Call of Duty Reviews

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

Gamespot

Machinima

IGN

Rev3Games

#2 Edited by platinumking320 (555 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: They've got Stephen Gaghan and Battlefield 4 to thank maybe even community fatigue at large. See how competition does influence these little improvements. If only designers were pushed to evolve themselves every franchise release. Hopefully next gen with Destiny and Killzone 3, shooters will have more campaign freedom of movement though.

#3 Posted by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: They've got Stephen Gaghan and Battlefield 4 to thank maybe even community fatigue at large. See how competition does influence these little improvements. If only designers were pushed to evolve themselves every franchise release. Hopefully next gen with Destiny and Killzone 3, shooters will have more campaign freedom of movement though.

i still think it is dissapointing to see how little singleplayer is still being an after thought. I know DICE can do great singleplayer games like Bad Company

#4 Posted by platinumking320 (555 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: Its so unfortunate. I think because of the earning prospects of multi-player and f2p realized from WoW to CoD have made companies cynical. They know as that other forum post discussing MAG mentioned that the beauty ends when the dedicated server goes down, so the campaign is tacked on just to add additional investment for what was meant to be a temporary experience, till the next trend comes down the pipeline.

creative multiplayer is great but sometimes it can be just as much of a relative cop-out as some reality shows are to well composed or written comedies dramas and original live shows. Its like we know where the money is, just focus on that.

or how QTE fights can be a cop out when you could just switch control modes and in-game camera angles ala true crime/Sleeping dogs or...Actually i remember thats been doable since the player brawls in NHL 95 or 97.

#5 Posted by Areez (6258 posts) -

I m probably going to skip this year's CoD. Seems to me like it is more of the same. Although I have BF4, that game has been a bit of a dissapointment to me as well. The nurfed vehicles, new weapons mod and unlock system, and the game freezing has been a let down for me.

Perhaps these franchises are becoming a bit bland, and the developers are running out of meaningful ways to introduce new gameplay.

Truth be told, I am ready for a new FPS franchise, so bring on Titanfall!

#6 Posted by marcheegsr (2184 posts) -

BF4 destroys this game.

#7 Posted by drufeous (2530 posts) -

This gens shooters and online shooters are in a serious need of a new Time Splitters. Great single player and multiplayer.

#8 Posted by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: Its so unfortunate. I think because of the earning prospects of multi-player and f2p realized from WoW to CoD have made companies cynical. They know as that other forum post discussing MAG mentioned that the beauty ends when the dedicated server goes down, so the campaign is tacked on just to add additional investment for what was meant to be a temporary experience, till the next trend comes down the pipeline.

creative multiplayer is great but sometimes it can be just as much of a relative cop-out as some reality shows are to well composed or written comedies dramas and original live shows. Its like we know where the money is, just focus on that.

or how QTE fights can be a cop out when you could just switch control modes and in-game camera angles ala true crime/Sleeping dogs or...Actually i remember thats been doable since the player brawls in NHL 95 or 97.

I think FPS can still have great multiplayer and Singleplayer. Hell look at Far Cry 3, it's not as polished as the BF or COD multiplayer but with the vast singleplayer and co-op, it's still a great multiplayer

#9 Posted by Randolph (10112 posts) -

Hmm. I said when the new Batman game was lambasted for not bringing enough new to the table that standard, the Petit standard, would not be applied to the yearly FPS games. Looks like I was right, both of them waltzed right on through with an easy 8 because, despite a lack of new ideas, and despite the fact they fundamentally play EXACTLY like previous games in the series, they are still fun to play. This is a case where I wish I had been wrong, but I was not.

#10 Edited by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

@Randolph said:

Hmm. I said when the new Batman game was lambasted for not bringing enough new to the table that standard, the Petit standard, would not be applied to the yearly FPS games. Looks like I was right, both of them waltzed right on through with an easy 8 because, despite a lack of new ideas, and despite the fact they fundamentally play EXACTLY like previous games in the series, they are still fun to play. This is a case where I wish I had been wrong, but I was not.

