Why diversity will always fail

Call of Duty Black Ops II Playstation 3

Why diversity will always fail

If there's anything I've learned over the past couple years it's that any form of diversity will always fail. It doesn't matter if it's Sony vs Xbox, Zimmerman vs State of Florida, or Less Filling vs Great Taste. People will go out of their way and manipulate anything they can to make their perspective seem superior. In the end the true purpose will be distorted if not lost in translation.

Present a good argument as to why a popular concept might be flawed and fanboys will unite and present irrelevant facts as to why you're stupid, wrong, and suck at life without giving so much as a constructive criticism to anything you present.

CoD being so popular will fall victim to this kind of banter for as long as it's being made. Call of Duty has done a great job at generating a very diverse community. We have several titles that evolved many different playstyles. However, Call of Duty has only given strong consideration to certain styles leaving the rest to evolve within themselves to survive.

With each passing title the sub-playstyles are dividing more and more. Before we just had people playing the game for fun. Their playstyles focused on doing such and the diversity didn't exist because diversity was in every player. Since then we have built a taxonomic rank (bet this is the first time anyone's used that phrase on these boards) inside Call of Duty itself.

This leaves us with a very interest situation. We have all these "species" of players to consider when we discuss the nature of the game. We have the Rusher, Camper, Quickscoper, Killwhore, Knives Only, ect. Therefore when games are released certain elements are put into the game for these types of players.

Camping and Rushing two very different styles of plays, infact they are considered opposites. So one element that may support Camping contradicts Rushing and Rushers aren't pleased. The converse can be said as well. We all know the battle, we live it on the boards everyday.

What makes this even more interesting is when titles like Black Ops II emerge. To say this title wasn't built around Rushers is a bit ignorant, just a bit. What we saw here is the evolution between the Camper adapting to a Rushing environment and the Rushing Genus split into Rushing extremist and traditional Rushers. So in the attempt to cater towards one specific style of play we infact redefine what it meant for the opposite playstyle.

For instance, Camping in Black Ops could be defined as sitting in one spot for a majority of a match. In Black Ops II, a game developed intensely around the prevention of Camping (defined by Black Ops standards) we see players focusing more on Rushing, but in doing so there becomes a level of tolerance to style. Players develop new meaning for what it is to Camp. Now Camping is considered staying in the same area for a given amount of time.

If you got lost in that last paragraph, good, because this is exactly the problem.

TL;DR

Call of Duty has evolved several playstyles each contradicting the other. In the end we're stuck with a problem as one playstyle must suffer to allow the other to exist. It's a vicious circle and it's causing a tear in the community. Co-existence of playstyles is starting fail.

Don't believe me? Go to the Call of Duty Ghosts forum and read a suggestions made by one community member. See the extreme views made on each suggestion. Civility is falling apart and I believe it might accelerate the downfall of Call of Duty.

Level 75
Likes: 5321
Posts: 13666
Registered: ‎17-09-2011
25 REPLIES

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to Ghamorra

ghamorra wrote:

Players develop new meaning for what it is to Camp. Now Camping is considered staying in the same area for a given amount of time.

I don't think that's the case. Most people still generally consider camping to be a person who sits in a corner or behind a headglitch spot for extended periods of time.

ghamorra wrote:

Co-existence of playstyles is starting fail.

I think you're being a bit over dramatic. BO2 is a game full of diverse playstyles. There are plenty of campers, rushers, QSers, knifers, 'worms' (taking camping to a whole new level). The weapon diversity is pretty good, there is not one or two guns that just dominate like the MP40 or Famas and for the first time we are seeing LMGs being used regulary. Of course BO2 was a game built around more aggressive playstyles but imo it is probably the most diverse CoD made by Trey.

