Conjoint Gaming [Game On]
CG Main => Debate Forum => Topic started by: (QC) Spell Bound on November 18, 2012, 05:53:57 PM
-
Seriously , many consumers still buy this shit, Cod uses the same engin all the time, it's like buying a new expansion for 60$. What do you think?
-
Doesn't matter about the Engine, matters about how fun it is.
If there was not going to be extortionately priced DLC (Which there will be.) and tons of hackers, I would buy it, I bought the original Black Ops and it is pretty fun, but like Battlefield 3, you won't escape the whiny, annoying bastards who lie in wait.
-
Doesn't matter about the Engine, matters about how fun it is.
If there was not going to be extortionately priced DLC (Which there will be.) and tons of hackers, I would buy it, I bought the original Black Ops and it is pretty fun, but like Battlefield 3, you won't escape the whiny, annoying bastards who lie in wait.
I agree with you on the fun part, but this infinity and triarch are making shit loads of cash on these people. BF3 is trying it's best by adding new engines, features.
I had bought the original black ops also, but i believe that cod should stop making games until they come up with something new, instead of always adding weapons and stories. There is a slight drop in the cod community, many have turned their backs on black ops 2 , just like the new medal of honor.
-
Sounds like L4D2, same game, different maps, and characters.
-
My answer is in that topic. No. I don't plan on buying it. I may had some fun with Black Ops (zombies and offline matches with my dad), but I am aware that it's the same gameplay that they release every year.
Personally, I don't care what people buy. It's their choice on buying the CoD franchise after all.
No doubt that Activision are demanding for another title after making $500 million on the first day that Black Ops II came out. -_-
-
fuck no dude this game is the bee's knees
like honestly, i know CoD games tend to be similar but they really tapped into some different areas with this game. the new zombies is unique as fuck with a map where you ride a bus and shit. zombies in general has a load of new features that make it worth getting.
multiplayer i will not say much about. they changed a bit of the interference and how things work but to its core, it's still a CoD multiplayer game. its enjoyable to say the least.
CAMPAIGN! this is where treyarch shines with their excellent and interesting story (for a CoD game). they changed it up quite a bit too with that strike force or whatever the hell you call it missions.
-
I agree with Emo. As someone who recognizes the redundant behaviors of Treyarch/Infinity Ward/Activision, I can't deny that the past few Call of Duty games have been far from appealing due to the fact that they were all so similar.
Personally, I've enjoyed Treyarch's approach to CoD than Infinity Ward's simply because they're more focused on the "fun" aspect rather than the competitive. Zombies never fails to please me on BO or W@W simply because it's so diverse and different from other arcade zombie shooters. They appease to story-telling via campaign and I can't say I've ever felt truly empty when playing it. I didn't play Black Ops 2 (yet) minus from what I've been able to play at my work, but I'm impressed so far. Hell, I still played BO for zombies every once in awhile.
Multiplayer is a different story. They changed a LOT of aspects of the multiplayer but in the end, it's still a Call of Duty title and it still plays and feels the same as a CoD game should. Still, I never really played for purely the multiplayer.
Also, let me state that just because a game engine is the same doesn't necessarily mean the game engine wasn't changed in itself. The core engine is still present but many changes occur through the coding of the game.
-
The engine its self is REALLY showing its age. I say call of duty should just take a break for a couple of years.
-
i enjoyed playing black-ops 1 way more than i did with MW3. That game was a rushed mess and should never have been released. The maps are to small and bland and the graphics are all grey and horrible i mean at least black-ops 1 had some colours. I'm looking forward to playing black-ops 2 as well as trolling 13 year old kids by trapping them in corners trollface
>implying Treyarch's color pallet isn't 50 shades of Gray
-
I am finding it quite enjoyable so far. The multiplayer seems to be even more fast paced, which I don't find that fun. BO seemed to be slower paced, and the maps were bigger allowing me to take a couple of silencers and pwn people, but the new one seems to require you to check your back after every kill just because the spawn system seems to like to deposit people behind you. That being said, it seems like they finally have acheived some sort of balance, the kill streaks are few and far inbetween meaning your get spammed much less then the rest of series by death machines, and the guns all seem to have a pro and con that suits play style, more then making one gun the best and seeing everybody use that weapon.