I as expecting the same sadly, i am not blaming this on Shaun McInnis, rather on Carolyn who yet again shows that she is biased in her reviews

#11 Edited by platinumking320 (555 posts) -

@Randolph said:

Hmm. I said when the new Batman game was lambasted for not bringing enough new to the table that standard, the Petit standard, would not be applied to the yearly FPS games. Looks like I was right, both of them waltzed right on through with an easy 8 because, despite a lack of new ideas, and despite the fact they fundamentally play EXACTLY like previous games in the series, they are still fun to play. This is a case where I wish I had been wrong, but I was not.

I as expecting the same sadly, i am not blaming this on Shaun McInnis, rather on Carolyn who yet again shows that she is biased in her reviews

Part of me still blames it on maddenizing and over-serializing...and EA liquidating studios. We wouldn't be having these conversations and reviews as much if folks had time they needed to make fuller more self-aware games. Some people can realize mid project they've worked themselves into a hole. They have to pick 'servicing a brand over making a stronger game' Sure time is money, but this standard is not healthy for development. You need a real competitive marketplace with the freedom for fresher game ideas to bounce around more often. There should be alternative ways for producers to drive revenue that don't pressure them to shovel reiterations of their marquee titles out the door too quickly just to remain socially relevant. They're games not twitter posts y'know?

I think even sports games should've done it less, and they would have been played more across different gamer tastes. For some devs it's figuring out how to fundamentally change your franchise without breaking the thing. Even small changes'll affect the flow of the gameplay in noticable ways, this stuff takes time. Some can wrap it up nicely in two years, but not everyone.

#12 Posted by Areez (6258 posts) -

@Randolph:

I think part of the score reflects some the new multiplayer features such as, earning XP against bots, chatacter/soldier creation similar to an RPG and the stripping of prestiging multiple times. Now are those big improvements? In my book...no.

#13 Posted by mjorh (260 posts) -

So Battlefield 4 is the WINNER !

Haven't played COD Ghost yet but obviously it's the same game ....

#14 Posted by ZZoMBiE13 (22910 posts) -

Damn it all. I was content with only ever bothering with the Treyarch CoD games because they had zombie mode and I actually liked that. Now these guys bring in alien horde mode??

Well... I doubt I'll bother playing it anyway. Not much for multiplayer (zombie mode notwithstanding).

#15 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (17560 posts) -

@mjorh said:

So Battlefield 4 is the WINNER !

Haven't played COD Ghost yet but obviously it's the same game ....

Battlefield 4 is identical to Battlefield 3 too

#16 Edited by 1PMrFister (3128 posts) -

Destructoid's review is the most negative I've seen for a CoD professional review yet. It's especially interesting in that Jim Sterling supposedly was a staunch defender of the CoD games up until now.

I'm really getting the feeling that we're going to see Call of Duty get usurped from its throne as the king of popular shooters in the next couple years. You can tell this franchise is petering out whether you enjoy its latest installments or not. The timing is also ripe, given that we're about to enter into a new generation of systems. The only real question is which franchise will end up taking the throne.

#17 Edited by Bigboi500 (27879 posts) -

Games like this and Battlefield could score perfect 10s across the board and I still wouldn't bother with them.

#18 Posted by Areez (6258 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00:

BK....You think its the same? I mean obviously the premise is the same in BF4. However, it seems that Dice has nurfed the vehicles in BF4, and has made it to easy to upgrade weapons. As of now BF3 is a better game imo....

#19 Posted by ZZoMBiE13 (22910 posts) -

Destructoid's review is the most negative I've seen for a CoD professional review yet. It's especially interesting in that Jim Sterling supposedly was a staunch defender of the CoD games up until now.

I'm really getting the feeling that we're going to see Call of Duty get usurped from its throne as the king of popular shooters in the next couple years. You can tell this franchise is petering out whether you enjoy its latest installments or not. The timing is also ripe, given that we're about to enter into a new generation of systems. The only real question is which franchise will end up taking the throne.