Level 18
Likes: 197
Posts: 989
Registered: ‎02-04-2013

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to Ghamorra

Id agree, i think it the term CAMPing has really become a  taboo word. and has expanded to not just sitting in a corner and ADS'ing, but playing defense and moving from choke point to choke point.. This is my play style so therefore i get alot of crap from the extremist rushers.. if you arent running around with your head cut off in a  map, then youre "playing wrong"

this isnt gonna change.. its gonna get worse

Level 8
Likes: 50
Posts: 299
Registered: ‎14-06-2013
Highlighted

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to Ghamorra

I don't think that the CoD society of playstyles is falling but it is more difficult for all playstyles than it has ever been.  Yes, BO2 is built for fast paced action which should favor the rusher but it also has more headglitching spots than any CoD in my memory (I only go back to BO1) and that favors the camper.  The knife got nerfed so the knife only guys are also having to adapt.  I'd say that only the QSers got it easier this time around.  Granter there is no quickdraw perk in BO2 but the relative steadiness of the rifles makes up for that.  Heck even I can QS and I never did it before.

Back to the two major groups of campers and rushers.  Campers can no longer sit in a corner and be as successful as they were in the past.  They have to patrole and area now.  In truth, the area patrole method has always been superior in effectiveness and this change has forced campers to grow that weren't already doing so.  Rushers can no longer run out into the open and expect to do as well as they did in previous titles due to the inordinate amount of headglitch spots.  This has forced rushers to hung walls and corners tighter and use cover more.  Which btw has always been the better way to rush but it wasn't always a necessity.

I think that the reason all this growth in playstyle has brought about more extreme views from various forumites is that change is often unwanted and uncomfortable.  The more difficult the game makes it for a person to use their playstyle of choice the more they are likely to rail against the playstyles that counter them.  I think that those of us that utilize an amalgam of playstyles have felt the pain of change the least but even we have found it difficult to adapt considering that the enemy team is much more savy in their approaches nowadays and as such we have to be that much tighter in our gameplay to compensate.

What we don't have anymore that many of us are quite used to is a relaxing set of maps where things aren't pushing full tilt all the time.  I think that they should bring that back as much as I used to hate the really big maps simply because I spent more time running back to the action than I did in it.  We all love fast paced action but too much of a good thing can turn itself into a bad thing.  Hopefully Ghosts will find a better balance in mapsize/layout.

Level 69
Likes: 3241
Posts: 7672
Registered: ‎29-02-2012

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to Ghamorra

dude, i think you think too much.

but since we're trying to relate playstyles to biology... how about the theory of evolution?

of course people will evolve their playstyles to fit both the way they approach the game and the way the game is presented to them.  the way i play COD has changed greatly since I first picked up a controller and played the game.  the way i play COD changes depending on the game mode.

the players that complain about other players style of play are the ones who cannot / dont evolve.  therefore they get disgusted with the game and quit, instead of evolving.  these are the ones who have consistently said that the previous release was better, not realizing that they have to change the way they play  to fit the environment (lag notwithstanding).

the best players are the ones that have evolved with each iteration of the game and have been able to use and in some cases exploit the small advantages that they have found.

in short: evolution is great.  who cares what class / sub-class you get 'lumped' into or how playstyles have changed. adapt and conquer.

Level 5
Likes: 46
Posts: 103
Registered: ‎07-11-2011

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to Ghamorra

I disagree. The key is to have those different playstyles work together. I'm a RunNGunner, my husband is a Dirty Camping Sniper (I kid, he tactically moves around an area with good lines of sight) - we make a great team. I pull them out into the open and cap objectives, he pops heads and calls out charlies in my sector.

The team I work on (real job) in similar. We all have something we specialize in, so that when an issue pops up we can forward it to the appropriate person and support them while they work on it.

IMHO, diversity works. Having everyone play the same, with the same set ups/loadouts, would make for a very boring game experience.

- Claire

Moderator
Likes: 809
Posts: 3169
Registered: ‎16-07-2011

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to jeepchick

jeepchick wrote:

I disagree. The key is to have those different playstyles work together. I'm a RunNGunner, my husband is a Dirty Camping Sniper (I kid, he tactically moves around an area with good lines of sight) - we make a great team.

IMHO, diversity works. Having everyone play the same, with the same set ups/loadouts, would make for a very boring game experience.

- Claire

Diversity works for you because of who you play with. When inside groups things are different. Look at professional sports teams and how several different races and ethnicity work together. If you open your sight to the general public you get very different reactions.

I think you make a great point though. When you do play in groups polarized styles of play magically become harmonous (spelling?) and work very well. However, when players of different sorts who don't know each other get together it never seems to work.