I have yet to touch the single player and zombies is always fun. Had a lot of good times with World at War and BO zombies with friends.
-
All of you should go run into a guardian, with that said warthog on the boat is the best killstreak ever
-
like honestly, i know CoD games tend to be similar but they really tapped into some different areas with this game. the new zombies is unique as fuck with a map where you ride a bus and shit.
>Zombies
>Riding a bus
>Dayz
In all seriousness though I have to agree with you guys that I've always enjoyed treyarch's games more than infinity ward's and although I haven't purchased this one yet I feel that it will be quite enjoyable. Also the reason why the campain is better in this one is most likely because it's based off of a novel.
-
CoD 4 was excellent, but after that IW decided to go all Micheal Bay and make a mess of the single player campaign. Treyarch got to play second fiddle, but instead of just doing it by the numbers, they attempted new things with their single player and created zombies. They kept trying to improve all of the game, not just minor tweaks and hence it seems that they have become the much better developer. I just wish they could make something else, they will be forever tied to CoD until they die or the series dies.
-
Nnnnooooo. It feels fresh enough so it's wort my money at least. On top of that at least the Quake engine WORKS, unlike the other AAA fps engine we got lately (Frostbite2), it looks pretty decent, the levels are nice and varied, zombies is as much fun as ever and the SP has its moments.
-
Everyone was fucking complaining when all we had was WWII games; we've finally moved on and now they're bitching about futuristic FPS's. God damn; why?
Honestly they're all the same to me, Rainbow Six, COD, MoH, BF3; etc. I just happen to prefer COD over the others, and if I'm going to get an FPS it's going to be COD because I've been playing them since COD1, and because Zombies are AWESOME. Each FPS one has something different to offer and maybe different people prefer other games, but COD is GOLD compared to 70% of console games out there that are complete shit, from the movie game spinoffs(some of them) to Dynasty Warriors (yeah their still making those) and so on.
There is a little bit of fun to be had in every game, it's the replay value that makes the game really worth purchasing. Specially when you're dropping 60$ on the game, and with Zombies, an always improving/changing multiplayer and a beautiful action packed story line that makes you feel like you're the most badass dude on the planet; it's the perfect game for everyone. My mom and dad watched me play through MW2 on the PS3 when it first came out, well mostly my dad but he really wanted to play it; and so did my little sister. Clearly the game is doing something right.
Seriously though, ALL games are a waste of money. Except ZPS because it's free, and I've played that for 4000+ hours and I still crave it after a few days without it.
TLDR Try to borrow it from a friend then it's totally worth it.
-
I have never enjoyed a call of duty like Black Ops 2 since COD4... it's a good game. I hated Black Ops. But Black Ops 2 is the shit
-
I agree with the fact that the campaign is pretty cool, but in terms of engines, my brother , who studies 3d animation tells me that this is a prehistoric way of making the game, compared to crysis who's graphics are the best on the market.
-
I agree with the fact that the campaign is pretty cool, but in terms of engines, my brother , who studies 3d animation tells me that this is a prehistoric way of making the game, compared to crysis who's graphics are the best on the market.
Graphics don't matter - Gameplay does.
Crysis is fun, but so is tetris; Dead Space 2 is fun but alas, so is Doom.
-
I agree with the fact that the campaign is pretty cool, but in terms of engines, my brother , who studies 3d animation tells me that this is a prehistoric way of making the game, compared to crysis who's graphics are the best on the market.
Graphics don't matter - Gameplay does.
Crysis is fun, but so is tetris; Dead Space 2 is fun but alas, so is Doom.
My point is that triarch and infinity uses the same technique to make new games, it's 2012, can't they change their games? Today all you see is bang bang bang, no more interesting shit, the story is nice tough, but what i'm trying to say is that the gameplay too is starting to look the same as the other cod's. Battle field for example, they started in 1999, had 2d graphics, then they put ww2 theme with airplanes and huge maps, next bf2, wich was even better because you had the commander option, the artilery, the new planes, new way of playing. And Bf3, destroyable environnement etc etc. This means that through out the history of the cod franchise, no significant changes have been made, this is a question consumers should ask themselves, why should they keep buying the game if it looks like the old version? Gameplays, graphics, all those aspects make the game look and feel better. Mine craft has shitty graphics, but it's very gun to play, and people don't complain about the graphics because theyre ment to be what way.
