Alright I am saying it....COD is ruining what FPSs should be

B

BillNyeGuy

Newbie
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Without sounding too arrogant or uninformed, it’s interesting to me how the COD franchise has changed the attention and focus of FPS games. As a fan of FPS like the half life series, Bioshock 1, halo (immersive and story driven), counter strike source, team fortress….its interesting that most FPS are riding on the modern setting. Its also slightly annoying to me that EVERY cod game coming out now becomes the next biggest selling franchise ever.

Games like COD to me are mind-numbing/dumbed down/no thinking required shooters. FPSs should focus on a immersive, well thought world that is built on a strong story, and smarter/more tactical gameplay. It’s sad to me that all the games I mentioned above have a lot less people playing. Most CSS servers that 1-2 years ago were full/busy are now constantly died or have bots. Even Halo Reach (and yes I think Reach requires more tactical gameplay then BO or MW2) which came out a few months ago rarely has above 20, 000 people playing.

I am just frustrated that games like Half Life, Bioshock, and Fallout aren’t praised more and recognized as games that have a better quality then the COD games. Most gamers I talk to only have their minds set on Bad Company 2, Modern Warfare 2, MAG, Medal of Honor (though believe me it sucks), Black Ops….and which one is better, which one has better graphics, and which one is more recent.

Just like how The Dark Knight revolutionized comic book superhero films, I think we need another awesome Half Life game (or Bioshock Infinite) to blow gamers minds and inspire FPS in a better direction.

Let the criticism of my ignorance ensue!!
 
I like cod, although they really ****ed up this last round with all the bugs. I don't think these games are meant to have a strong story behind them, they are meant for multiplayer. I haven't played the single player on the new one yet but on the last few the games took 3 or 4 hours to beat.

I am still waiting for the next BF2 though, nothing beats it.
 
While it's true that a lot of other FPS games follow a similar formula, there are still great FPS games out there.
 
FPS have two very important aspects: a first person view, and shooting.
 
I haven't played any of the COD games after the first. But all the other games you mentioned (HL, Bioshock, Fallout.... Halo?) did seem to be highly acclaimed and/or popular. I don't see a huge problem, although I admit the last FPS I ever played was Bioshock, so I'm not really in the loop here.
 
Stop being so melodramatic. There is enough room for both story diven, and mindless, kill everything FPS games.
 
^This. Just because everyone isn't playing it doesn't mean that these old games are being forgotten, or that the new ones will inevitably suck. It's just a gaming trend, and pretty soon everyone will just be frustrated, bored, or had a stroke from playing too much of it, and come back to games that really had their interest. I don't think COD is ruining anything. If you like it, fine. I have my favorites, you have your favorites. Lets leave it at that. I like this, you like that. Just because a lot more people like the one you like doesn't mean that mine is any less valuable.
 
Many of those games, like HL and Bioshock, don't exactly excel in the shooting department, which is one of the main reasons I'm playing the game. Tactics as well. To me the COD series (for the most part) has provided very fluid shooting mechanics that require me to think about how I'm going to handle the next situation, especially on harder difficulties. I have never needed to do that in Bioshock OR HL.
 
I'll agree that Half Life 2 and Bioshock are top notched quality games.

Fallout 3 on the other hand is a piece of shit. Honestly, the buggiest piece of crap I have ever played in my life. Absolutely unbalanced (you can max every stat), with repeated perks that become stupidly useless (I think there was a perk that brings all your skills to at least 5, and another perk that brings it all to 9 later on. So what was the point of taking the first one?).

Fallout 3 is not a shooter, it's a buggy, glitchy, crashy vats spam game (made even more spammable with the perk which instantly recharges your vats if you make a kill in vats). There is no sense of urgency in Fallout 3, there are little repercussions to poor decisions in battle (not that there are much decisions to be made in the first place).

That being said, I'll agree CoD games follow a similar brainless shooting concept. CoD is more about who sees their target first and who camps better.

I miss the good old Counter-Strike games. Screw realism, it should be about mastering strategies and techniques that give you even the slightest edge in first person shooters.