Level 75
Likes: 5321
Posts: 13666
Registered: ‎17-09-2011

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to Ghamorra

Alright G' lets take a look at what you are saying here:

any form of diversity will always fail.

Not sure what to think here.

People will go out of their way and manipulate anything they can to make their perspective seem superior. In the end the true purpose will be distorted if not lost in translation.

Well a persons concious (if this is where your going) will vary from the next, we all see what we (only) want to see and believe.

Present a good argument as to why a popular concept might be flawed and fanboys will unite and present irrelevant facts as to why you're stupid, wrong, and suck at life without giving so much as a constructive criticism to anything you present.

Well if the majority find something good, than yea the ones who counter it will be bashed, we all do this.

Call of Duty has only given strong consideration to certain styles leaving the rest to evolve within themselves to survive.

This is a runner / camper thing? I borderline both worlds when needed this game has suited that the most for me.

With each passing title the sub-playstyles are dividing more and more. Before we just had people playing the game for fun. Their playstyles focused on doing such and the diversity didn't exist because diversity was in every player. Since then we have built a taxonomic rank (bet this is the first time anyone's used that phrase on these boards) inside Call of Duty itself.

Well as anything, this game has evolved and moved past those "simpler" times. That is not bad, its simply changing. Its like our grandparents never will appreciate "todays" music because they are stuck in a what it was like mentality <useless and old<>

We have the Rusher, Camper, Quickscoper, Killwhore, Knives Only, ect

What you speak of are names people have just associated others with in an attempt to understand what they are doing. Players than, based on the word they associate others with will provide their opinion on which is best when truly none is best.

For instance, Camping in Black Ops could be defined as sitting in one spot for a majority of a match. In Black Ops II, a game developed intensely around the prevention of Camping (defined by Black Ops standards) we see players focusing more on Rushing, but in doing so there becomes a level of tolerance to style. Players develop new meaning for what it is to Camp. Now Camping is considered staying in the same area for a given amount of time.

hmmm your saying what happened in BO is happening in BO2. Sure.

In the end we're stuck with a problem as one playstyle must suffer to allow the other to exist. It's a vicious circle and it's causing a tear in the community. Co-existence of playstyles is starting fail.

G' no offense but what? Since when did playstyle actual fail as a community? Its the individual who uses such style in a weaker way fails. I've encountered strong and weak rushers, weak campers and good campers, and all of the in between's.

I think if your point is to identify the fall of this game, as I have said, as Drew has said its the community itself (which is what your ultimatly repeating) its the user and each users way of playing the game. As each day passes less people are playing, less NOobs, less casual dudes your are facing more experienced, better prepared and smarter opponents than before.

If anything variety will save this game, as opposed to focusing only on rushing. Rushing is good, but it is the easiest form to counter after all.

"We do not rise to the level of our expectations. We fall to the level
of our training"
Level 75
Likes: 9199
Posts: 16478
Registered: ‎14-11-2011

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to Izjar11

Izjar11 wrote:

Well as anything, this game has evolved and moved past those "simpler" times. That is not bad, its simply changing. Its like our grandparents never will appreciate "todays" music because they are stuck in a what it was like mentality <useless and old<>

I think people's playstyles have definately evolved in BO2. Campers are now utilising headglitch spots with LMGs rather the sitting in corners with silenced Assault Rifles and stealth perks. Rushers are also utilising more cover and flank routes rather then blindly rushing into the middle of the map. Obviously there are still people trying to play this game like they tried to play an older CoD but these people generally get stomped. BO2 is played in a very different way to any other CoD, campers can't hide forever due to the Ghost nerf and the spawn flips (the spawn flips mainly apply to TDM and KC) and Rushers can't blindly run everywhere expecting to get a decent score.

Level 18
Likes: 197
Posts: 989
Registered: ‎02-04-2013

Re: Why diversity will always fail

in reply to Im_not_BukLau

this is the one thing I learned from BO2 it plays (moves) so much differently than previous titles that relying on what use to happen is a big error.

"We do not rise to the level of our expectations. We fall to the level
of our training"
Level 75
Likes: 9199
Posts: 16478
Registered: ‎14-11-2011

Studios