Blops and MW3 were like 6/10s at best for me. Why are they so deserving?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Medal of Honor: Warfighter |OT| of Knock Knock, it's Tier 1
- Thread starter Lagspike_exe
- Start date
Blops and MW3 were like 6/10s at best for me. Why are they so deserving?
I just happen to think that Call of Duty hasn't been a "quality" franchise since 2007.
I don't play CoD mulitplayer, though, so I tend to have a vastly more negative opinion of the franchise than most.
I loved Blops, hated MW2 and MW3, but either way they're extremely polished, full-featured games. You might be sick of the formula (I am, to a degree), but they do what they do really well. Same goes for sports games.
Because they arent fundamentally broken?
And we on the other side do think it has been a quality franchise.
I like how both sides are being intentionally obtuse about this, because it's pretty worthless to even argue this. Well at least I hope y'all are being intentional lol.
My opinions on the Call of Duty franchise are single-player campaign only.
I know the multiplayer is good for those who like it, so I speak only for what I play.
Last time I was able to extract a significant amount of joy from playing a Call of Duty game was 4. By 2009 it was stale. Now it's just going through the motions.
I am not sick of the formula. I'm not sure what "fully featured" means in this case vs. MoH 2010/2012, but I don't really agree that polish is enough to hide uninteresting encounters. That's -all- these games are now and the quality of the shooting setpieces has been slipping in each iteration. I think they're just running out of ideas. BlOps was a series of disconnected hallways + 60s/70s tropes, and MW3 was just a disaster.
Call of Duty for me has slipped in quality during the Infinity Ward releases. Modern Warfare 2 was filled with so many cheap, easily exploitable combinations and issues that made the game very unappealing to me. It also began Infinity Ward's disdain for the PC by cutting out features that had become common and expected for shooters on the platform. Modern Warfare 3 kept this going and was made more insulting by the fact that Treyarch in Black Ops 1, released between Modern Warfare 2 and 3, actually added many of those features back to the game only for Infinity Ward to once again remove them.
Black Ops 1 also felt, to me, to be a more solid shooter. The weapons in large part were more balanced as were the perks, with only a few glaring examples like the AK74u being the best SMG and unlockable so early on. I didn't get Modern Warfare 3 until it went on a deep discount and didn't find it to my liking. I'm optimistic about Black Ops 2 as I have faith in Treyarch to deliver a good experience that actually acknowledges and embraces the PC platform.
As for Warfighter I'm liking it so far, though it has rough edges that need to be smoothed out and I think EA committed a critical error by trying to get it out the door a few weeks before Black Ops 2. It could have been something special if they had shot for mid to late winter or early fall and given it more polish. That being said the multiplayer is decent, more so if you have a dedicated fire team partner and embrace the mechanics of that system.
Edit: I should also say that I don't really give a #@$! about the singleplayer stories of Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, or Battlefield. 99% of my time is spent on multiplayer with usually just 1-2 playthroughs of singleplayer. These games could ditch the singleplayer stories entirely and I wouldn't care. Though I will enjoy a singleplayer shooter where that received the bulk of the developers attention and multiplayer was simply an after thought. Unfortunately those are getting fewer and fewer, not to mention shooter, making it hard to justify full price. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series being an example of singleplayer-focused shooters I really enjoyed.
Black Ops 1 also felt, to me, to be a more solid shooter. The weapons in large part were more balanced as were the perks, with only a few glaring examples like the AK74u being the best SMG and unlockable so early on. I didn't get Modern Warfare 3 until it went on a deep discount and didn't find it to my liking. I'm optimistic about Black Ops 2 as I have faith in Treyarch to deliver a good experience that actually acknowledges and embraces the PC platform.
As for Warfighter I'm liking it so far, though it has rough edges that need to be smoothed out and I think EA committed a critical error by trying to get it out the door a few weeks before Black Ops 2. It could have been something special if they had shot for mid to late winter or early fall and given it more polish. That being said the multiplayer is decent, more so if you have a dedicated fire team partner and embrace the mechanics of that system.