Emporius said:
Many of those games, like HL and Bioshock, don't exactly excel in the shooting department, which is one of the main reasons I'm playing the game. Tactics as well. To me the COD series (for the most part) has provided very fluid shooting mechanics that require me to think about how I'm going to handle the next situation, especially on harder difficulties. I have never needed to do that in Bioshock OR HL.
Click to expand...

I think you feel that way because of the magical quick save quick load button. Half Life 2 and Bioshock should only allow you to save and reload from checkpoints, that will actually make you contemplate proper approaches to the next wave of enemies. The idea of regenerating health severely dumbs down the need to worry about your health progression, whiles in games like HL 2 every health point matters. Obviously, by allowing us to quick save and quick load anytime, we lose the sense of urgency.

Now if you have the HL 2 health concept along with the only save and reload during checkpoints idea, the game becomes much more challenging (and perhaps even more frustrating), but for someone who played CS for so long, I enjoy this style of game play much more. CS is the epitome of strategic FPS gaming in my opinion.
 
For me, Doom(both original Doom and company and Doom 3) and Half-Life will always be the best FPS's of all time. Probably because I started playing them when I was a kid but no other FPS has caught my interest like those 2 titles ever since.
 
Why are you comparing SP shooters to MP shooters and expecting them to be held to the same standard?

This thread is balls.
 
bam23 said:
Why are you comparing SP shooters to MP shooters and expecting them to be held to the same standard?

This thread is balls.
Click to expand...

Wait what?

First off COD has both. Secondly the thread is compared it to several games, some of which are multiplayer only, others which are singleplayer only.

Your post is balls.

Also, I agree that it sucks that COD is so big. I've always felt this way, because so many developers try to copy cat the biggest name which means we get the same games under different names. My only consolation is that not all developers are run by idiots. But theres so, so few of them left.
 
BillNyeGuy said:
Without sounding too arrogant or uninformed, it’s interesting to me how the COD franchise has changed the attention and focus of FPS games. As a fan of FPS like the half life series, Bioshock 1, halo (immersive and story driven), counter strike source, team fortress….its interesting that most FPS are riding on the modern setting. Its also slightly annoying to me that EVERY cod game coming out now becomes the next biggest selling franchise ever.

Games like COD to me are mind-numbing/dumbed down/no thinking required shooters. FPSs should focus on a immersive, well thought world that is built on a strong story, and smarter/more tactical gameplay. It’s sad to me that all the games I mentioned above have a lot less people playing. Most CSS servers that 1-2 years ago were full/busy are now constantly died or have bots. Even Halo Reach (and yes I think Reach requires more tactical gameplay then BO or MW2) which came out a few months ago rarely has above 20, 000 people playing.

I am just frustrated that games like Half Life, Bioshock, and Fallout aren’t praised more and recognized as games that have a better quality then the COD games. Most gamers I talk to only have their minds set on Bad Company 2, Modern Warfare 2, MAG, Medal of Honor (though believe me it sucks), Black Ops….and which one is better, which one has better graphics, and which one is more recent.

Just like how The Dark Knight revolutionized comic book superhero films, I think we need another awesome Half Life game (or Bioshock Infinite) to blow gamers minds and inspire FPS in a better direction.

Let the criticism of my ignorance ensue!!
Click to expand...

are you kidding me. Consider this. The Wii introduced more people to gaming than ever before in the history of gaming. its casual, its fun, theres party systems in check and multiplayer to give you a taste of the action. then people woke up and found its more fun to have engaging and tactical gameplay. something with some meat on it, not Nintendogs 15: The return of the Golden Retriever. If anything, I see COD dying down in the next 5 years and other important FPS emerging from the rubble.

also your pointing out the Capt Obvious statement. everyone knows what COD is all about, and to me if I had to chose between playing HL single player games for the rest of my life or COD multiplayer, I'd probably go nuts deciding. lol

also welcome to the forums, I don't think I said hi yet.

edit: i also emplore you to ask your friends to play games like HL2, Bioshock, and other great FPSs. you'll be happy to know that some are interested in something greater. I got a friend of mine to play Bioshock and he burned through 1 and 2 in a short while and loved them.
 
flamingdts said:
I think you feel that way because of the magical quick save quick load button. Half Life 2 and Bioshock should only allow you to save and reload from checkpoints, that will actually make you contemplate proper approaches to the next wave of enemies. The idea of regenerating health severely dumbs down the need to worry about your health progression, whiles in games like HL 2 every health point matters. Obviously, by allowing us to quick save and quick load anytime, we lose the sense of urgency.
Click to expand...

