Call of Duty: What's all the fuss about??

BigBoi83

I just think cod4 is a bit of fun, people who play all day long and get obsessed ruin it...i mean who cares that you unlocked every single thing or got all the dopey badges for killing a million people with your god damn elbow.. i played c.s years ago n it was good crack, no kills streaks n no achievements = good gaming fun IMO

BunShopVoyeur

TheGroove wrote: »

Maybe a bit controversial here but what's so good about it??

Nothing at all sir.

I've only played MW, MW2 & Black Ops so can't comment on the rest but they all seem exactly the same with the same annoying little ****es cheating their way to victory.

(I'm also awful at it)

Cathal Healy

hooradiation wrote: »

Yeah, I mean don't you remember how the mechanics from BF2 were being copied wholesale into every other FPS for years after it came out. Me neither.

Again you don't understand. BF2 was a massive game that I personally played regularly for the guts of 2 years. It had ranks, a significantly more varied points system than any other mp game before it and it had unlocks. Those are the ingredients you are talking about, and BF2, a major PC release had it before MW. BF2 also had extensive vehicle warfare which hasn't been copied all over the place. Not because people don't know of it, but because other developers struggle to match it.

One could argue that CS had it all first, but it was through a money system which allowed you buy new weapons.

COD exploited the success of the ranked system in BF2 (which for a MP game had a great run) on a much smaller market, the consoles. Where making a better FPS better than Halo was an accomplishment. That's why COD was able exploit the system better than BF2. Wider audience with lower expectations. On PC, people have a wide range of exceptionally well made MP games to chose from and for a long time BF2 was one of the most played.

I have BF3, I actually prefer the simpler unlock system from BF2 because I'm finding some of the unlocks to be causing balancing issues but it's good fun and vehicles add for far more varied and fun play.

As for the argument that FPS is not a good genre, I think it is in trouble at the moment, but no more than the RPG is. One of the major problems is that these games are being made for consoles and for one reason or another that is effecting development. I'm still looking forward to Stalker 2 for a great FPS experience and the polish are providing me with my RPG fun for the time being.

penev10

I haven’t enjoyed a FPS for years. The first Modern Warfare and Resistance: FOM were good at the time but since then any FPS I’ve played has been quite dull – Killzone 2, FEAR 2, Resistance 2 etc. I’ve loved FPS games since Doom and Quake but the genre seems to have stagnated due to the piggybacking on MW’s success. Too many braindead military romps -whether set in the modern day or space marine land – it doesn’t seem to matter. I’d love to see something as deep and atmospheric as Dark Souls, perhaps the dark fantasy setting would be a good one to explore for developers of FPS games?

hooradiation

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Like the way Call of Duty 4 copied it wholesale?

Oh yeah, I remember the vehicle combat in Call of Duty 4, riding around in tanks, capping points in a helicopter... oh no. Wait...

Though I'll give you that BF2 did the "Modern Warfare" setting before CoD 4 which is why it's the game we all curse for trend of modern shooter....oh no. Wait....

So.... what was your point again?

Cathal Healy wrote: »

Again you don't understand.

No, you don't understand.
I don't care if you liked BF2 or hated it, it's an irrelevance. I said which had the bigger impact and influence on the industry and that's CoD.
You can offer all the excuses you want, say they did it first and that's fine - but of the two the mechanics of the CoD series are the ones that have seen widespread adoption.
BF2 - not at all.

That's all there is to it.

johnny_ultimate

I haven't been a big fan of the games since MW1 (which was really a breath of fresh air, on consoles anyway) - thought MW2 was decent but unbalanced, and the series hasn't particularly appealed to me since. On one hand, it's a shame that so many people play CoD and nothing else (or very little else), on the other it's not the worst game they could be playing by any stretch!

The only thing I find extremely unfortunate about CoD's popularity - and this is no fault of Infinity Ward or Activision, really - is that its online model has been copied wholesale for pretty much every other online game. Levelling up systems reward time rather than skill a lot of the time, and its proving an unnecessary distraction in games that would be nice to just be able to casually drop into.

Uncharted 3, for example: not a game I'd be willing to spend many hours levelling up, and I can't imagine many would get too obsessed with it. So it would be nice not have to contend with unlocks and ranks. It suits some games, certainly, but not others. Easy to ignore, perhaps, but also the constant feedback about the system can detract from just playing and having drop-in drop-out fun.

Retr0gamer

hooradiation wrote: »

Oh yeah, I remember the vehicle combat in Call of Duty 4, riding around in tanks, capping points in a helicopter... oh no. Wait...

Though I'll give you that BF2 did the "Modern Warfare" setting before CoD 4 which is why it's the game we all curse for trend of modern shooter....oh no. Wait....

So.... what was your point again?

