_8u8

 

[Dalisclock]

I don't know. I haven't played COD games for so long maybe I'm out of touch. I thought the game was fun from simply a shoot 'em up stand point.

It seems like you are taking things way too seriously by expecting "realism" and plausible story-lines, etc. Can't I just shoot some bad guys and look at some cool graphics and maybe for two seconds not feel so bad about spending $400 on a game system that has no games?

I can't believe you injected race somehow into this. I didn't even notice. That you did I think says something about you. How many black guys are appropriate? Tell me. Maybe you can set up a committee that determines the proportion of women to men that need to be in each game. Then once you've achieved your fantasy ideal mix of race and sex, you can then go on to complain that the game doesn't focus on game-play.

Yahtzee, I think in some ways you yourself sold out on this video. You bought a COD game and now you are complaining that it's a COD game. What did you expect?

Except that COD actually used to have plausible stories and were semi-realistic, feeling less like a Michael bay movie and more like Band of Brothers. The first modern warfare is lauded because it struck just the right tone between real life combat and video game awesomeness.

Not to mention some of us are kind of dismayed by the fact the series actually used to fall on the "War is horrible but sometimes necessary" side and over the years it's slowly drifted into "America. Fuck Yeah!". Which is why the whole plotline in ghosts of "America is invaded by (brown) South Americans" seems particulary tacky, if not racist. Black Ops 2 did something similar but BO2 actually came off as more plausible(hacking the US drone fleet) and less disturbing by emphasizing that cooperation between the US and China is required for a good ending, not to mention the fact the Menedez is actually characterized to make him more a far more sympathetic(or at least empathic) villain then any other in the series.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

I don't know. I haven't played COD games for so long maybe I'm out of touch. I thought the game was fun from simply a shoot 'em up stand point.

It seems like you are taking things way too seriously by expecting "realism" and plausible story-lines, etc. Can't I just shoot some bad guys and look at some cool graphics and maybe for two seconds not feel so bad about spending $400 on a game system that has no games?

I can't believe you injected race somehow into this. I didn't even notice. That you did I think says something about you. How many black guys are appropriate? Tell me. Maybe you can set up a committee that determines the proportion of women to men that need to be in each game. Then once you've achieved your fantasy ideal mix of race and sex, you can then go on to complain that the game doesn't focus on game-play.

Yahtzee, I think in some ways you yourself sold out on this video. You bought a COD game and now you are complaining that it's a COD game. What did you expect?

Except that COD actually used to have plausible stories and were semi-realistic, feeling less like a Michael bay movie and more like Band of Brothers. The first modern warfare is lauded because it struck just the right tone between real life combat and video game awesomeness.

Not to mention some of us are kind of dismayed by the fact the series actually used to fall on the "War is horrible but sometimes necessary" side and over the years it's slowly drifted into "America. Fuck Yeah!". Which is why the whole plotline in ghosts of "America is invaded by (brown) South Americans" seems particulary tacky, if not racist. Black Ops 2 did something similar but BO2 actually came off as more plausible(hacking the US drone fleet) and less disturbing by emphasizing that cooperation between the US and China is required for a good ending, not to mention the fact the Menedez is actually characterized to make him more a far more sympathetic(or at least empathic) villain then any other in the series.

I'm sorry, but how come no one ever seems to mention (or remember) that the primary antagonists for all 3 Modern Warfare games were the Russians? Hell, the big bad guy in MW2 was a white American General! So it's perfectly acceptable for the US to be at war with Russia in a fake videogame storyline, but if they're at war with any country where the majority of folks aren't white, it's instant racism?

This reminds me of the people who cried foul at the movie "The Siege" because it had the audacity to have the terrorists be Middle Eastern.

 

[Dalisclock]

I'm sorry, but how come no one ever seems to mention (or remember) that the primary antagonists for all 3 Modern Warfare games were the Russians? Hell, the big bad guy in MW2 was a white American General! So it's perfectly acceptable for the US to be at war with Russia in a fake videogame storyline, but if they're at war with any country where the majority of folks aren't white, it's instant racism?

Because Russia is a far more plausible threat to the US(and even then it was a bit of a stretch. MW3 made the whole scenario a lot more implausible) then South America. South Americans destroying and invading the American southwest is not only fairly ludicrous, but also smacks heavily of racist conspiracy theories held by some right wingers that Mexicans are invading and reconquering lands that used to belong to Mexico(AKA the American Southwest).

Again, MW2 also differed in the fact that it was (tenously on the side of) "War is bad"(More specifically, "Revenge is bad") rather then "war is awesome and explosionific". Gen Shephard and Makarov were the primary antagonists in MW2 and pushing the world into war for their own agenda. Sure, the Russians are shown as being pretty evil, but it's not like the 141 was exactly a wonderful group of people either. I'm fairly sure you're not supposed to be smiling when one of the soldiers mentions they're going to burn Moscow to the ground as retribution for DC and it seemed fairly obvious by the end of MW2 that Price had lost a few of his marbles in the Gulag(launching a nuke at DC, for example).