-
I agree with the fact that the campaign is pretty cool, but in terms of engines, my brother , who studies 3d animation tells me that this is a prehistoric way of making the game, compared to crysis who's graphics are the best on the market.
Graphics don't matter - Gameplay does.
Crysis is fun, but so is tetris; Dead Space 2 is fun but alas, so is Doom.
My point is that triarch and infinity uses the same technique to make new games, it's 2012, can't they change their games? Today all you see is bang bang bang, no more interesting shit, the story is nice tough, but what i'm trying to say is that the gameplay too is starting to look the same as the other cod's. Battle field for example, they started in 1999, had 2d graphics, then they put ww2 theme with airplanes and huge maps, next bf2, wich was even better because you had the commander option, the artilery, the new planes, new way of playing. And Bf3, destroyable environnement etc etc. This means that through out the history of the cod franchise, no significant changes have been made, this is a question consumers should ask themselves, why should they keep buying the game if it looks like the old version? Gameplays, graphics, all those aspects make the game look and feel better. Mine craft has shitty graphics, but it's very gun to play, and people don't complain about the graphics because theyre ment to be what way.
So basically you're tired of FPS's? You also think there haven't been significant changes to the games? I thought the only thing that stayed the same was the fact that you kill people with guns; which is everyone's secret fantasy that we can't accomplish because it's illegal.
What do you want from COD? A RPG? Everyone would hate it.
-
So basically you're tired of FPS's? You also think there haven't been significant changes to the games? I thought the only thing that stayed the same was the fact that you kill people with guns; which is everyone's secret fantasy that we can't accomplish because it's illegal.
What do you want from COD? A RPG? Everyone would hate it.
I can understand being tired of fps's in general, although hating on COD because it hasn't changed is stupid. That's why the implemented the "different developer every year" system to keep the game fresh every year.
The most strikingly similar COD games are mw2 and mw3, but are both blatantly distinguishable then each other, but I digress. Call of duty in general has been arguably similar, but Black ops 2 is different, I like it so far, but its still the honeymoon period, so we'll see.
-
So basically you're tired of FPS's? You also think there haven't been significant changes to the games? I thought the only thing that stayed the same was the fact that you kill people with guns; which is everyone's secret fantasy that we can't accomplish because it's illegal.
What do you want from COD? A RPG? Everyone would hate it.
I can understand being tired of fps's in general, although hating on COD because it hasn't changed is stupid. That's why the implemented the "different developer every year" system to keep the game fresh every year.
The most strikingly similar COD games are mw2 and mw3, but are both blatantly distinguishable then each other, but I digress. Call of duty in general has been arguably similar, but Black ops 2 is different, I like it so far, but its still the honeymoon period, so we'll see.
I enjoyed the zombie mode they put in, thats one example of how cod can make their gameplay better, imagine if they started by making bigger maps, concentrated on team work and also fully controlable vehicles. Thats my opinion on the subject, i just think its too overdone, we need something new. I've been playing cod since the first one came out, during that period, cod was a huge success, you had a large community of players who enjoyed the game, then later after mw2, the next cod's were like expansions that you could buy for 60 bucks .
-
Sell 200 million dollars worth of a product on the first day consistently, then go to your employer and tell them you want to change things. See how well they would react.
thought so
-
Sell 200 million dollars worth of a product on the first day consistently, then go to your employer and tell them you want to change things. See how well they would react.
thought so
Thats one of the problems that the company is facing. The changes can make significant differences, but that doesn't stop me from demanding these changes.
-
Sell 200 million dollars worth of a product on the first day consistently, then go to your employer and tell them you want to change things. See how well they would react.
thought so
(http://skepticon.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/knapp01.png)
-
MW2 had that snowy level in the trainyard that was massive and I've seen quite a few other giant ones; but they're only good for 32 players and whatnot.
Fully controllable vehicles? Like jeeps and cars? Why would anyone want that in their multiplayer experience? They have them in story mode and didn't implement them into MP for obvious reasons. The killstreak copters and jets are bad enough; not to mention the RC car you can control and detonate on people. Battlefield3 tried to let people control tanks and Jet's but for some reason that game still doesn't feel as fun as COD; I had both for some time before selling BF3 while it was still worth something. Maybe it's because I wasn't as good at it, but the fast paced action of COD never gets old.