Sorry but what is your point? Nowhere have I mentioned anything about vehiclular combat, I was on about the RPG experience system. You're just changing the topic to suit yourself.

I think you really under estimate the influence and how big BF2 was.

BeansBeans

hooradiation wrote: »

Oh yeah, I remember the vehicle combat in Call of Duty 4, riding around in tanks, capping points in a helicopter... oh no. Wait...

Though I'll give you that BF2 did the "Modern Warfare" setting before CoD 4 which is why it's the game we all curse for trend of modern shooter....oh no. Wait....

So.... what was your point again?




No, you don't understand.
I don't care if you liked BF2 or hated it, it's an irrelevance. I said which had the bigger impact and influence on the industry and that's CoD.
You can offer all the excuses you want, say they did it first and that's fine - but of the two the mechanics of the CoD series are the ones that have seen widespread adoption.
BF2 - not at all.

That's all there is to it.

Eh sorry to break it to you but CoD 4 would not exist without Battlefield 2 and CoD 4 and and its successors were simplistic abominations of a game. Such a far cry from the greatness of CoD 1 & 2. People may have been getting sick of the setting by 2 but 1 was one of the best FPS ever.

hooradiation

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Sorry but what is your point? Nowhere have I mentioned anything about vehiclular combat, I was on about the RPG experience system. You're just changing the topic to suit yourself.

If CoD4 was, as you claim, a copied it's mechanics wholesale from BF2 then... ahh fuck it. If you can't be fucked to remember what you posted when I even go and quote it for you then how the fuck am i meant to take your seriously?

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I think you really under estimate the influence and how big BF2 was.

It's influence was so massive that we're practically tripping over the BF2 clones that have been released since 2005....

Retr0gamer

hooradiation wrote: »

It's influence was so massive that we're practically tripping over the BF2 clones that have been released since 2005....

You mean like Homefront, the Joint Operations games and the Star Wars Battlefront games to name a few? Or even the larger vehicular based levels from Halo?

Corkfeen

BeansBeans wrote: »

Eh sorry to break it to you but CoD 4 would not exist without Battlefield 2 and CoD 4 and and its successors were simplistic abominations of a game. Such a far cry from the greatness of CoD 1 & 2. People may have been getting sick of the setting by 2 but 1 was one of the best FPS ever.

This times a million. Battlefield 2 had a rather large following in its pc days too. The gameplay was far superior to the various iterations of COD 4 imho.

Potential-Monke

I think whats happening here is that there are too many people who were not PC gamers when BF2 came out. I can honestly hold my hands up and say i've never played BF2.

As for the CoD games, i remember 1 & 2 being some of the best games i ever played at the time. It was like Medal of Honor, but better. But i lived in the country so i didn't even know what Multiplayer was, just read about it in the odd magazine. And CoD 3 came out and was good, but was near the end of the WWII setting and was getting boring for me. I then played CoD3 local MP and it was crazy fun!

When i eventually moved to Waherford and found the greatness of broadband, CoD4 had just come out and was fresh and innovative in terms of setting. It probably had the same mechanics of other games, and because BF2 didn't have a console release it was the best thing since sliced bread, and was new and innovative to everyone who wasn't a PC gamer. It was the first Modern shooter on consoles that worked well.

As for MW3 and BF3, i think that they were both meh. The main stories were typical of each series (i'm going by BF:BC2 for BF) with BF toning down the destruction. But it was the MP that these games were made for, and i think that MW3 is just a shinier version of MW2, and BF3 is just not for me.

Anyway, who cares when Skyrim is out?!?!?!?!

ShadowHearth

The only reason why bf2 is not so well known as cod4 - it was not ported to consoles.

3 platforms vs 1 platform.

Cod was copied not because it was sooooooooo great, it was copied because:

1. There were statistically more people playing it ( 3 platforms )
2. It is way way way easyer to copy cod style then bf style.
3. Bf requires way more effort and recourses to pull out properly, so it's not efficient money wise.


Like it or not, BF always stands higher food chain step.

daveyid89

Is everyone on this thread arguing about different things?

1. I think the BF2 guys are arguing that BF2 was a better game in general.

2. From what I can tell the COD guy(s) are saying that COD4 changed the industry.

IMO cod4 DID change the industry as it brought it to the masses. You mentioned that BF2 was not ported to all platforms like cod. I am not claiming that COD is (was) a better game or that it had more features or new additions. Hell, it could have stolen everything from BF but that is not the point. The point is that COD did it in a way that gained worldwide acclaim and acknowledgement and they changed the FPS industry.

Their promotion of the game had alot to do with it, and whether or not you like the michael bay singleplayer it made for some fantastic trailers and only fueled the mania surrounding cod4.

hooradiation

daveyid89 wrote: »

Is everyone on this thread arguing about different things?