Edit: I should also say that I don't really give a #@$! about the singleplayer stories of Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, or Battlefield. 99% of my time is spent on multiplayer with usually just 1-2 playthroughs of singleplayer. These games could ditch the singleplayer stories entirely and I wouldn't care. Though I will enjoy a singleplayer shooter where that received the bulk of the developers attention and multiplayer was simply an after thought. Unfortunately those are getting fewer and fewer, not to mention shooter, making it hard to justify full price. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series being an example of singleplayer-focused shooters I really enjoyed.
Or maybe they actually have a lot of good ideas, but no time to implement them properly?
I can only imagine that a yearly dev cycle is a total bitch. I almost feel bad for them. I just hate Activision for their bastardization of a franchise I used to love. The almighty dollar trumps artistic vision and integrity.
I want another Call of Duty game with balls, not this "safe" BS they've been cranking out year after year.
I don't think a yearly dev cycle is as much of a detriment to the Call of Duty series as you might think, at least from a design perspective. The games aren't being made by the same studio every year. Infinity Ward makes the game one year then it is handed off to Treyarch for the next, then back to Infinity Ward. What isn't known is exactly how much development is done by, say, Treyarch during the period that Infinity Ward is making their product. Pre-production for sure, but I'm curious what else.
I also get the impression from Infinity Ward of arrogance in their game design. They seem to ignore a number of changes to their formula that Treyarch comes up with that are well-received by the playerbase. An example of this was Modern Warfare 3 going back to the same unlock system where every single thing, aside from weapon attachments, was tied solely to your rank, with many perks and weapons not unlocking until very high levels. Black Ops 1's unlock system was more generous, spreading out weapon unlocks more evenly and it allowed you to select your perk loadout and weapon attachments right from the start with the only requirement for unlocking being playing a few matches to earn enough credits to purchase them. I loved that system as it allowed me to create my character build before my level hit double digits and play how I wanted to play, not be forced to grind using perks and equipment I didn't want until I hit level 50.
See, here's where the disconnect between people who play Call of Duty for the campaign and those who play for the multiplayer happens.
I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I haven't played multiplayer CoD since MW2. None of my criticism of the franchise has anything to do with multiplayer at all, I think it's just fine.
OK so my thought on it after playing for a couple of days. Single player was not up to the same level of MoH 2010. SP was a bit too all over the place for my liking. It was decent but the bar was raised by the first game and it's a shame they couldn't deliver another experience like that.
Multiplayer is fantastic so far. The fireteam feature actually works amazingly well. Don't get the hate on the maps apart from the orange map. I haven't really played enough I suppose to critisize them so I'll leave that for another day.
Game sure does look beautiful on PC. Here are some MP shots I took just now.
Multiplayer is fantastic so far. The fireteam feature actually works amazingly well. Don't get the hate on the maps apart from the orange map. I haven't really played enough I suppose to critisize them so I'll leave that for another day.
Game sure does look beautiful on PC. Here are some MP shots I took just now.
Fatal Futanari
Member
Just finished SP....really didnt like it. Was boring, MoH 2010 was waaaaaay better imo.
I only played MP for a little bit and it seemed OK.
Such a shame though, the MoH reboot series could be really great if they just gave it more dev time. It does great on the whole "fallen soldier" and "honor" feeling that it gives off.
I only played MP for a little bit and it seemed OK.
Such a shame though, the MoH reboot series could be really great if they just gave it more dev time. It does great on the whole "fallen soldier" and "honor" feeling that it gives off.
joeygreco1985
Member
Blops and MW3 were 9/10 and 8/10 respectively for me. Both games' gunplay and polish can't be ignored.
Oh, hell no. They absolutely can when the plot and story-telling devices of the game are ignored to the point of disgust. Modern Warfare 3 is polished yes, but it's also completely dead inside.
joeygreco1985
Member
I get it, you're riding that Spec Ops: The Line high. Great story. I played through it this year too. Better than MW3's.
But I don't think MW3's was bad. Totally serviceable story to wrap up the Modern Warfare storyline. I had no problems with it, and the gameplay itself was still great.
The Nature Roy
Member
Finished the campaign tonight.