EVERY sequel to an older game is like an expansion. It's called a fucking SEQUEL. Go bitch about the 7 dynasty warriors and the 20 megaman's while you're at it. You notice how they're all the same game with slightly different ideas? Sonic? Madden? Super Smash Bros? Mario-Party? Super Mario Brothers? Gran Turismo?
They add more guns, new maps, new gadgets and killstreaks and everyone's happy; really they should just ditch single player completely and just release CALL OF DUTY; and update it constantly. Then they couldn't get your money as much though; so I doubt that'll happen. If you don't like it though, don't get it.
Not every person is going to enjoy every game. Kind of like how most COD players look at Zelda and go "Wow so you just run around with a sword looking for shit and solving puzzles? Do you get to kill things? God I wanna shoot something where's COD at"
-
MW2 had that snowy level in the trainyard that was massive and I've seen quite a few other giant ones; but they're only good for 32 players and whatnot.
Fully controllable vehicles? Like jeeps and cars? Why would anyone want that in their multiplayer experience? They have them in story mode and didn't implement them into MP for obvious reasons. The killstreak copters and jets are bad enough; not to mention the RC car you can control and detonate on people. Battlefield3 tried to let people control tanks and Jet's but for some reason that game still doesn't feel as fun as COD; I had both for some time before selling BF3 while it was still worth something. Maybe it's because I wasn't as good at it, but the fast paced action of COD never gets old.
EVERY sequel to an older game is like an expansion. It's called a fucking SEQUEL. Go bitch about the 7 dynasty warriors and the 20 megaman's while you're at it. You notice how they're all the same game with slightly different ideas? Sonic? Madden? Super Smash Bros? Mario-Party? Super Mario Brothers? Gran Turismo?
They add more guns, new maps, new gadgets and killstreaks and everyone's happy; really they should just ditch single player completely and just release CALL OF DUTY; and update it constantly. Then they couldn't get your money as much though; so I doubt that'll happen. If you don't like it though, don't get it.
Not every person is going to enjoy every game. Kind of like how most COD players look at Zelda and go "Wow so you just run around with a sword looking for shit and solving puzzles? Do you get to kill things? God I wanna shoot something where's COD at"
Then it's just a matter of taste, Bf3 in my opinion is better and totally worth my money.
-
Well, I would not consider it a waste if you haven't played any of the post World at War games. The whole gameplay setup won't seem like a complete duplicate if you haven't played any of the other games like it.
I got MW2 and enjoyed it for a while, then I got black ops and realized it was pretty much the same game.
Learned my lesson and stopped buying them. 60$ a year is a lot, but if you just stick with a single game and you enjoy playing it it isn't that bad. Might as well try it if you don't have any of the post WoW games already, otherwise, it'll probably be like the other games you've played.
-
I agree with the fact that the campaign is pretty cool, but in terms of engines, my brother , who studies 3d animation tells me that this is a prehistoric way of making the game, compared to crysis who's graphics are the best on the market.
Graphics don't matter - Gameplay does.
Crysis is fun, but so is tetris; Dead Space 2 is fun but alas, so is Doom.
Crysis was fun? Did you play a different game then the rest of us? Sure it had amazing graphics but the overall game was horse shit.
Complete and total waste of money on that,
Back on topic however, BlackOps2 I haven't look at it much but as far as the multiplayer goes it looks terrible even compared to blackops 1
-
I agree with the fact that the campaign is pretty cool, but in terms of engines, my brother , who studies 3d animation tells me that this is a prehistoric way of making the game, compared to crysis who's graphics are the best on the market.
Graphics don't matter - Gameplay does.
Crysis is fun, but so is tetris; Dead Space 2 is fun but alas, so is Doom.
Crysis was fun? Did you play a different game then the rest of us? Sure it had amazing graphics but the overall game was horse shit.
Complete and total waste of money on that,
Back on topic however, BlackOps2 I haven't look at it much but as far as the multiplayer goes it looks terrible even compared to blackops 1
I'm not defending Black Ops or any Call of Duty game.
But, at this point almost all Console shooters have the exact same Multiplayer with very slight "Unique" features.
Sadly it the way all Shooters have gone.
