How come some people try to make it seem as if COD was for the unintelligent?

#81sworderPosted 10/22/2013 8:59:38 AM
sangernambu posted...
The main difference is that since the first FPS game it has ALWAYS been the same thing.

Move, Kill stuff, repeat step 1 and 2

Sports game, which you took as example, have evolved since the Soccer World Cup I use to play on my NES to modern FIFA games. I agree the game main point is still to score but you have more complex mechanics to do it.

The Doom I was playing on my Commodor is the exact same thing as your COD (speaking of mechanics, not graphics of course), you move in an area and kill everything that jumps at you.


Yes, that is every FPS ever. Including Halo.

If you don't like FPS then don't play them.
#82jrr18Posted 10/22/2013 9:14:50 AM
singhellotaku posted...
Perthboy posted...
Because COD players think pressing face buttons = button masher = mindless. Without ever realizing they are just pulling R trigger.

Because their simple minds cannot comprehend an inventory or market system (Mass Effect).
Exploring with Mako is boring so replace it with planet scanning, pulling two triggers at the same time.. AT TEH SAME TIME. It's so awesome.

Everything must be stupefied to create our the Mass Effect 2.


ME2 and 3 were terrible from an rpg fundamentals standpoint weren't they, glad to hear its not just me.


right because it's not like when you get specter weapons in the first one you can slap on some gun mods and render overheating pointless.
---
the world did end in 2012 it's just taking a bit to kick in.
PSN/steam jrr101
#83bigarsebits1Posted 10/22/2013 9:22:11 AM
A few reasons I've taken in over the past few years -

1.) Biggest one is without a doubt, gathered from MANY people I've spoken to, the online game has continually regressed. There are lots of 13 year old morons who are quite enamored with their own voice and monopolize the games with vapid comments and use of foul language.

2.) Fans of the game are perpetually buying the game and lining the pockets of a horrible juggernaut that thinks it can simply spit out a slightly upgraded game every year and make a killing. Yes it is also true of Battlefield series and even Halo and Killzone, but the add ons and dlc that is spewed out for COD is phenomenal, and unnecessary.

3.) Like the WW2 theme that has been done to death in the past (Although I though COD:WAW was pretty good), inventing feasible modern stories and single player scripts is getting harder and harder not to laugh at. Can also be taken as a hit to some people's intelligence...

4.) While I understand the great complexity of the scoring and online communication, COD has always been more of a twitch shooter. With maps that are usually smaller than some other online games, real tactics take a backseat to luck, speed on the draw, and memorization, not real tactical simulation. If you like quick, light tactical gameplay, play COD and Halo - there is nothing wrong with that. But don't try and elevate yourself to the position of a real Combat Soldier, just because you can headshot a newb at warp speed. If you want tactics, try the Armas, Operation Flashpoint(s), or even, to a lesser extent, Battlefield(s).

In short - there's nothing wrong with COD, outside my personal feelings about the parent company - I have no beef with REAL COD players, it's the jackarses that ruin it for others when they play that kills COD Multiplayer for me, not the actual game...
---
"Facere Non Dicere"
#84The_Man_On_FirePosted 10/22/2013 9:49:55 AM
COD series got taken over by the "Jock " mentality and some gamers see it as unintelligent

mostly PC people
#85renzsweetPosted 10/22/2013 9:50:51 AM
I have served in war overseas and I have worked for NASA, having finished college before third grade (yes, seriously), so I have some perspective on this. I never had to train my brain for gunplay. Shooting develops from instinct and muscle memory, among other things. My 8 year old nephew that failed every grade since 2nd has been able to win various contest in fps games. I am not saying all that play these games are necessarily less than able, but to say that they require intelligence is just not true.
---
I praise the name of Jesus.
#86XtremeWRATH360Posted 10/22/2013 10:10:30 AM
Because each game sells more than the previous, don't see why people spend money on a game that gets replaced every year or why you need a new version of the same game every year.
---
Juan is........NUMBER 1!
XtremeWRATH-Gamertag
#87Broly4561Posted 10/22/2013 10:59:55 AM
sworder posted...
Broly4561 posted...
This right here is why. "A killstreak mechanism is why I keep playing" hurr du derp. /generalCODplayer

Thanks for killing the gaming industry.


ITP: Playing one game for whatever reason = killing the entire gaming industry


Any moron who buys a game based on rewards for a consistent kill streak isn't helping the industry. Learn to critically think.
#88Exodus_PrimePosted 10/22/2013 11:51:41 AM
Yes but what about this?


http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/665/8871/original.jpg
---
Xbox One and PlayStation 4
Because I can buy both.
#89Sevi_neyPosted 10/22/2013 1:12:20 PM
Want to know what keeps people coming back to CoD year after year? New killstreaks, loadout set-ups, perks, maps and weapons. In other words, CoD keeps people coming back year after year. And after that disaster of a BF4 beta, the only competition for Ghosts' expected #1 spot in the FPS department will be either Titanfall or Shadowfall.
---
You will see us everywhere, even in your nightmares...
http://i.imgur.com/Y97KtJD.jpg
#90Dudeman315Posted 10/22/2013 1:29:48 PM
Devil_wings00 posted...

Ya It's kind of annoying how people pretend the first one was some sort of uber deep RPG. All ME2 did with the skill system is take away the arbitrary points and roll the charm/intimidate directly into your conversation choices. As far as the weapon skills they really didn't do much anyway since they forced you into 1 or 2 guns anyway so ME2 just made it so what type of guns you used was based on the class instead of class AND points. In ME1 you got a swath of points and every 5 points or so into every tree you got something that actually mattered the other points were just arbitrary stat increases that really wouldn't be noticed anyway in actual gameplay.

Actually taking away the charm/intimidate and installing the % system in ME 2 meant that even if you choose 100% of the renegade options presented to you, you could still be f'd out of choices because choices you hadn't even had the opportunity to to make would count against you it was terrible. They also took away weapon customization, health management (cause you regen like other generic shooters), and the heat system that some fans loved.

All ME2 did was take away the illusion of a D&D style RPG and removed all the pointless busy work and focused on what you WOULD be doing most of the time, shooting sh** with guns and using Sci-fi powers. It actually made that fun instead of a chore you had to do to get to the next story bit.

Your FPS vs RPG bias really shows here--I'd rather do that and have scripted combat sequences based on my choices in ME2, because all I could think was GoW did it better. That said I loved ME1 combat.

Was their more to ME1 in terms of what you could do in the menus? Yes but all it did was slow down the game while you got to pretend that putting one point into something actually mattered. Did it make the actual gameplay as tight as ME2/3? No, not even close. ME1 was clunky as hell compared to 2/3.

Or to RPG players made the game fun with all that thinking and math, not just point and shoot blam-blam-splossin action of ME2.

I do agree ME2 was a little TO simple because when you strip the illusion that your choices actually matter it makes the game feel pretty shallow but it was shallow in ME1 as well, they just covered it better but the trade off was clunky gameplay.

Yeah like dialoging my way through side missions that was terrible, oh wait actually it made the game far more enjoyable. You don't like RPGs which is fine, but please stop acting like ME wasn't heavily change between 1 and 2. I though the "clunky" game play was perfectly fine, in fact I STILL regard ME1 as the best shooter game since Doom 2. But I also appreciated the rpg-ness of ME1, and the menus, customization, health pack management, Mako exploration, etc...