Call of Duty "has almost ruined a generation of shooters"

[p0intman]

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/13/ca...ra-2-interview

Seems accurate

[Hamma]

Hah - great article. Agreed.

[ChipMHazard]

Interesting dev perspective, one that I agree with. One could argue that the CoD series, especially the later games, are a different more arcady type of FPS.
It does raise the question as to how much a developer should or has to cater to that generation to succede in getting players interested in the more complex gameplay aspects. I'm sure there are those who would raise that question with PS2
One game that has actually been good at this is War Thunder. although it's not an FPS.

[krnasaur]

The only problem I have with cod is that it has turned into madden. Yearly updates with minimal improvements to the game. (with some "Improvements" that hinder the game IMO, but it is not a super detailed post so I wont go into those)

I tried finding a reason to hate the game, but its a smooth running, arcade shooter. Its a fun game. When I don't feel like playing a super serious game and i just want to have some fun, I go shoot some bitches in cod.

Am I a cod fanatic? no. I play maybe 1-2 Hrs a month. I just don't get all of the cod hate

[ChipMHazard]

I think all the hate comes from the fact that the CoD series is so darn popular and has had such an impact on the genre, if not the industry as a whole. Some will see it as being a positive impact and some will see it as being a negative impact.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by ChipMHazard

I think all the hate comes from the fact that the CoD series is so darn popular and has had such an impact on the genre, if not the industry as a whole. Some will see it as being a positive impact and some will see it as being a negative impact.

I think part of the problem is that any game's success is being compared to CoD's sale numbers.

Quality of the game is more than if it reaches an arbitrary number of sales. :/


But it's true, in PS2, one of my biggest complaints is the lack of adrenaline rush. There's not the FEAR of losing, or not winning, it's the knowledge of losing and not winning and the knowledge of winning before you started that makes some of the PS2 gameplay boring.

And that largely stems from things that are more deathmatch than conquest in nature.



Hack and holds in PS1 were filled with tension, both resecuring and holding (aside from the wait). But yes, I think the lack of patience has a lot to do with it. I'm hoping people will realise that just because people aren't used to it more, you shouldn't confirm that you shouldn't be used to it anymore. And that's what a lot of games have been doing by gradually becoming more CoD style. It's to the point where a lot of people gave up and argue that you couldn't ever get the CoD crowd in. Who gives a fuck about the CoD crowd? They move on anyway at the next CoD title. The way you retain them and have them come back is by providing something OTHER than CoD and OTHER than other games provide. >.> IMO.

Unique Selling Points. Make there be lots.

[ChipMHazard]

Agreed, some of my favorite games are niche games that require plenty of patience to even have a chance.
An FPS trying to compete with the CoD series is like MMORPGs trying to compete with WoW, the quality tends to suffer especially when it comes to variation and more unique gameplay elements.
Hopefully PS2 will soon see some of the lost sense of tension, in a win or lose situation, returned with the future updates.

Originally Posted by Figment

Quality of the game is more than if it reaches an arbitrary number of sales. :/

Heh, I also realize the irony of my present day attitude when I used a similar argument, but reversed, against your suggestions on the old beta forum.

[Baneblade]

That is the problem with big fish, they got big by being more appealing to the casual crowd who don't want to actually learn anything new. They just want to pick up and play as good as everyone else.

[Program]

I agree, go Tripwire. I love RO2, should probably try the original.

[Maidere]

It isnt even remotely accurate. Computer games attracted a huge CASUAL audience in the last 7-8 years,CoD attracted a huge CASUAL audience to the shooters. Those people wont be playing Quake 3 12 years ago.
TF2 is still very popular by example, CS:GO, NS2 is far from dying afaik.
And it's kinda the same case with the WoW-clones - if you want to make a popular and successful shooter, dont make it similar to CoD.

[camycamera]

good article. CoD has ruined my favorite FPSs like crysis and BF by removing the complexity for the casuals. the bastards.

[omega four]

Originally Posted by p0intman

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/13/ca...ra-2-interview

Seems accurate

Perhaps. But for others like myself, who are casual gamers that have limited time to game at any given point in time, games like COD are a godsend.

All I can say is that I'll never have the time to fight those PS1 battles which lasted for a 12 consecutive hours.

Some of us have to go to work and generally have a life in the real world....

If some of you desire a complex FPS military simulation, my recommendation is to join your country's armed forces. Not only do you get to get involved in a complex endeavor, you also get to do something useful and helpful for your country as well.

[Baneblade]

Your mistake is thinking you have to be there the entire battle. Half the epic feeling of PS1 was starting a fight late night Friday after work and then the same battle is going all the way on into Sunday.

[Babyfark McGeez]

Originally Posted by omega four

Perhaps. But for others like myself, who are casual gamers that have limited time to game at any given point in time, games like COD are a godsend.

All I can say is that I'll never have the time to fight those PS1 battles which lasted for a 12 consecutive hours.

Some of us have to go to work and generally have a life in the real world....

If some of you desire a complex FPS military simulation, my recommendation is to join your country's armed forces. Not only do you get to get involved in a complex endeavor, you also get to do something useful and helpful for your country as well.

Advertising joining the military on a video game board. Nice.
Aside from your hilarious attempt to mimic a cannon fodder recruiter, i have quite a hard time to see your point. There were allways games like CoD, Unreal Tournament and Quake for example have exactly the same "quick fix" concept.
The problem nowadays is that EVERY. SINGLE. commercial fps is modelled after CoD. It's not that the segment of "30 mins hop in and out" games was absent before. It's that everything else is absent now and all games are like that. But since you played the "i gotz real life" card right after your statement you don't really seem to have a point there besides pointing out how "casual" you are hm?

You know, you remind me an awful lot of this "i am the spokesperson of casuals" guy who posted video after video on the official forums, despite being so casual and having no time. The patronizing tone of your post and the gullible attitude shown towards military service is just the icing on the cake.

[Shogun]

i don´t get, why developers try to dumb down their games to make them more like Cod!

you can´t compete with the king by trying to copy it! how often did this work? how many clones of successful games managed to be better than the original, or at least as good?

the only way to make a successful game is by delivering something new and innovative! if you aim for the cod crowd, you will lose them to the next cod or bf game that has better graphics and physics.

ps2 offered 2000 players and giant maps. but that was the only thing that cod didn´t have. all other things the cod people like are better in the original for sure. (i never played cod, but i guess ps2 can´t compete in terms of graphics and gunplay)

if ps2 still had all the cool concepts from ps1, the players would be hooked up by those unique gameplay features. and there would be no other game for them to run to for a long time.