Now Command and Conquer Renegade, that was a shooter with some fun Online.
Stupid ass crate turning me into a Visheroid.
-
I heard that you can finally have selectable fire modes on your guns. Most realistic part of the game.
-
Depends on what you consider wasteful? If you enjoy the same gameplay as the older ones, then it is not wasteful.
-
Depends on what you consider wasteful? If you enjoy the same gameplay as the older ones, then it is not wasteful.
If you enjoy the same gameplay as the older ones, why not play the older ones if it has the same gameplay ? Meme9
-
Depends on what you consider wasteful? If you enjoy the same gameplay as the older ones, then it is not wasteful.
If you enjoy the same gameplay as the older ones, why not play the older ones if it has the same gameplay ? Meme9
Because the older ones don't have 10x more content and better graphics? It's like making a remake of an old movie; you have better CGI and more ideas to make it cooler so they do. Take the same game, change the story and make it more awesome and like I said earlier that's how you make a sequel.
-
So I work in a ToyStore at the local Mall; and I overheard a 5 year old boy and his 7 year old sister (guessing) discussing black-ops.
They were talking about the toys when the little boy said "I wish they had games here though, like Black Ops!" The girl said "Oh I have Black-Ops" and then they went on talking about shooting people and how much more fun it is then toys; and the girl trailed off talking about her prestige level in a previous call of duty.
I knew kids played the game but I never imagined them that small.. back in my day 7 year old girls didn't play video games much less the shooting kind. I'm kinda jelly they have the game and I don't. I'm stuck playing Borderlands 1 and SoulCalibur 5 D:
-
Buying Black ops 2 all depends on who you are or how you feel about the franchise. Personally, I believe they are starting to over stretch the franchise. I can easily see this game being the last, well, at least from treyarch.
The thing that changed CoD forever was CoD 4, this mainly started all of their futuristic/more modern things like weapons and all that other shit. But, going future was way overboard, they took a huge risk by trying this and it FAILED. Everything is fucked up. You can't just add 2 weapons and a new scope or whatever "future" things they added and say it's a game based in the future. Honestly, call of duty is terrible, and need to rename the franchise to call of quickscope.
I hate call of duty and will probably until a new better one comes out. So yes, its a waste of money and fucking time.
-
So I work in a ToyStore at the local Mall; and I overheard a 5 year old boy and his 7 year old sister (guessing) discussing black-ops.
They were talking about the toys when the little boy said "I wish they had games here though, like Black Ops!" The girl said "Oh I have Black-Ops" and then they went on talking about shooting people and how much more fun it is then toys; and the girl trailed off talking about her prestige level in a previous call of duty.
I knew kids played the game but I never imagined them that small.. back in my day 7 year old girls didn't play video games much less the shooting kind. I'm kinda jelly they have the game and I don't. I'm stuck playing Borderlands 1 and SoulCalibur 5 D:
Jesus...
-
Buying Black ops 2 all depends on who you are or how you feel about the franchise. Personally, I believe they are starting to over stretch the franchise. I can easily see this game being the last, well, at least from treyarch.
The thing that changed CoD forever was CoD 4, this mainly started all of their futuristic/more modern things like weapons and all that other shit. But, going future was way overboard, they took a huge risk by trying this and it FAILED. Everything is fucked up. You can't just add 2 weapons and a new scope or whatever "future" things they added and say it's a game based in the future. Honestly, call of duty is terrible, and need to rename the franchise to call of quickscope.
I hate call of duty and will probably until a new better one comes out. So yes, its a waste of money and fucking time.
Couldn't have said it better, Cod is a huge fail in gameplay but yet staying on the top because more and more 12 year olds buy the game and like sheep, make the company grow bigger.
-
Buying Black ops 2 all depends on who you are or how you feel about the franchise. Personally, I believe they are starting to over stretch the franchise. I can easily see this game being the last, well, at least from treyarch.
The thing that changed CoD forever was CoD 4, this mainly started all of their futuristic/more modern things like weapons and all that other shit. But, going future was way overboard, they took a huge risk by trying this and it FAILED. Everything is fucked up. You can't just add 2 weapons and a new scope or whatever "future" things they added and say it's a game based in the future. Honestly, call of duty is terrible, and need to rename the franchise to call of quickscope.
