Call of Duty: Black Ops site live, game releases Nov 9th

firehawk12 said:
Fake co-op is almost the same as no co-op

What the hell is "fake" co-op?

You play through the single player campaign in cooperative or competitive co-op with up to 3 other people. Seems to be real co-op to me. It's not hard, man.
 
Bumblebeetuna said:
Wow this thread is troll central now. Even got one in here hyping up Infinity Ward's storytelling abilities what the fuck :lol

FPS narratives are 100% shit and IW is at the top of the shit pile. My bar is so low that any attempt to do something interesting with telling a story in first person gets my attention.

Until Ken Levine gets off his ass and announces his new game, IW/Respawn's all I got at the moment. :lol

Bumblebeetuna said:
What the hell is "fake" co-op?

You play through the single player campaign in cooperative or competitive co-op with up to 3 other people. Seems to be real co-op to me. It's not hard, man.

Real co-op: Gears of War 1/2. Halo 3/ODST. Left 4 Dead.

Fake co-op: Fable 2, CoD:W@W. MW2: Spec Ops (except the AC-130 level and the Helicopter level). Maybe Splinter Cell: Convinction if you listen to Giantbomb's latest podcast.

That's my working definition anyway. A "real" co-op game is built for co-op from the ground up with multiple players in mind. You can play it single player, but it expands to co-op. Fake co-op is a game that takes its single player component and shoves a second player into it for no reason other than to put "co-op" on the box.
 
ezekial45 said:
That was a very interesting trailer. Didn't really show much, but it's doing much more than i expected.
Nothing in that trailer was remotely interesting...because it showed nothing.
 
Yeah it's hard to tell much of anything. Did I see an astronaut at one point?

Hey firehawk12, thanks for schooling us all on real co-op vs fake co-op. That was... interesting. :lol
 
yoopoo said:
Nothing in that trailer was remotely interesting...because it showed nothing.

Says you. I was expecting it to be strictly in the past, but those scenes with dialog seem to take place in the present. Involving some form of experimentation or interrogation. I got a Assassin's Creed vibe from it.

I still think it's interesting.
 
firehawk12 said:
Real co-op: Gears of War 1/2. Halo 3/ODST. Left 4 Dead.

Fake co-op: Fable 2, CoD:W@W. MW2: Spec Ops (except the AC-130 level and the Helicopter level). Maybe Splinter Cell: Convinction if you listen to Giantbomb's latest podcast.

That's my working definition anyway. A "real" co-op game is built for co-op from the ground up with multiple players in mind. You can play it single player, but it expands to co-op. Fake co-op is a game that takes its single player component and shoves a second player into it for no reason other than to put "co-op" on the box.

What? I don't think you can say Splinter Cell Conviction is "fake" co-op while something like Halo 3: ODST is real co-op. Splinter Cell is built around letting two agents function together in their own ways, and has plenty of points where both players are forced to do different things to accomplish a singular objective. ODST on the other hand is a mess with co-op. It in no way indicates what your progress is like on collectibles, or if they stack, the open world design makes navigating as a group frustrating and confusing. It's implemented purely for the sake of feature parity with Halo 3, but the entire campaign is designed to be experienced by a singular player.
 
Considering Nazi Zombies one of the few good things to come out of CoD in a long time, I'd totally be interested if I wasnt avoiding Activision's games on principle. Of course that mean everyone else I know will be all over it.
 
yoopoo said:
Nothing in that trailer was remotely interesting...because it showed nothing.

Wait for the Gametrailers frame-by-frame analysis of the teaser, they'll likely post it by the end of the weekend. I'm more than willing to bet that some little details and hints about gameplay were hidden in that mess of a teaser.
 
firehawk12 said:
FPS narratives are 100% shit

At least you can admit IW writes shit stories.


firehawk12 said:
Real co-op: Gears of War 1/2. Halo 3/ODST. Left 4 Dead.

Fake co-op: Fable 2, CoD:W@W. MW2: Spec Ops (except the AC-130 level and the Helicopter level). Maybe Splinter Cell: Convinction if you listen to Giantbomb's latest podcast.

That's my working definition anyway. A "real" co-op game is built for co-op from the ground up with multiple players in mind. You can play it single player, but it expands to co-op. Fake co-op is a game that takes its single player component and shoves a second player into it for no reason other than to put "co-op" on the box.

Uh.. Gears and Halo 3 are the same game in co-op that they are in single player. In Gears your partner is either AI controlled or human controlled but the game plays out the same. Same with Halo 3, at least what I played up until I got bored of it. No different than World at War. And what co-op is in ODST? Firefight? World at War has Nazi Zombies. And if you think those levels weren't built for co-op then you simply didn't play it.

You're grasping at straws with this silly logic.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
I'm a tenth level prestige player in COD4 and I can say with a 100% certainty that I will not be buying this game.
As a person who also played the shit out of COD4 (it's my favourite game in the entire series), I can safely say I am buying this game. I like Treyarch as a dev and I have faith that they will deliver a game that I will most likely enjoy moreso than MW2. All I care about is redemption, because, again, MW2 was a sin in my books.
 
Trailer was interesting. It looks like given the nature of the time-hopping storyline, it's going to be very disconnected like MW2. (This could be a bad thing.) I'd laugh my ass off if it had some sort of choronaut thing like Seven Days where you're a black ops soldier sent back in time to correct the course of history so that good ol' Democracy wins again.