Well said and very true. Although I have no idea what might fill the role of top online shooter. Maybe Tom Clancy's The Division will stand a chance? That looked pretty decent at E3.

I'd like to say Titanfall, but I honestly just can't get excited about any game with no single player offering. And let's be honest here, being an Xbox exclusive may not do it any favors at this point, even though I don't think it'll be as cut and dried as many fans seem to.

Meh, whatever it is I just hope it leans more into science fiction or something other than modern military settings.

Games like this and Battlefield could score perfect 10s across the board and I still wouldn't bother with them.

lol. Too true.

#20 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (17560 posts) -

@Areez said:

@Black_Knight_00:

BK....You think its the same? I mean obviously the premise is the same in BF4. However, it seems that Dice has nurfed the vehicles in BF4, and has made it to easy to upgrade weapons. As of now BF3 is a better game imo....

Those are minor tweaks, c'mon man. Anyone can see the game is basically the same. Someone could make a montage with the HUD off and challenge people to tell which is BF3 and which is BF4

#21 Posted by WR_Platinum (4666 posts) -

I'm just shocked that the majority of the major gaming website didn't give Ghosts a 9 or above. It seems tho that it is basically more of the same from mw3, only trying to be like battlefield with unnecessary huge maps. Kinda weird since Battlefield 4 is trying to be like COD.

I'm just waiting to see if Ghosts actually beat GTAV in sales, if it didn't, I'll be super happy, if it didn't outsell Blops 2, I can safely assume that this is when COD loses its momentum drastically.

#22 Posted by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride said:

@Randolph said:

Hmm. I said when the new Batman game was lambasted for not bringing enough new to the table that standard, the Petit standard, would not be applied to the yearly FPS games. Looks like I was right, both of them waltzed right on through with an easy 8 because, despite a lack of new ideas, and despite the fact they fundamentally play EXACTLY like previous games in the series, they are still fun to play. This is a case where I wish I had been wrong, but I was not.

I as expecting the same sadly, i am not blaming this on Shaun McInnis, rather on Carolyn who yet again shows that she is biased in her reviews

Part of me still blames it on maddenizing and over-serializing...and EA liquidating studios. We wouldn't be having these conversations and reviews as much if folks had time they needed to make fuller more self-aware games. Some people can realize mid project they've worked themselves into a hole. They have to pick 'servicing a brand over making a stronger game' Sure time is money, but this standard is not healthy for development. You need a real competitive marketplace with the freedom for fresher game ideas to bounce around more often. There should be alternative ways for producers to drive revenue that don't pressure them to shovel reiterations of their marquee titles out the door too quickly just to remain socially relevant. They're games not twitter posts y'know?

I think even sports games should've done it less, and they would have been played more across different gamer tastes. For some devs it's figuring out how to fundamentally change your franchise without breaking the thing. Even small changes'll affect the flow of the gameplay in noticable ways, this stuff takes time. Some can wrap it up nicely in two years, but not everyone.

i agree, because my favorite sport game PES, got crushed because of that, and they had to do the same in 2007 or 08 because FIFA was gaining so much ground because of it

#23 Posted by Areez (6258 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00:

Well nurfing the effectiveness of the vehicle's, tanks, LAVs, jets and helicopters has changed the game play. You see consistently see soldiers on foot running up to vehicles now. to take them out. That did not happen in BF3. That being said the game looks the same, with more destruction but the game play is worse. So yes the premise is the same, but the nerfing has changed the dynamic a bit.

#24 Posted by Archangel3371 (14797 posts) -

I've only played the multiplayer so far but I still find it to be very enjoyable and I love Extinction mode. Having said that I do admit that as this gen draws to a close the CoD games do feel like they are on the wane with this game and next gen will usher in a new king which I think may very well be Titanfall.

#25 Edited by dvader654 (44741 posts) -

Good that it got average scores. This series needs a makeover.