I hate call of duty and will probably until a new better one comes out. So yes, its a waste of money and fucking time.
Couldn't have said it better, Cod is a huge fail in gameplay but yet staying on the top because more and more 12 year olds buy the game and like sheep, make the company grow bigger.
Its funny because you guys think its just some twelve year old's buying the game. No there are obviously lots of teens and young adults buying it as well. It sells like crazy and it does for a reason. The gameplay can be simple and a little spammy but (cant believe I am defending CoD) Its probably the best tactical shooting game outside of CS. It requires a hair trigger, alot of looking over your shoulder, and shooting skills to come out on top.
I will also disagree with you on the future part. Treyarch actually tries to do something different when it makes its CoD aka every one they have made so far. They try new things, and try to actually put together a good story (lets not say good, maybe an ok story). My point being, is that what Treyarch has done is much better then what MW2 and MW3 have done, which is to say have an actual story that feels like it has an impact.
I enjoyed Black Ops 1 much better then MW2, and am finding Black Ops 2 enjoyable as well, hell its got Micky Rouke's voice in it (look it up)
I will certainly agree that CoD4 was the height of the series, and nothing beats All Guilled Up, a classic game level in all of shooterdom.
I will also agree that the series is stale, and if much does not change, they might lose their player base. I'll just say this. Something must be working if you are selling 200M games every single opening night. At that rate, they will outsell every Mario game combined.
-
Black Ops 2 is pretty good actually. It was Treyarch and not infinity ward after all.
-
Black Ops 2 is pretty good actually.
:-X
Black Ops 2 is pretty good actually.
:o
Black Ops 2 is pretty good actually.
Meme7
Black Ops 2 is pretty good actually.
ironymeter
Because the *new* idea of adding lava chains to the floor to shrink a map and kill you is a good idea.
-
ironymeter
Blardyblar about how everything you like sucks and the things I have or do are better.
Don't ignorant to people's views and be courteous god-damnit >.<
Anyway, I may buy this when it's on sale, I enjoyed Black Ops so I should enjoy this.
-
ironymeter
Blardyblar about how everything you like sucks and the things I have or do are better.
Don't ignorant to people's views and be courteous god-damnit >.<
Anyway, I may buy this when it's on sale, I enjoyed Black Ops so I should enjoy this.
"Don't ignorant to people's views and be courteous god-damnit >.<"
is ignorant to my view ironymeter
This a is forum this is how things work no need to get a sandy vagina about everything. I don't think the new game mechanic is a good idea and so I pointed it out. Chill out. Meme11
-
I can't wait to buy this game for my new WiiU!
-
After playing a bit of Modern Warfare 3, Black Ops 2 just seems so much better then I thought. MW3 was pretty trash and bland. I can confidentially say they are trying new things with Black Ops 2.
-
went from being prestige 7 on MW3 to playing Black Ops 2 and it was amazing, I love the feel of black ops and the new perk system, ive only had it for 4 days and im rank 30 in the league matchs and ive prestiged almost twice
-
hit rank 8 in gold league today :P was happy
-
Ya'll get owned if you come on bf3 .
-
Sigh, they are two different gameplay styles, there's no use even vaguely trying to compare them. They only share the military theme and first person shooter aspect in common.
-
Sigh, they are two different gameplay styles, there's no use even vaguely trying to compare them. They only share the military theme and first person shooter aspect in common.
Different styles or not, I think Bf3 is way better.
-
Sigh, they are two different gameplay styles, there's no use even vaguely trying to compare them. They only share the military theme and first person shooter aspect in common.
Different styles or not, I think Bf3 is way better.
Your opinion, but as Dark said they are two extremely different games, sure they both have pewpew and boom buttons, but the gameplay is very different, Bf3 is more open and tactical (And is open to ranged fighting) while CoD is more like an arcadey, kill to win kind of game - there's not a lot of skill involved, and sometimes that's the kind of game you need to play once in a while.
In any case I love both franchises, and they're both hecka fun (But if I play too much of either It makes me want to dropkick the producers in the throat.)
-
Sigh, they are two different gameplay styles, there's no use even vaguely trying to compare them. They only share the military theme and first person shooter aspect in common.
Different styles or not, I think Bf3 is way better.