Here's hoping the MP is great! Hopefully Treyarch doesn't feel the pressure to appeal to the MW2 audience and keeps their design choices smart like they did with W@W.
 
soultron said:
Trailer was interesting. It looks like given the nature of the time-hopping storyline, it's going to be very disconnected like MW2. (This could be a bad thing.) I'd laugh my ass off if it had some sort of choronaut thing like Seven Days where you're a black ops soldier sent back in time to correct the course of history so that good ol' Democracy wins again.
I doubt that's the case, but if they do I sure as hell hope they include a smart cripple and sexy russian chick too
 
So this new COD seems to be some sort of MW3? I don't mind the idea, I've been a fan of that kind of military games (loved Counter Strike, Tactical Ops, America's Army, COD4, MW2, etc..).

As far as they improve on some stuff (which they better do..) and get rid of some of the retarded perks, this could be a very enjoyable game.
 
It seems strange that they didnt annouch it on the 30th anniversary of the embassy siege in a few days.

it will be great to play as Rusty or Johnny Mac.
 
Don't really wanna burst anyones hype bubble but it looks like another re-skin to me.

Ok, the trailer doesn't show much but using the same god damn engine 4 times in a row, Is that some sort of a record for a franchise in one generation of consoles? :lol
 
CozMick said:
4 times in a row, Is that some sort of a record for a franchise in one generation of consoles?

Isn't the CoD4 engine just a modified Quake III engine? In that case, it's a lot more than four. :P
 
Zyzyxxz said:
nah any fan of military tech knows about the SR-71

Such an awesome plane for it's time with iconic shaping. It's on my top ten list of favorite planes. Top of that list is still the A-10 though, followed by the P-51.
 
donny2112 said:
Isn't the CoD4 engine just a modified Quake III engine? In that case, it's a lot more than four. :P

I remember an interview where the developers said there maybe some similar lines of code left, but they are almost totally different engines now.
 
Looks like we play as Solid Snake.

fernoca said:
What about their other dozen or so games..or they all blow too?
That you don't like their Call of Duty games is one thing, but that the whole team blows..because of those 3 games is another. :p

All treyarch's games apart from Die by the Sword have outright sucked. They're current job is to take a great franchise and turn it into mediocre garbage. They're just riding on the shirt tails of Infinity Ward. If it weren't for the fact they have CoD's brand power behind their games they wouldn't even get a mention on this forum.
 
Zenith said:
All treyarch's games apart from Die by the Sword have outright sucked. They're current job is to take a great franchise and turn it into mediocre garbage. They're just riding on the shirt tails of Infinity Ward. If it weren't for the fact they have CoD's brand power behind their games they wouldn't even get a mention on this forum.

Well, that's not true. They copy IW's COD and these games aren't garbage (until they copy MW2).
 
Raiden said:
Interesting to see all the people who suck at MW 2 here. Im sorry, IW overdid the whole killstreak rewards stuff true... but Infinity's Call of Duty's >>>>> all of Treyarch's ...

Is that so? WaW ws fun, MW2 felt like a parody of MW1.

Ah you edited.
 
Screencaps from trailer, provied by NoFrag.com :

004ffd.jpg
 
Everything went by a bit too quick, but it at least showed more than most debut trailers...

Ten-Song said:
What? I don't think you can say Splinter Cell Conviction is "fake" co-op while something like Halo 3: ODST is real co-op. Splinter Cell is built around letting two agents function together in their own ways, and has plenty of points where both players are forced to do different things to accomplish a singular objective. ODST on the other hand is a mess with co-op. It in no way indicates what your progress is like on collectibles, or if they stack, the open world design makes navigating as a group frustrating and confusing. It's implemented purely for the sake of feature parity with Halo 3, but the entire campaign is designed to be experienced by a singular player.

Bullshit.

Not only does it immediately count an audio file for everyone in the lobby if one person picks it up (if you already have it, of course it wouldn't count it) but you can hit the Back button and see how many you have in total, and the map there is simple enough to use with any map you can find online with all of the audio files, which even glow bright yellow and give clear audio cues if you haven't picked it up yet.

Did I mention that every other Achievement in ODST has a live Achievement counter as well? As yes, they all do.
 
firehawk12 said:
Why?
It's like people forget that when when all the cool WW2 shit was going on with their Call of Duties and Company of Heroes that a few million Jews were systematically exterminated.

I think it's one thing to create a massacre but it's another to actually recreate one.
 
Cosmo Clock 21 said:
I hope that lurker from Treyarch comes back and posts more about development like he did for Reflex. Lots of interesting stuff there.

I'd be surprised if that guy still has a job after some of the stuff he said :lol
 
subversus said:
Well, that's not true. They copy IW's COD and these games aren't garbage (until they copy MW2).

The Big Red One and CoD3 says hi. And they're poor copies, not exact duplicates. Use your brain.
 
Ok the screencops confim that I was right about the blood fountains. I thought the violence in WAW was just silly.
 
Zenith said:
The Big Red One and CoD3 says hi. And they're poor copies, not exact duplicates. Use your brain.

Man, they had 8 months to do COD3. And United Offensive says hi. Use your brain.
 
Top Bottom