Im actually enticed by this trailer. This CoD actually looks like it might be a bit different for once.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
You really think that? It'll be the same old CoD just with a different skin over it.Im actually enticed by this trailer. This CoD actually looks like it might be a bit different for once.
MEOWWW123
[QUOTE="MEOWWW123"]You really think that? It'll be the same old CoD just with a different skin over it.Im actually enticed by this trailer. This CoD actually looks like it might be a bit different for once.
Toxic-Seahorse
I wasn't aware that previous Call of Duty games had branching storylines and RTS sequences.
You really think that? It'll be the same old CoD just with a different skin over it.[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"][QUOTE="MEOWWW123"]
Im actually enticed by this trailer. This CoD actually looks like it might be a bit different for once.
Phoenix534
I wasn't aware that previous Call of Duty games had branching storylines and RTS sequences.
I also forgot when older Call of Duty games let you ride horses or fly a VTOL.
[QUOTE="MEOWWW123"]You really think that? It'll be the same old CoD just with a different skin over it. yep. saem old same old. move along, nothing to see.Im actually enticed by this trailer. This CoD actually looks like it might be a bit different for once.
Toxic-Seahorse
when it comes to marketing trailer, activison the best in the industry. None of the BO1, MW1-3 looked less impressive, until you start playing it.
Different yes, same graphics engine since 2007, also yes.
egger7577
Same graphics engine since 2003. Not improved all that much since 2005.
Will the never-ending series of CoD, MW, and BF ever end? NOPE! Not as long as people keep buying them by the 100's of thousands. I finally stopped at CoD 2, BF2, and MW4. As many as they have released in each series, I can't see where they can possibly add anything new gameplay wise. So to expect something groundbreaking from any of these is somewhat naive. slabber44
It's funny because Bad Company 2 and now BLOPSII add something new gameplay wise.
If you count zombies and campaign coop - WaW was pretty damn innovative back in 2008. And BLOPS was the pinnacle of RPG elements in a multiplayer shooter.
[QUOTE="slabber44"]Will the never-ending series of CoD, MW, and BF ever end? NOPE! Not as long as people keep buying them by the 100's of thousands. I finally stopped at CoD 2, BF2, and MW4. As many as they have released in each series, I can't see where they can possibly add anything new gameplay wise. So to expect something groundbreaking from any of these is somewhat naive. Baranga
It's funny because Bad Company 2 and now BLOPSII add something new gameplay wise.
If you count zombies and campaign coop - WaW was pretty damn innovative back in 2008. And BLOPS was the pinnacle of RPG elements in a multiplayer shooter.
WaW featured like a decent version of COD2 gameplay with both small and large maps, and some tanks, great FULL co-op with 4 players and... Zombies.[QUOTE="Baranga"][QUOTE="slabber44"]Will the never-ending series of CoD, MW, and BF ever end? NOPE! Not as long as people keep buying them by the 100's of thousands. I finally stopped at CoD 2, BF2, and MW4. As many as they have released in each series, I can't see where they can possibly add anything new gameplay wise. So to expect something groundbreaking from any of these is somewhat naive. DevilMightCry
It's funny because Bad Company 2 and now BLOPSII add something new gameplay wise.
If you count zombies and campaign coop - WaW was pretty damn innovative back in 2008. And BLOPS was the pinnacle of RPG elements in a multiplayer shooter.
WaW featured like a decent version of COD2 gameplay with both small and large maps, and some tanks, great FULL co-op with 4 players and... Zombies. Your right about the co-op in WaW (played my friends game). The zombies was alot like L4D survival mode, with different features. As for BLOPS and Bad Co. 2 can't comment cause I never played it so you might be right there also. So what is it that they could possibly add to make people want to buy it? The basic gunplay hasn't changed much. Still need to shoot people multiple times for them to die often, guns that should have a limited range can shoot halfway across the map. Those two things always irritated me.I thought the mechs and stuff make the game look terrible.. And I woulda used CGI for the trailer instead of gameplay, with THOSE graphics.
It's the same crap but with robots thrown in. It's going to be generic garbage just like the past few entries in the series.Im actually enticed by this trailer. This CoD actually looks like it might be a bit different for once.
MEOWWW123
rofl they put 4 legs in a tank and make "futuristic" military uniforms instead of "modern" time uniforms and people go "OMGADZ its a new cod"
well i guess its understandable, there has been so little change over every cod that this may seem the ultimate change for some people, i will wait and laugh when it comes out and its the same engine with same mechanics in different uniform.
Meh. Activision is Tony Hawking the COD series big time. I give them one or two more iterations before the series falls into oblivion and they find some other burgeoning franchise to destroy.theragu40It's true, it's absurd how much they milk it. But what's more absurd is that the sales keep increasing.
You mean since 1999?Different yes, same graphics engine since 2007, also yes.
egger7577
EDIT: O wait some1 beat me
[QUOTE="theragu40"]Meh. Activision is Tony Hawking the COD series big time. I give them one or two more iterations before the series falls into oblivion and they find some other burgeoning franchise to destroy.Englando_IVIt's true, it's absurd how much they milk it. But what's more absurd is that the sales keep increasing.
Well for one, its not the same deal. Not exactly.