Your opinion, but as Dark said they are two extremely different games, sure they both have pewpew and boom buttons, but the gameplay is very different, Bf3 is more open and tactical (And is open to ranged fighting) while CoD is more like an arcadey, kill to win kind of game - there's not a lot of skill involved, and sometimes that's the kind of game you need to play once in a while.
In any case I love both franchises, and they're both hecka fun (But if I play too much of either It makes me want to dropkick the producers in the throat.)
How is there no skill involved?? Sure it is much easier to pick up but have you seen some of the good players, they are nuts how good they really are, so I beg to differ that there is no skill.
Also I would consider CoD more tactical (small firefights, very fast paced, limited objectives) while BF3 is more strategic if you want to win a game (much bigger maps, objectives are much more important then killing people)
-
How about we put all the Babie shooters away and pick up a wheel game
Serious Sam
Now that's a game that requires pure skill
You have to train yourself to never let go of the trigger or stop moving.
And for all you Call of Duty fanboys it even has a kill Counter in the story mode
That's right, you can brag about you 700/0 kill death ratio.
And for you Battlefield three fans, I know you love your planes and cars. But, how about a Fire breathing Dinosaur and a Chicken mech.
That's right This can be yours if you just put down the Babie game and pick up a wheel gun.
Just don't shoot the wockets.
-
I like the adrenaline wich bf3 proccures me, it's so intense, team work is nice and you never get bored because theres always something to do.
-
I like the adrenaline wich bf3 proccures me, it's so intense, team work is nice and you never get bored because theres always something to do.
Teamwork? Does it have teamwork cause Bad Company 2 sure as hell didn't (and CoD never has)
Only game I have seen teamwork was TF2, cause its required.
-
I like the adrenaline wich bf3 proccures me, it's so intense, team work is nice and you never get bored because theres always something to do.
Teamwork? Does it have teamwork cause Bad Company 2 sure as hell didn't (and CoD never has)
Only game I have seen teamwork was TF2, cause its required.
Once again, I bring up Serious Sam.
Do you know how many more things you can kill when you have 4 people shooting at them instead of 1?
A lot
-
Sigh, they are two different gameplay styles, there's no use even vaguely trying to compare them. They only share the military theme and first person shooter aspect in common.
Different styles or not, I think Bf3 is way better.
Your opinion, but as Dark said they are two extremely different games, sure they both have pewpew and boom buttons, but the gameplay is very different, Bf3 is more open and tactical (And is open to ranged fighting) while CoD is more like an arcadey, kill to win kind of game - there's not a lot of skill involved, and sometimes that's the kind of game you need to play once in a while.
In any case I love both franchises, and they're both hecka fun (But if I play too much of either It makes me want to dropkick the producers in the throat.)
How is there no skill involved?? Sure it is much easier to pick up but have you seen some of the good players, they are nuts how good they really are, so I beg to differ that there is no skill.
Also I would consider CoD more tactical (small firefights, very fast paced, limited objectives) while BF3 is more strategic if you want to win a game (much bigger maps, objectives are much more important then killing people)
Aha, pardon my poor wording x)
For the average game of CoD, you don't really have to THINK about the game - at least from my perspective, and skill (Which there is, again, poor wording) comes naturally to the player.
Again, bad wording, I was aiming for strategic for BF3.
-
I like the adrenaline wich bf3 proccures me, it's so intense, team work is nice and you never get bored because theres always something to do.
Teamwork? Does it have teamwork cause Bad Company 2 sure as hell didn't (and CoD never has)
Only game I have seen teamwork was TF2, cause its required.
Tell me, when you're in a heli and you are with your friend, isn't that team work, tanks? Jet buddies, c4 buddies, tactics, sniper buddies, using your team to win a flag, BF3 is full of team work.
-
I like the adrenaline wich bf3 proccures me, it's so intense, team work is nice and you never get bored because theres always something to do.
Teamwork? Does it have teamwork cause Bad Company 2 sure as hell didn't (and CoD never has)
Only game I have seen teamwork was TF2, cause its required.
Tell me, when you're in a heli and you are with your friend, isn't that team work, tanks? Jet buddies, c4 buddies, tactics, sniper buddies, using your team to win a flag, BF3 is full of team work.