#26 Edited by mjorh (260 posts) -

@mjorh said:

So Battlefield 4 is the WINNER !

Haven't played COD Ghost yet but obviously it's the same game ....

Battlefield 4 is identical to Battlefield 3 too

Nah man i don't think so , destruction changes the game completely , u didn't have THAT much of destruction in BF3 , u didn't have Commander Mode , i believe BF4 is a combination of Bad Company 2 n BF3 n BF2 ....

#27 Edited by 1PMrFister (3128 posts) -

@ZZoMBiE13:

I don't know about any Tom Clancy game becoming top dog. Games with his name on it have been declining in popularity these last few years. Then again, maybe Clancy's recent death might give the game a posthumous boost.

Titanfall is iffy too in that not only is it exclusive to one console, but it has no single-player component whatsoever, which is guaranteed to limit its impact. Not to say that it couldn't do the job (Quake 3 demonstrated this was possible), but it's an uphill battle to be sure.

In any case, I'm in the same boat as you and bigboi. Competitive shooters aren't my thing, so I really don't care either way.

#28 Edited by Randolph (10112 posts) -

Destructoid's review is the most negative I've seen for a CoD professional review yet. It's especially interesting in that Jim Sterling supposedly was a staunch defender of the CoD games up until now.

I'm really getting the feeling that we're going to see Call of Duty get usurped from its throne as the king of popular shooters in the next couple years. You can tell this franchise is petering out whether you enjoy its latest installments or not. The timing is also ripe, given that we're about to enter into a new generation of systems. The only real question is which franchise will end up taking the throne.

Much as I would enjoy seeing COD crash and burn, Sterling is a shock jock, and you shouldn't take him seriously. He's more entertainment and cheap pops than information.

#29 Posted by jukev2424 (242 posts) -

Watching a couple of these reviews has made me want to play this before BF4. Always been a COD fan and recently have been playing BF3, nice shake up, but still think COD is more enjoyable IMO.

#30 Edited by ZZoMBiE13 (22910 posts) -

@ZZoMBiE13:

I don't know about any Tom Clancy game becoming top dog. Games with his name on it have been declining in popularity these last few years. Then again, maybe Clancy's recent death might give the game a posthumous boost.

Titanfall is iffy too in that not only is it exclusive to one console, but it has no single-player component whatsoever, which is guaranteed to limit its impact. Not to say that it couldn't do the job (Quake 3 demonstrated this was possible), but it's an uphill battle to be sure.

In any case, I'm in the same boat as you and bigboi. Competitive shooters aren't my thing, so I really don't care either way.

Yeah, I agree. The only reason I even mentioned the Division was it's the only big online shooter I can think of that is cross platform, multiplayer focused, and has the potential to attract attention away from CoD while not being too radically different for it's core fanbase.

Of course, as a long time fan of Bungie and Halo I have high hopes that Destiny will turn out to be good. And those guys are certainly capable. Plus it's going to be available for new machines and legacy systems, so that is a point in it's favor. But it's just that I don't know if a sci-fi shooter has legs in the current market. I know I'd like it more, but it seems the "modern military" focus coupled with some good old fashion Cold War fear mongering has been working well for CoD, and Clancy has (had) the potential to get folks of that mindset to gravitate toward Division. Plus Division is a more grounded realistic setting, so that may work to it's advantage.

But who knows. Until we see some more real gameplay of some of these titles, it's impossible to speculate with authority. I just know I'd love a world where something, anything, toppled CoD as the status quo.

I don't really think the X1 is going to sell as badly as some people do, but I know they have a long road ahead for sure. Even if Titanfall did turn out to be amazing, even if it had enough quality to carry a game with no single player aspect, it's still going to be hobbled by being a single platform offering, as you said. And we've seen how that goes. Halo and Halo 2 were THE big shooters of their day, but once Modern Warfare came along and upset the apple cart, there was a game with the same multiplayer draw but cross platform enough to reach fans of that kind of game regardless of where their friend list happened to be. I just don't think that in this market you can sustain that model without multiple platforms to release on.