Going to "We are Americans. We are smart and brave and hard working and defending our lands from the brown, barbaric hordes who are persecuting us because they hate our freedom" comes across as jingoistic at the very least.

And I actually liked Black Ops 2 because despite having a similar plotline, it came across as being more plausible(breaking our cyber defenses, which controlled our drones, from the inside) and less jingoistic/racist actually could see why Menedez(the death of his family) and the rest of the third world really hated the US(Crippling poverty vs. Western Opulence and backlash against American Foreign policy in the third world).

 

[Ihateregistering1]

I'm sorry, but how come no one ever seems to mention (or remember) that the primary antagonists for all 3 Modern Warfare games were the Russians? Hell, the big bad guy in MW2 was a white American General! So it's perfectly acceptable for the US to be at war with Russia in a fake videogame storyline, but if they're at war with any country where the majority of folks aren't white, it's instant racism?

Because Russia is a far more plausible threat to the US(and even then it was a bit of a stretch. MW3 made the whole scenario a lot more implausible) then South America. South Americans destroying and invading the American southwest is not only fairly ludicrous, but also smacks heavily of racist conspiracy theories held by some right wingers that Mexicans are invading and reconquering lands that used to belong to Mexico(AKA the American Southwest).

Again, MW2 also differed in the fact that it was (tenously on the side of) "War is bad"(More specifically, "Revenge is bad") rather then "war is awesome and explosionific". Gen Shephard and Makarov were the primary antagonists in MW2 and pushing the world into war for their own agenda. Sure, the Russians are shown as being pretty evil, but it's not like the 141 was exactly a wonderful group of people either. I'm fairly sure you're not supposed to be smiling when one of the soldiers mentions they're going to burn Moscow to the ground as retribution for DC and it seemed fairly obvious by the end of MW2 that Price had lost a few of his marbles in the Gulag(launching a nuke at DC, for example).

Going to "We are Americans. We are smart and brave and hard working and defending our lands from the brown, barbaric hordes who are persecuting us because they hate our freedom" comes across as jingoistic at the very least.

And I actually liked Black Ops 2 because despite having a similar plotline, it came across as being more plausible(breaking our cyber defenses, which controlled our drones, from the inside) and less jingoistic/racist actually could see why Menedez(the death of his family) and the rest of the third world really hated the US(Crippling poverty vs. Western Opulence and backlash against American Foreign policy in the third world).

"We are Americans. We are smart and brave and hard working and defending our lands from the brown, barbaric hordes who are persecuting us because they hate our freedom"

Except the game isn't saying that, YOU are saying that. Sure, one can critique COD: Ghosts for being more Michael Bay and less Saving Private Ryan than previous MW games, but that's unrelated to any sort of racist ideals.

2nd, the evil Russians invading was a "right wing fantasy" a LONG time before MW ever came into existence.

3rd, the concept of illegal immigrants from Mexico (of which there are 15 million or so in the US) and the exploding US Hispanic population (which is statistically completely true) eventually becoming the majority in the US is a totally different ball of wax than a theory of a South American Army invading the United States, which I have never heard any "right-winger" talk about, even amongst the most extreme ones. The conspiracy theory you're talking about of Mexicans "invading" is not a literal invasion.

4th, since COD: Ghosts essentially says we're going to go down the ridiculous route, the lack of plausibility in the storyline is completely justified.

To me, this is simply knee-jerk reaction from many of the same people who already despise COD anyway. I don't particularly like COD, but this notion of "the game is racist if the US goes to war with any country that doesn't have a white majority" just reeks of searching for controversy.

 

[4Aces]

Gotta love those doomsday satellites. How many did the US launch last week alone?

 

[Kuuenbu]

So I guess you could say it didn't have a Ghost of a chance?

This is the best post in the thread and it will likely never be topped.

I think CoD is in a sort of uncanny valley period where the narrative still has yet to catch up to the universe. Most of the people who take a moral high ground over the series had no issues mercilessly slaughtering Russians in the old arcade side-scrollers of the '80s because there just wasn't much context to tie it into real-world logic: the worlds portrayed were cartoonish and ridiculous and the story was non-existent. Compare that to today's military first person shooters that attempt to shoehorn in graphic realism and vast political plots, yet still take the same care-free attitude of the "vaguely nationally themed and that's it" military side-scrolling shooters that preceeded them. Suddenly "shoot the person of a different color" takes on several new meanings.

Simply put, these developers are trying to apply old design philosophies into new environments where they're not nearly as compatible or as plausible.

 

[Jacques Jones]

Well, who the hell buys CoD for singleplayer anymore?

Please, stand up and say your name, so that we may oggle at the oddity that is you.

Ooh, ooh, I do! I remember playing it on single-player. Those were good times.