No I'm talking about actual teamwork like talking to people on the server to cover you or heal you or stuff like that, not just 1 friend working with you. More then half the time I see transport helo's leaving without people on board and tanks running full tilt to the front line just to run over a land mine, or bypass the current objective to get spawn kills.
-
Sigh, they are two different gameplay styles, there's no use even vaguely trying to compare them. They only share the military theme and first person shooter aspect in common.
Different styles or not, I think Bf3 is way better.
Your opinion, but as Dark said they are two extremely different games, sure they both have pewpew and boom buttons, but the gameplay is very different, Bf3 is more open and tactical (And is open to ranged fighting) while CoD is more like an arcadey, kill to win kind of game - there's not a lot of skill involved, and sometimes that's the kind of game you need to play once in a while.
In any case I love both franchises, and they're both hecka fun (But if I play too much of either It makes me want to dropkick the producers in the throat.)
How is there no skill involved?? Sure it is much easier to pick up but have you seen some of the good players, they are nuts how good they really are, so I beg to differ that there is no skill.
Also I would consider CoD more tactical (small firefights, very fast paced, limited objectives) while BF3 is more strategic if you want to win a game (much bigger maps, objectives are much more important then killing people)
Aha, pardon my poor wording x)
For the average game of CoD, you don't really have to THINK about the game - at least from my perspective, and skill (Which there is, again, poor wording) comes naturally to the player.
Again, bad wording, I was aiming for strategic for BF3.
I'll agree with you partially here (I have not played Battlefield three) If I were asked to legitimately describe Call of Duty nine as a "Game" the first thing I would say is "Mindless", the second word would be "Stahp"
Call of Duty require very little thinking on the players part. A no, camping in one spot and watching a door for an hour waiting for a kill is not "strategic" or "Skill testing" in fact, Automatic doors use the same technique when waiting for a person to enter their domicile.
The only time you'll find "Teamwork" or "Strategy" in Call of Duty (one - nine) is when you're playing with your friends. The rest of the time it's a rather large Fluster Cluck of people climbing over each other in a desperate bid to get that "Super 1337 rolfocopter" that also doesn't require any skill to operate.
In my honest opinion, if they put some harsher penalties in the game and removed that horrible "Kill streak" system, which I believe is the main source of "Kill whoring" it would raise team work and easily improve the game.
But as it is, Call of Duty 9 and 3/4 lacks any elements of Team play and any shred of Skill requirement that might have been had, was tossed aside when people learned, that if they ignore everyone else and don't help the team, they can get enough kills to fly a helicopter and look good.
-
Talking about team work, Heres a video of mine. Me and my teammates managed to stay in a tower for like 10 minutes and attracted the bullets from every player, the enemies were so disctracted that our allies went in to capture the flags and win.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=410CMzBX2gI
-
Tic(or whatever, I'm calling you tic) they did reduce the kill steaks. They are now point streaks and they are hard to get unless you are actually capturing the flag. They are quite reduced for TDM
spell: not with your friends, with people you don't know in the game aka in tf2 you need a medics help if you are a heavy, so usually its a random person. I don't see that happen at all in CoD/BF
-
Tic(or whatever, I'm calling you tic) they did reduce the kill steaks. They are now point streaks and they are hard to get unless you are actually capturing the flag. They are quite reduced for TDM
spell: not with your friends, with people you don't know in the game aka in tf2 you need a medics help if you are a heavy, so usually its a random person. I don't see that happen at all in CoD/BF
Well that's at least one good thing they've fixed.
There was no skill or even thought required when playing Black cocks
You'd sit in one spot and camp as many kills as you could tell you finally got a Helicopter. Upon which you'd use your "Super 1337" skills to kill roughly 30 people.
-
No I'm talking about actual teamwork like talking to people on the server to cover you or heal you or stuff like that, not just 1 friend working with you. More then half the time I see transport helo's leaving without people on board and tanks running full tilt to the front line just to run over a land mine, or bypass the current objective to get spawn kills.
You should try some squad gamemodes, with such a small amount of people on your team people usually try to communicate and win. CoD has nothing like that in place.
-
Ahgr, we are still debating this?
-
Ahgr, we are still debating this?
Last post was November 29th you stupid pants
-
Ban Inject for being a stupid pants.
-
Ahgr, we are still debating this?
Last post was November 29th you stupid pants
Oh, snap. I mega derped. Sorry.
Locked.