While I agree that sometimes it can retard the gameplay, quick save/load never seemed to be an issue in games with true difficulty that could still kick your ass even with a magical rage-reducing progress-recorder. In STALKER, for example, there was one instance where it was me and like 20 Monolith soldiers at the exit from Army Warehouses, and I kept quicksaving/loading because I had to make every shot from my gun count in their heads. Even though it may have reduced my sense of "urgency" by more than it could have been, I still felt very challenged; the quicksave/load feature probably lessened my frustration so I would not quit due to having to reload and try to kill 20 guys every single time.
 
I love quicksave features. theres nothing more frustrating than repeating shit in games. and I'm willing to be I've wasted over a years time repeating the same shit in video games. that and loading screens suck balls. I like COD's you can press X or whatever and skip right to the action.
 
Krynn72 said:
Wait what?

First off COD has both. Secondly the thread is compared it to several games, some of which are multiplayer only, others which are singleplayer only.

Your post is balls.

Also, I agree that it sucks that COD is so big. I've always felt this way, because so many developers try to copy cat the biggest name which means we get the same games under different names. My only consolation is that not all developers are run by idiots. But theres so, so few of them left.
Click to expand...

The SP is tacked on to an obviously predominant MP game.
 
BillNyeGuy said:
As a fan of FPS like the half life series, Bioshock 1, halo (immersive and story driven)
Click to expand...
Thought you could get away with it, did you? Well you did, for like two pages, because people in here are dumb. But I'm onto your shit, troll.
 
Darkside55 said:
Thought you could get away with it, did you? Well you did, for like two pages, because people in here are dumb. But I'm onto your shit, troll.
Click to expand...

never let a troll know that you know that he's a troll! you just blew your cover and now i just blew my cover as well. i was hoping for an intervention or mass email spamming the guy but this was such a waste :(
 
This thread is ruining what this forum should be.

(Gaming is thattaway -->)
 
I tried to explain this to CoD fanatics at my school, they called me a N00B & laughed raucously. :(
 
bam23 said:
The SP is tacked on to an obviously predominant MP game.
Click to expand...

Thats very debatable, and doesn't negate my main point in that you seemed to have missed every game the OP compared COD to, except for Half life.
 
http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

There are currently more people playing Counter-Strike and Counter-Strike: Source combined than are playing Black Ops and Wodern Warefare MP on Steam right now. And seeing as all those games require Steam that's everyone who is playing these games online legally. Counter-Strike active fanbase is still bigger than the CoD MP PC active fanbase and this is when Black Ops is out for only a few weeks.
 
Xevrex said:
While I agree that sometimes it can retard the gameplay, quick save/load never seemed to be an issue in games with true difficulty that could still kick your ass even with a magical rage-reducing progress-recorder. In STALKER, for example, there was one instance where it was me and like 20 Monolith soldiers at the exit from Army Warehouses, and I kept quicksaving/loading because I had to make every shot from my gun count in their heads. Even though it may have reduced my sense of "urgency" by more than it could have been, I still felt very challenged; the quicksave/load feature probably lessened my frustration so I would not quit due to having to reload and try to kill 20 guys every single time.
Click to expand...

This. Sometimes the quick save feature is vital to ensure no frustration and to allow and more fluid progression with the game, rather than get so far, die, go back to start of checkpoint, get even further, die, go back to start of checkpoint, die straight away etc. That would drive any gamers nuts.

As for CoD, the franchise died when MW2 came out and Activision started the whole money trap idea with it, they will keep throwing the same crap out until they can make as much money from the franchise as possible, the main problem is that so many people keep buying them. I mean why by Black Ops when its essentially the same game as MW2? I've played the latter a lot and I've seen friends play the former and its the same ****ing game, just with more retarded perks. The reason they will bring one out every year is because they know most gamers will be bored of their former title by then.