1. I think the BF2 guys are arguing that BF2 was a better game in general.

2. From what I can tell the COD guy(s) are saying that COD4 changed the industry.

Sweet jesus, this guy actually gets it.
I am fucking astounded.

briany

ShadowHearth wrote: »

"-whcih car is most stalkerish?
-zaparozitch" (http://img13.nnm.ru/f/4/6/d/3/f46d353084b64c3189aed7aff5c148ca_full.jpg its lowest grade soviet union car, disabled people were getting those fom goverment, they did not even had water cooling engine systems )
-why?!?!?!
-because boot is in the front, its easyer to look after your ****, so nobody could nick it!"

I wonder how many hectares it could go on a single tank of Kerosene?

gizmo

daveyid89 wrote: »

Is everyone on this thread arguing about different things?

1. I think the BF2 guys are arguing that BF2 was a better game in general.

2. From what I can tell the COD guy(s) are saying that COD4 changed the industry.

IMO cod4 DID change the industry as it brought it to the masses. You mentioned that BF2 was not ported to all platforms like cod. I am not claiming that COD is (was) a better game or that it had more features or new additions. Hell, it could have stolen everything from BF but that is not the point. The point is that COD did it in a way that gained worldwide acclaim and acknowledgement and they changed the FPS industry.

Their promotion of the game had alot to do with it, and whether or not you like the michael bay singleplayer it made for some fantastic trailers and only fueled the mania surrounding cod4.

Actually I think what the BF2 guys are really objecting to is the insinuation that CoD4 changed the industry via innovation, which it did not. In terms of mechanics it simply took an existing formula which had been established previously in BF2 and ramped it up to almost obnoxious levels. In the process it created something which proved to be highly addictive to those who enjoyed it and nauseating to those who didn't. The former clearly outweighed the latter and combined with a slick, action packed single player story and an effective marketing campaign, it went on to sell a huge amount of copies.

Over time this has led to most new games being released with multiplayer elements which also copied the formula and due to its popularity many people began to reference CoD as the source. Here's the kicker though, they're correct. When publishers and developers were looking at ways to appeal to a wider demographic they looked to CoD and the system they had used. They didn't care that BF2 had done it first, CoD was the massively successful one and that was what they wanted to emulate. So yes, CoD has changed the industry, just not in the way many people claim it did.

I was actually going to end this paragraph with "So yes, CoD has changed the industry, in almost exactly the same way that Angry Birds has changed the mobile industry." But I thought it may come across as overly condescending despite there being many similarities between their stories.

DarthBill

gizmo wrote: »

Actually I think what the BF2 guys are really objecting to is the insinuation that CoD4 changed the industry via innovation, which it did not. In terms of mechanics it simply took an existing formula which had been established previously in BF2 and ramped it up to almost obnoxious levels. In the process it created something which proved to be highly addictive to those who enjoyed it and nauseating to those who didn't. The former clearly outweighed the latter and combined with a slick, action packed single player story and an effective marketing campaign, it went on to sell a huge amount of copies.

Over time this has led to most new games being released with multiplayer elements which also copied the formula and due to its popularity many people began to reference CoD as the source. Here's the kicker though, they're correct. When publishers and developers were looking at ways to appeal to a wider demographic they looked to CoD and the system they had used. They didn't care that BF2 had done it first, CoD was the massively successful one and that was what they wanted to emulate. So yes, CoD has changed the industry, just not in the way many people claim it did.

I was actually going to end this paragraph with "So yes, CoD has changed the industry, in almost exactly the same way that Angry Birds has changed the mobile industry." But I thought it may come across as overly condescending despite there being many similarities between their stories.

/thread

hooradiation

gizmo wrote: »

Actually I think what the BF2 guys are really objecting to is the insinuation that CoD4 changed the industry via innovation, which it did not.

Well, if they will get upset at arguments that aren't being made there's not much that can be done for them, is there.

gizmo

hooradiation wrote: »

Well, if they will get upset at arguments that aren't being made there's not much that can be done for them, is there.

Well it kinda was made here. He later clarified his point saying he had meant specifically on consoles but putting something on a different platform still doesn't make it innovative.

LH Pathe

should just put a set path in yellow on the HUD n save all the "why can't I pass that pebble" frustration

daveyid89

gizmo wrote: »

Actually I think what the BF2 guys are really objecting to is the insinuation that CoD4 changed the industry via innovation, which it did not. In terms of mechanics it simply took an existing formula which had been established previously in BF2 and ramped it up to almost obnoxious levels. In the process it created something which proved to be highly addictive to those who enjoyed it and nauseating to those who didn't. The former clearly outweighed the latter and combined with a slick, action packed single player story and an effective marketing campaign, it went on to sell a huge amount of copies.

