Let me start by saying I'm a fan of the CoD franchise, at least, I was until now.
I was never really into first person shooters until the release of Black Ops 1 when a friend suggested I try it, as you can imagine it was a new experience for me, and I loved it.
Eventually Battlefield 3 came out, and at first I wasn't interested, but the game was bought for me so I decided to try it. It wasn't really fun at first, since I had been comparing it my only other experience with the pure FPS genre at the time, BO1.
Then when MW3 came out, being a fan, I bought it instantly. I'll be honest, it wasn't spectacular, but I didn't mind it. Despite plenty of people saying it was "yet another copy and paste" it didn't feel that way to me, at least not entirely.
However, yesterday, I was given Black Ops 2 as a present, I was looking forward to playing it for a while, as I'd put off buying it myself for some time.
Everything became clear to me at that point, that the Call of Duty franchise is in a serious stagnation problem.
I was very disappointed with the game, and here's why :
- For a game with the budget of BO2, perhaps one of the biggest bugets in gaming history, it is UNACCEPTABLE that you are using a 13 year old quake 3 engine, it's simply inexcusable.
- The maps are still too small to give the game any pace other than "spray 'n pray".
- Camping problem wasn't addressed whatsoever, it's easier to camp in BO2 than it is in any previous game.
- Still NO focus on playing as a team, the CoD franchise needs to lose their lone wolf persona, it isn't attractive, it isn't fun - it's just isolationism due to lack of creativity.
I'm considering turning my copy of BO2 in and buying another game with it, the price tag at which it was purchased, is ludicrous when you take into account the sheer lack of features.
In this day and age, when you're competing with a game like Bf3 that is packed with incentive to play as a team, steady progression, huge maps and countless ways to approach any situation, the product that you are pumping out every year is simply not good enough.
In my eyes, Treyarch doesn't deserve 10% of the success that this release has garnished, infact, I would go as far to say that what they have produced is utterly embarrasing when compared to Battlefield 3.
Personally, when the next gen consoles are released, if I see that a new Call of Duty game is to be released and doesn't contain a new engine to rival that of frostbite 2, you can consider this customer gone for good.
Thanks for reading, opinions? Agree/disagree?
I don't get how any of those are problems.
The engine is fine. It outperforms most of the other games that come out. Valve, the company that everyons seems to PRAISE, has been using the same engine for just as long as CoD, yet no one complains about that. And their games have even worse graphics, and run at an even slower pace.
Camping WAS adressed a little, but they don't want to eliminate it. Treyarch knows camping is a strategy, just like rushing.
And CoD has NEVER been about the team. They've tried a couple times. In WaW, with tanks and second chance. They tried it again in BO with second chance, but again, no one likes it. CoD just isn't about teams. You can have a good party and dominate, but the gameplay has never been about teamwork. And I'm fine with that. I'll go play BF if I ever want to rely on my team to win for me.
I do agree about the maps, though. After MW2, no other CoD had any memorable maps that I thought I would like in another CoD. CoD4 had the best maps.
There are problems i agree....but to shoot u down a little....the smallest maps are the fastest paced so youre comment about small maps taking the pace out of it i dont understand....and unless you want a big circle for a map then you cant stop camping, And also you cant force people to play as a team the game modes are all there to play as team but no one chooses to do so. you cant lay that blame on the game makers. But yeah with the budget they had far too many mistakes.
What I said, or what I meant to say, rather, was that there is no difference in pace.
I'm not saying they need to speed it up or slow it down, but vary it from map to map, It almost feels like every map is nuketown.
As for camping, again, I understand it is a stragedy, and a perfectly good one if the map is large enough to accomodate it without forcing everyone else to do it too, and that's where they fail.
As for team play, you don't HAVE to play as a team in every situation on battlefield 3, but there are several modes where it is encouraged or necessary, would it be so hard to do that to CoD?
Let's face it, one man armying every domination match gets seriously dry after a while.
I agree, there has been so much hype on this game and i was expecting alot and i was so dissappointed when i got it. There are so many connection problems in this game and lagg compensation plays a big role, some people die in a few shots and others dont die with a full clip shot at them. Also the spawn system is horrible! Why didnt they keep the same spawn systems they had in Black Ops 1? Nuketown 2025 i get spawned literally right next to the enemy everytime, and in Black ops 1 i use to dominate that map due to a proper spawn system now you spawn exactly right by the enemy and there so much bs in this game. Im not complaining because im really bad in this game, my kd is 3 and i consider myself one of the better players in this game, but i dont like it when all i die to in this game is total bs never because someone else is more skilled than me. And camping definately was not fixed, there are more campers in this game than any Call of Duty i have played by far. I dont know if its christmas noobs but there are SO MANY campers,, and once again im not complaining cause im bad it just frustrates me when a 60-3 game becomes 60-23 because you die so many times to bs and never because your being outplayed by another team (not saying that never happens, but the case is mostly bs that kills me)
After a little longer playing it, I can say that I'm sticking to what I said 100%
They could've literally just given us a black ops 1 disk and I would be less disappointed.
Too many failures to list, disgusts me to think that they've made record profits from what is essentially and truthfully, a shoddy piece of work.
I agree with some points you made, but one i strongly disagree with is the point about lone wolfing. Some of us thrive playing the lone wolf stlye, it's definitlely a greater challenge than playing with a full team, in fact i don't really get your point on this, if you are on a full team that are good a soloist on a team of randoms will stand no chance.
u are talking about small maps allowing just spray and pray and then have a problem with camping???
u have to decide ...
btw. u should not compare COD with BF3
The game is not the best and you can lose interest quite quickly however it does not make it bad in any way.
There are seperate issues which should be addressed in the next major update, Id say in the next 2 weeks.
The engine perhaps is old however using such an old engine and still managing to make a game that generates billions of $$$ is an achievement. They will not change their engine until perhaps the next gen consoles as its a little late for investing a lot of time, money and effort at this stage of the console life span.
You should not compare BF3 to any COD as they are both good depending on your game play and taste.
Also you cant compare BO1 to MW3, MW3 is more like a copy paste of MW2 with extras.
I'm tired of people using that statement, "you can't compare CoD and BF"
Why the hell not?
They're both primarily team based online first person shooters.
The only reason people tell you not to compare them is because when you do, CoD gets absolutely thrashed.