But that doesn't mean gaming in general is doomed. I will agree there are few remaining superb developers left who still want to inject innovation and imagination into new games, and we will still get titles like that (especially with more development companies being opened in the future) but I do agree that games like CoD are getting all the unnecessary hype, but at the end of the day, you don't have to buy it. Save your money for a proper game to come out (there some very good titles in the works), or wait for the next hopefully innovative franchise to start.
 
There are actually currently more people playing Counter-Strike than Black Ops MP.
 
Say what you want about Halo, but goddamn if its combat isn't a thousand times better than anything the CoD games have ever produced. I played HL2 Episode Two recently after having beaten Halo Reach and Modern Warfare 2, and goddamn it, the combat in both the Halo games and Half-life games shits all over CoDs "cardboard cutout" shoot em ups any day of the ****ing week.

The CoD games are so brainless and disposable compared to decent shooters, that treating them as the so-called 'pinnacle' of anything other than multiplayer shooters (which is a shame really, considering so many other MP games are better than any CoD game) carries as much weight as saying Avatar is greatest film ever because it made the most money.

That's not to say that I don't enjoy them. They're all pretty good games in the end and the single-player campaigns are often a lot of fun, but I treat them like Michael Bay films. When you want brainless action and explosions, you go to Michael Bay. When you want something with substance, go anywhere else.

There's nothing wrong with wanting some brainless action once in a while. But when that becomes your only option... well...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUH3JQjcweM
 
Remus said:
Stop being so melodramatic.
Click to expand...


THIS. just dont buy the game ffs. I dont see how any of this is different than every other zFPS released in the last decade. fps have fundamentally changed waaay before COD. CoD just brings out the anti-establishment bleeding vaginas just like Halo does. success breeds bitterness in people who want things to remain the way they are. well that's too freakin bad, you should have voted with your wallet
 
Sparta said:
Say what you want about Halo, but goddamn if its combat isn't a thousand times better than anything the CoD games have ever produced
Click to expand...

Amen.


I agree with the OP, probably for quite different reasons. COD is the devil. Not because it shifts focus from more story/immersion driven fps to arcady shooters, but because it's ****ing arcade shooters in the ass. They used to be about speed, reactions and aiming. Now they're slooow, reward spray and prey, camping, with victory going to who sees who first (all thanks to iron sights btw). And why? Because everyone is copying CoD. Everything's infected. Other than L4D and TF2 (thank **** for Valve) can anyone name a decent arcade shooter of recent times?

I would also moan about the single player, but it's obviously bollocks.
 
I am not a fan of the term 'Story-Driven' when describing shooters, esspeacialy when people use it to defend Half-Life and other such game's.

Every first person shooter has a story, even Wolf3D had a story, but you wouldn't describe it as story-driven. Some are better written and presented than others, but if Call of Duty was well written, you still wouldn't describe it as story-driven.

There are plenty of other ways to describe the differences between these games, than resorting to a buzzword that tells people nothing. The pacing and connection with the enviroment, the level of interactive freedom the player has in any given area, the way in which infomation is passed to the player. etc.

Edit: On the subject of arcade shooters, I fully agree! The high speed twitch based FPS is really neglected.
 
The best part about this thread is the title. He's like "OKAY GUYS I CAN'T STAY QUIET ANY LONGER, I GOTTA SAY SOMETHING."

Like everyone on this ****ing board hasn't been saying the exact same thing for years.
 
Weird thing about Bioshock was that it was totally fun to watch my friend play it on his xbox, but when my cousin gave it to me for Christmas, I really had to struggle to make myself play all the way through. Mostly got sick of the endlessly re-spawning enemies. Sometimes I just like to be able to wander around and do the occasional backtrack without having to keep killing off people. Also contributed a little to why I stopped playing Stalker about 5 hours into the game.
 
Barnz said:
hahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahaha


poor teenagers
Click to expand...

2qx9do7.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bbson john
Hi everyone. I am new to this forum!
Replies
11
Views
6K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Barking Dog Studios' work for Valve
Replies
0
Views
12K
Barnz
B
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
B
Community Interviews: Final Exchange development team
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Back
Top