Over time this has led to most new games being released with multiplayer elements which also copied the formula and due to its popularity many people began to reference CoD as the source. Here's the kicker though, they're correct. When publishers and developers were looking at ways to appeal to a wider demographic they looked to CoD and the system they had used. They didn't care that BF2 had done it first, CoD was the massively successful one and that was what they wanted to emulate. So yes, CoD has changed the industry, just not in the way many people claim it did.

I was actually going to end this paragraph with "So yes, CoD has changed the industry, in almost exactly the same way that Angry Birds has changed the mobile industry." But I thought it may come across as overly condescending despite there being many similarities between their stories.

Yes, I am agreeing with you, that was exactly how I meant it. That CoD changed everything, but only because they got the recognition. They may well have invented nothing but that is not the important part, the important part is that they got the recognition for doing it and *appear* to have been the catalyst for the change in the industry.

Of course you can follow that "change" all the way back to BF or other games in terms of innovation, but in terms of bundling it all together and being so successful.

daveyid89

But my point was that the people who are pro-CoD meant the same when they said it changed the industry, and they did not mean that CoD was more innovative.

I could be wrong about everything though :cool:

Cathal Healy

gizmo wrote: »

Actually I think what the BF2 guys are really objecting to is the insinuation that CoD4 changed the industry via innovation,

Which is the argument that has been made. Regardless of whether the goal posts have been moved since. The insinuations made by COD4 fans is that COD4 invented it, and even if it DID steal it from BF2, that doesn't matter because nobody has ever heard of BF2, it was a small insignificant game.

But the actual fact is that the BF2 was a huge PC release and as has been said without it, COD4 MP likely would not be what it is. Possibly not even set in present day and likely without all the ranks and junk.

But yes COD4 changed the industry but not because it was incredibly innovative, which it wasn't. It changed because it hit the right formula at the right time and sold it to millions of people.

Retr0gamer

Innovation is overrated compared to creativity. Being in the right place at the right time with a bigger marketing budget with someone elses ideas isn't something I see that should be celebrated.

Optimalprimerib

Just because an idea was invented, it does not mean it should not be copied or improved upon by someone else. Its not as if bf created levelling up, they copied an old formula from RPGs. Cod then copied that idea and attempted to improve upon it for their games.

In a matter of interest, who invented the kill streak awards?

BeefyS

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

In a matter of interest, who invented the kill streak awards?

Whoever did should live in shame for the rest of their existence

gizmo

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

Just because an idea was invented, it does not mean it should not be copied or improved upon by someone else. Its not as if bf created levelling up, they copied an old formula from RPGs. Cod then copied that idea and attempted to improve upon it for their games.

In a matter of interest, who invented the kill streak awards?

In the sense of being rewarded in some manner for multiple kills without deaths? I reckon Unreal Tournament with its announcements. If you mean granting the player overpowered pieces of often game breaking equipment, then that'd be the later CoDs.

BlitzKrieg

hmm

to say call of duty's legacy was the popularizing of the ranking system in mutliplayer is to actually do the series a discredit as its true innovation was the perks system which led to the custom class scenario.

Something Battlefield has only replicated in the most tame manner (the perks in BC2/BF3 have no where near the same influence on gameplay as the COD perks)

Without perks there wouldn't be the appeal of custom classes as the classes would be defined by weapons and armour and nowhere near as unique and personal.


The ranking mechanic is from battlefield, right down to rewarding specific tasks which was a big deal in cod as BF2 introduced the ribbon system aswell that awarded ribbons for completing specific tasks in a game.

But perks are all COD.

Though they can be traced back to RPGS as being the fps equivalent of having armour with +5 speed or some other bollocks.

The number of games that directly copy that element is pretty substantial but its not huge. FPS in general made a shift in gamestyle prior to COD4 to a leaner faster experience, I'd credit titles like Goldeneye, Counter Strike and Halo for being the fore fathers of all the elements that come together to be what is the modern shooter.

COD4 is as some people pointed out more of a matter of timing and market then actually leading it. I'd add it brought the final touch which was the perk system which gave this new leaner faster fps experiance a personalisation touch it needed to blow up like it did.


And on the issue of copying formulas. THere have been many elements of BF that have been copied again and again.

Conquest mode of BF has become a staple online mode in not only FPS but also in some RTS (C&C4 is designed around a conquest mode variant as are all the relic RTS games since Dawn of War) plus the numerous FPS games some of which have been mentioned (Star wars battlefront 1 & 2 being the most obvious but also Frontlines fuel of wars and Call of Duty 3) It also appears as a gamemode in some MMO's including WOW & Age of Conan and even in a flight sim (Battlestations midway/pacific)