Either way, it'll be fun to watch! If we're lucky, in a couple of years we'll have a different game to shun and belittle for being too mainstream. lol

#31 Posted by Jacanuk (2751 posts) -

@mjorh said:

So Battlefield 4 is the WINNER !

Haven't played COD Ghost yet but obviously it's the same game ....

Hmm, neither BF or COD wins prices on its singleplayer part, BF4´s are so bad that i wonder why they even bothered releasing it, because i dont think i have ever played such a poorly made single player campagin in the history of gaming.

And COD from i have tried is not doing it better.

But then again neither game is bought because of the single player, its a mp game 100% and here i will agree, BF´s graphics and realistic feel beats COD hands down any day of the week.

#32 Posted by N1K0LA191 (64 posts) -

@marcheegsr: BF4 implemented virtually nothing new from BF3. Being a Battlefield fan myself, I don't know how you can think that BF4 has come farther from BF3 than Call of Duty Ghosts from MW3. It's just an ignorant fan boy's opinion though. I think both games are awful and being overtaken by 12 year old kids whose parents have no control over them. End rant.

#33 Edited by marcheegsr (2184 posts) -

@N1K0LA191 said:

@marcheegsr: BF4 implemented virtually nothing new from BF3. Being a Battlefield fan myself, I don't know how you can think that BF4 has come farther from BF3 than Call of Duty Ghosts from MW3. It's just an ignorant fan boy's opinion though. I think both games are awful and being overtaken by 12 year old kids whose parents have no control over them. End rant.

Your the ignorant one. All the people I have played bf3 with are at least over 21. I rarely hear any kids on the mic as opposed to the 12 year olds that say the N world every 2 minutes on call of duty.

Where did I say that bf4 has come farther from bf3 than ghosts from mw3? I Just said BF4 destroys call of duty.

#34 Edited by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

Metacritic is around 75 and next gen on ps4 is around 78 at the moment. So not a good overall score on this games

#35 Posted by megaspiderweb09 (3646 posts) -

The new COD sucks, plain and simple, atleast BlackOps2 tried something new with its campaign and multiplayer

#36 Posted by N1K0LA191 (64 posts) -

@marcheegsr: I simply disagree that one trumps the other. They're both garbage. Titanfall is the next game title that is getting my money in a first person shooter sense because it is being made by the lead creators of Call of Duty 4 which is undeniably the standard setting FPS for 360/ps3 gen.

#37 Edited by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

@marcheegsr: I simply disagree that one trumps the other. They're both garbage. Titanfall is the next game title that is getting my money in a first person shooter sense because it is being made by the lead creators of Call of Duty 4 which is undeniably the standard setting FPS for 360/ps3 gen.

I am rather going with Destiny and Battlefield 4 than Titanfall and COD. I don't get the hype around. Titanfall. Witcher 3, Dragon Age, or anything else look far more impressive during E3 if you ask me

#38 Posted by N1K0LA191 (64 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: I'll end up getting Destiny and Titanfall, and probably not going to waste my time with COD or Battlefield once the good games start coming out next year.

#39 Posted by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: I'll end up getting Destiny and Titanfall, and probably not going to waste my time with COD or Battlefield once the good games start coming out next year.

For me personally there is no appeal to Titanfall

#40 Posted by I-AM-N00B (410 posts) -

I still love CoD but I'm waiting till next gen before playing Ghosts. I admit that it may be time for the series to be given an overhaul as they are all a bit too similar, and I also believe that eventually it will become multiplayer only. I know very few people who play CoD for the single player!

#41 Posted by The_Last_Ride (65902 posts) -

I still love CoD but I'm waiting till next gen before playing Ghosts. I admit that it may be time for the series to be given an overhaul as they are all a bit too similar, and I also believe that eventually it will become multiplayer only. I know very few people who play CoD for the single player!

i gave up after Blops