Honestly, I'm bummed it's been so savaged by critics. I thoroughly enjoyed it and wish Danger Close would be given a chance to continue building their JSOC MoW world, although it's difficult to imagine that happening now.
It looked and played extremely well on my PC, and while it was definitely of the CoD mold (again), it's miles beyond in terms of all those little touches of authenticity.
I've said this a couple times before, but I'll say it again -- if you liked MoH (2010)'s campaign, ignore the reviews and pick this up. It's of similar quality IMHO (I'd even say better -- the gunplay and the graphics are both markedly improved). Some people seem to dislike the globe-hopping aspect, but I liked the greater variety.
Honestly, I'm bummed it's been so savaged by critics. I thoroughly enjoyed it and wish Danger Close would be given a chance to continue building their JSOC MoW world, although it's difficult to imagine that happening now.
It looked and played extremely well on my PC, and while it was definitely of the CoD mold (again), it's miles beyond in terms of all those little touches of authenticity.
I've said this a couple times before, but I'll say it again -- if you liked MoH (2010)'s campaign, ignore the reviews and pick this up. It's of similar quality IMHO (I'd even say better -- the gunplay and the graphics are both markedly improved). Some people seem to dislike the globe-hopping aspect, but I liked the greater variety.
The SP can be short and disposable IMO, if the game is clearly MP focused, it's core gameplay is solid, and there's enough content to support it. MW3 had pretty average maps at launch, out of 16 maps there were maybe 5 I liked (and that's pushing it). This is why the game should have been scored lower, not because the SP was average. If you're playing COD style military shooters for their SP campaigns you're going to be disappointed most of the time.
Warfighter has 8 maps, 3-4 of them are pretty good, but there just isn't enough content. Also on consoles the MP maps look very rough (worse than any console COD release), those PC screens posted above make me want to cry.
Warfighter has 8 maps, 3-4 of them are pretty good, but there just isn't enough content. Also on consoles the MP maps look very rough (worse than any console COD release), those PC screens posted above make me want to cry.
Rated-Rsuperstar
Member
Played about 2 hours of multiplayer tonight. I really like it. The buddy system is truly a great addition and makes you feel like a badass when you string some kills together and watch those bonus points pop up. And they've greatly reduced the chaining of killstreaks by making the maps more cluttered. There was nothing worse in Moh 2010 then some jerk hitting a killstreak of +20 all while sitting in a corner on the far side of the map. As for modes, I think hotspot is the best but I haven't tried home run mode yet.
soulassssns
Banned
Looks awesome.
How is the campaign? worth the price?
How is the campaign? worth the price?
mercenar1e
Member
Net_Wrecker
Member
I find nothing impressive with the gunplay of the CoD series. You may like how the games feel in terms of movement controls, but they're the same pea shooter simulation as nearly every other shooter out there. Weak recoil, sound, visual effects, hit feedback, etc. Combined with what I consider to be weak narratives, and generally uninspired scenarios (since CoD4), and I'd have to agree with the 6 or 7/10 scores, multiplayer included. (Note: these aren't "bad" scores on a full scale)
Stephen_drewz
Member
Just finished the campaign. Same as 2010, starts really slow but picks up towards the middle. I didnt enjoy this one as much as 2010 however.
Have a question which I will spoiler, don't read it if you haven't finished 2010 and Warfighter.
Thanks
Have a question which I will spoiler, don't read it if you haven't finished 2010 and Warfighter.
How does rabbit die and in which game? I really can't remember it happening. I'm referring to the last moment when Dusty says for Mother, for Rabbit. Mother was executed, what happened to Rabbit?
SolidSnakex
Member
He died in MoH 2010 from a combination of gunshot wounds and internal injuries after jumping from a mountain during an ambush. He's one of the guys (along with Mother) that you're trying to rescue in the final mission.
Rabbit was the operator that died at the end of the last game
I have determined, through hours of play that the Pointman is woefully underpowered. The AK5 and F88 both have too much recoil for longer ranges, but loses out in shorter ranges to the damage output and speed of Spec Ops. The 5.56 LaRue OBR is an interesting oddity, with its high damage and SAO trigger, but it still loses out if only due to the semi-auto nature.
What really needs to happen is that the Pointman weapons need to lose recoil and gain a little damage. 9/10 times I will beat a pointman that doesn't have his shotgun (which is completely okay where it is) out in any situation with Spec Ops or assaulter. Similarly, in gunfights where I don't have the immediate upper hand (and in a few I do), the firearms are insufficient to keep damage on target. This also goes for the HH ammo as a class ability. With the kind of recoil it gives your gun, using it to engage in longer ranges becomes pointless for all but the LaRue and sometimes it feels pointless to use it. This is a shame though, because I love the class, being able to pin someone down in a building, throw in a flashbang, and then rush their faces with the 870. I just wish that I could be more effective with it. All the other classes seem to fit the glove pretty well, each filling a clear role, but Pointman seems neglected. I'd like to see it get some loving when it has Spec Ops with signal scan to compete with as the forward rush class.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Why is that, bomba?
haven't followed this game much lately and just redboxed it tonight.
The respawning in the cod games of enemies is a real bug bare of mine, you can almost see the line you have to cross to stop them spawning. But they never get marked down for being the same thing over and over, i feel reviewers on the whole are scared to dock cod points for things like that for some reason.
Loving the SP, was expecting some rough edges but must say am not seeing them yet.
One point, why lock the game save?
Been playing this morning on living room ps3,copied the save from the cloud, did a few mission and SWMBO decided she wants the tv. Ok copy save back to cloud, to the other ps3 i go.
Can only download this save once in any 24 hours, WTF.
One point, why lock the game save?
Been playing this morning on living room ps3,copied the save from the cloud, did a few mission and SWMBO decided she wants the tv. Ok copy save back to cloud, to the other ps3 i go.
Can only download this save once in any 24 hours, WTF.
I feel like I should stand up for the SP campaign. After the worst opening levels in a military shooter ever, it really picks up and I am having a ton of fun with it.
I don't think the quality is all that far behind the COD SP campaigns so if you like them (and I do) there is no reason why this should not entertain you.
I don't think the quality is all that far behind the COD SP campaigns so if you like them (and I do) there is no reason why this should not entertain you.
The save is locked?
How the hell did that happen...I personally nuked the code that could lock the save file. It shouldn't be locked...
Sorry about that
We made every effort to NOT lock the save file. Locked save files piss me off too. Some backstory: It's actually easier for devs to lock the save file because the main thing we need to prevent are people cheating the trophies by using someone else's save game. If you want to unlock the save file, you have to put some extra code in to detect that it's someone else's save file, then let the user know why you can't load someone else's save file (and reject it), etc. But not being to back up my save games makes me crazy so we fought hard to be able to unlock the saves. I did hear there was an occasional bug that locked the save game, but I couldn't get it to happen. So I speculatively fixed it by removing the code that handled locking the save game (you know, nuking the site from orbit), but clearly I missed a spot and there's a bug somewhere else that can cause the save game to end up locked
Quick question: What was the last checkpoint you saved at when you quit playing?
Achievement glitch and reason for it: http://battlelog.medalofhonor.com/mohw/forum/threadview/2832654490025336529/
I quit on ps3 1 before the last breach before the
driving
driving
Dont worry, im playing MP on one, SP on the other
Loving it tbh.
Bloody wife's fault anyway
I quit on ps3 1 before the last breach before themission. Went to other ps3 downloaded save, resumed the breach anddrivingmission. Played some more, saved to cloud and went on other ps3. Message appeared.driving
Dont worry, im playing MP on one, SP on the other
Loving it tbh.
Bloody wife's fault anyway
D'oh, I knew it!
The driving levels are done by Black Box, they probably don't have my code change. It's not really their fault (and those guys were fantastic to work with!), we may have forgotten to ask them to make the change in their code, so I'm guessing the save file gets locked anytime you save in their level.
The graphics or the game?
both imo, your thoughts?
Still better than Call of Duty. Unless of course you're determined to shit on this game at every turn regardless. There's fun to be had if you know what to look for. You apparently do not. So quit being a drama queen and just saying the game is bad. If that's all you have to say about it, then don't say anything at all. It gets tiring, and the scores tell enough as it were.
I dont think the SP campaign was that bad. But I sure as hell didn't really know what was going on with the story.
Still would not recommend anyone to buy this game unless $10 though, lol
Who gives a fuck if it's better than Call of Duty. Call of Duty isn't the only game in existence. Why are people constantly harping on about Call of Duty whenever someone mentions this game is bad? Some sort of inferiority complex? Sure it's riding off the back of CoD but still isn't the only comparison point.
I still disagree however, this campaign takes the cake as the worst FPS campaign I've played in years. BF3 had that honour before but this just swept in and stole it away. Pure and utter garbage.
And this is a discussion forum, ignore me if you don't like my opinion.
Its my understanding that the SP campaign suffered from some major, last minute edits forced on Danger Close by EA that reordered several missions (thereby disjointing the plot) and added the first two levels ostensibly to put more action upfront.
The action as originally written set in a fairly intricate story of how the heroes were unravelling the enemy network from two ends -- the overt end with TF MAKO and the covert end with TF BLACKBIRD. (It was a parallel to the way the MOH2010 story was told from the dueling points of view of recon-focused WOLFPACK and the assault-focused NEPTUNE.) This was meant to emphasize what the military advisors said about counterterrorism being a combination of complex analysis and rapid action and give the SP a sort of "military detective thriller" feel.
I guess EA didn't think that would compete with CoD, but I would have liked to have played that game.
And before anyone asks, no I don't work for EA. Its all just friend-of-a-friend rumors. I do think it makes sense given what so many people are saying about how they enjoyed the SP in the middle of the game and how the first two missions don't feel like MoH. I also think it makes sense if you look at the link chart on the wall in the background of the Dusty scenes and watch the cutscenes like the ones before and after the Bosnia mission -- there seems to be a lot of story that was crippled in editing.
Take it for what its worth. I don't disagree with people who liked it and I don't disagree with people who hated it. There are alot of reasons to do both with this game.
The action as originally written set in a fairly intricate story of how the heroes were unravelling the enemy network from two ends -- the overt end with TF MAKO and the covert end with TF BLACKBIRD. (It was a parallel to the way the MOH2010 story was told from the dueling points of view of recon-focused WOLFPACK and the assault-focused NEPTUNE.) This was meant to emphasize what the military advisors said about counterterrorism being a combination of complex analysis and rapid action and give the SP a sort of "military detective thriller" feel.
I guess EA didn't think that would compete with CoD, but I would have liked to have played that game.
And before anyone asks, no I don't work for EA. Its all just friend-of-a-friend rumors. I do think it makes sense given what so many people are saying about how they enjoyed the SP in the middle of the game and how the first two missions don't feel like MoH. I also think it makes sense if you look at the link chart on the wall in the background of the Dusty scenes and watch the cutscenes like the ones before and after the Bosnia mission -- there seems to be a lot of story that was crippled in editing.
Take it for what its worth. I don't disagree with people who liked it and I don't disagree with people who hated it. There are alot of reasons to do both with this game.
So much wrong with this post. You're right, it is a discussion forum, so if someone compares one military FPS to another, there is nothing wrong with that.
And nice going telling people they can't talk to you unless they agree with you, when your stupid ass post itself was replying to a post YOU disagreed with.
No, there's nothing wrong with that but had you actually read the thread it's the end all argument that is constantly presented: but Call of Duty. Whenever you say this game is bad, "But Call of Duty". Apparently Call of Duty is the only game in existence and any shortfalls of that game will make everything in this pile of wank a-okay. I didn't say there was anything wrong with it but now I just need a reason for the constant mentions of Call of Duty ... Because now there's no comparison points presented or parallels drawn, it's just "But Call of Duty".
People can use it all they want. I'd just like to see people present a counter-argument for this game not being bad that isn't "But Call of Duty".
And where did I say they can't talk to me unless they agree? Sounds more like the other way around, "Oh you're being negative - Go away".
soulassssns
Banned
The game looks awesome in the screenshots though.