Tony Hawk games were all made by one developer, which inevitably led to games decreasing in quality as time went on and more time and money was necessary to make quality titles. Sort of the same tale for Guitar Hero, except it relied on expensive peripherals, at one point had like 5 other GH games out in one year, and ended up being just like Rock Band, not to mention the lack of flexibility they had in messing with the formula.
CoD has a lot more going for it, especially when you consider how they can make radical changes like CoD4 or, well, BO2 and still call it CoD.
That's because Treyarch fails at making MP as well as IW did prior to the post-MWF2 release firings. I will admit, all the fluffy stuff like gun cosmetics, wager mode, dive to prone, combat training, etc. were neat but I don't trust them to make the core MP enjoyable, I mean just look at their random hate for snipers. In BF3 sniping at any range is enjoyable, and yet somehow in a COD game it isn't? Well at least the art direction isn't as moody/depressing looking as in previous Treyarch titles :lol: Compare this from MWF3 for example: http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2011/244/995751_20110903_640screen003.jpg With this from BO1 for example: http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2010/312/reviews/960187_20101109_640screen013.jpgCoD has a lot more going for it, especially when you consider how they can make radical changes like CoD4 or, well, BO2 and still call it CoD.
SPYDER0416
[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]That's because Treyarch fails at making MP as well as IW did prior to the post-MWF2 release firings. I will admit, all the fluffy stuff like gun cosmetics, wager mode, dive to prone, combat training, etc. were neat but I don't trust them to make the core MP enjoyable, I mean just look at their random hate for snipers. In BF3 sniping at any range is enjoyable, and yet somehow in a COD game it isn't? Well at least the art direction isn't as moody/depressing looking as in previous Treyarch titles :lol: Compare this from MWF3 for example: http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2011/244/995751_20110903_640screen003.jpg With this from BO1 for example: http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2010/312/reviews/960187_20101109_640screen013.jpgCoD has a lot more going for it, especially when you consider how they can make radical changes like CoD4 or, well, BO2 and still call it CoD.
Zubinen
Personally I think after MW2 and the IW split, Treyarch is the company responsible for the better CoD games. They aren't busy doing sidework like before with WaW and 3 (which made them less then stellar), and they seem the most interested in fleshing out unique ideas or concepts. IW just has a "if it aint broke, don't fix it mentality" and all they do is add and polish what they had before instead of innovating.
Black Ops was fun and a step in the right direction. The gun customization was maybe a bit TOO cartoony (smily face dot sights?), and the polish isn't nearly on the level of IW titles in terms of smooth performance, graphics and hit boxes, but I think that's really the only thing holding them back when they try to innovate and make the series fresh and unique again.
I'm not saying they revolutionized Call of Duty yet like CoD4 did or anything, but so far its looking like it just based on what we can expect from single player. Really the only thing holding it back is the tech, and hopefully the game looks better when it releases.
I don't feel the same way but that's an awesome feeling I would imagine. COD4 was the last, and best Modern Warfare COD game.Elann2008Yup lol. COD 4 was the last good one, bought 5 and haven't touched the series since.
Anyone else sick of the "COD sucks" circlejerk?SteverXIIIIt's the PC games board on a generic gaming site, what exactly would you expect? Although I find it funny that the scrubs mention COD4 which wasn't worth playing until mods were available for it. COD 2 was there before the franchise took consolitis to the knee with a bunch of BS added to the game to grab a huge demographic of otherwise non gamers, COD 6 gave good players the opportunity to dominate the enemy team and nuke nubs, COD4 didn't have good qualities of either game with a spawn system worse than both.
I fail to understand how people can looove Call of Duty 4, but somehow not enjoy Modern Warfare 2 at all.
[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]
[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"] You really think that? It'll be the same old CoD just with a different skin over it. SPYDER0416
I wasn't aware that previous Call of Duty games had branching storylines and RTS sequences.
I also forgot when older Call of Duty games let you ride horses or fly a VTOL.
Come on think about it, those sequences are only going to be short to break up gun scenes, will probably mostly be on-rail with a small amount of freedom, every COD game has something like it, whether it be flying a Helicopter, being the gunner on a car or bike, operating a predator drone, an AC130, driving a tank etc etc, each COD has some sort of section like that, it really won't be anything new and won't eat up much of the actual campaign time.I fail to understand how people can looove Call of Duty 4, but somehow not enjoy Modern Warfare 2 at all.
JangoWuzHere
I don't really like COD4 but MW2 is the most frustrating multiplayer experience ever.
There is no balance, the sky is full of threats, the interface and sound design are a mess and the only map I was able to learn is Afghan.
You know there's something terribly wrong when you can noobtube Flag A from the spawning point until you get a nuke and win the game.
MW2 was a train wreck. It was as if they decided to not balance the game. Akibmo g18's, riot shields, shotguns as secondary weapons, 1 hit kill throwing knives. Just one terrible feature after another. Not to mention the tactical nuke made no sense. If I am playing demolition and i need to destroy the crates, if they call in tactical nuke why do they win the game? The crates would have gotten destroyed so technically I should win the game. It is just one bad oversight after another.I fail to understand how people can looove Call of Duty 4, but somehow not enjoy Modern Warfare 2 at all.
JangoWuzHere
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment