May 25, 2011

Gamer Chat? Nope, This is Gamer Rant!

Ok so Gamer Rant is going to be my little outlet to unleash the frustration in the gaming world. This rant is about good ol’ Call of Duty. First things first. When I played Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare I was blown away. That game raised the bar and set a new standard for first person shooters and it was a fantastic game. There I said something nice. We fast forward to now and we have Modern Warfare 3 on the horizon. Here is the problem, with the exception of zombies (great idea) what exactly is new about the next Call of Duty titles? You get a new story right? Run through maps shooting everything and blow stuff up. Multiplayer is different? No…you pay for a glorified map pack really. My point is since Call of Duty hit gold with the first Modern Warfare, they haven’t shown us anything new or different since. Yes zombies was a good thing, but now Black Ops gave us a shopping style leveling process. Ohh I get to buy things now. They gave us playercards so kids can make a rough image of a penis next to their name. Ohh the creativity! Still not with me on this? Ok try something for me. I am sure everyone has seen the newest MW3 trailer because it plays on TV every 10 mins. Step one: watch the trailer. Step two: take out anything that says 3. Step three: realize that trailer could be used for any other CoD game because its nothing new! “That wouldn’t work for World at War because it was set in WW2.” Absolutley correct…..I see my argument has failed miserably. Now don’t get me wrong this is a problem for all shooters alike. I only use MW3 because its what they are trying to shove down our throats this time. I really hope with a new game will come something more interesting than the usual dismal repeat of the previous year. I want to see what Battlefield 3 is going to do. I as a gamer, just want something new. I don’t want to pay $60 for a new video game case.

8 comments

  1. ScrotusKilmystr - May 27, 2011 8:17 am

    the operative pharse in all the positive arguemets are” it’s a good FORMULA!” ” if it ain’t broke don’t fix it…” sure if I order a pizza I don’t expect meatloaf but maybe some one should make meatloaf pizza time for Activision to come up with a new formula and use the “VISION” in Activision more these 6 hours huge explosion slow dramatic camera pans and trannical villians hell bent on total world destruction titles are running alittle thin
    I will admit Black ops did have a huge amount of verity as far as multi was concerned but nothing that hasn’t been done in another shooter at one point or another
    My biggest complaint other than a feeling that I’m always moving around in the mud is the constant and unchecked cheating that has overtaken the franchise the boosting and hacking is just silly If I even play Black ops I use the bots ( they’re cheap but they can’t boost!)

    DICE seems to be putting an effort out as far as innovation everoments ARE destructable the story and gameplay seems to be evolving from title to title even if there’s a big stink about player per match caps not hitting 128 and staying at 64 and 24 per session

    Reply
  2. CharcoalCoyote - May 26, 2011 3:36 pm

    Countercounterargument, zero!

    1. I’ll give you that their formula works. However, most of that formula working is due to incumbency and not being halo. If you have an Xbox 360 and you play shooters on Live, chances are you’re playing CoD or Halo. It’s not that there aren’t any other options, it’s just that those two dominate the market. If you like Call of Duty, I’m not really judging you. As far as mechanics go, it’s a clean shooter. I just don’t like that they essentially do a model swap on some weapons, crank out some new unmemorable maps, come up with some number modifying perks, and then use the terms “new” or “realistic” anywhere.

    2. The story is okay in Modern Warfare. However, it’s horribly underdeveloped, and there’s little to no supporting material anywhere. If you asked me to name characters from those games, I’d be able to come up with Soap, Price, Roach, and Ghost, two of which were only introduced in MW2. I get that the whole “Modern Warfare” is just starting out, but even at Halo 2, you got a much larger sense of “epic as hell”. If the enemies recurred and weren’t so random, it’d be different. Long story short, to have a better story, Modern Warfare needs more cutscenes, more in-game dialogue relevant to the story, and more acknowledgement that there is something other than online multiplayer.

    3. It’s not changing because there’s a PC/Mac style monopoly on console shooters. Activision is a great company for ruining formerly good series of games and turning them into money machines. They’re good at making money, but they’re shells of what they once were. Also,a lot of my argument here has to do with the consolification of online gaming. Article pending.

    Reply
  3. zero_19 - May 26, 2011 3:30 pm

    I always want to see a great game come along. And honestly I’m really hoping that BF3 will be that “one” for the next year or two.

    Reply
  4. AceOfNades69 - May 26, 2011 3:26 pm

    I agree with the whole “aint broke, don’t fix it”, but I just feel like shooters have started bluring together because no one sticks out. Yes CoD sells more (BF3 may take that title this year)but it just feels bland to me. Maybe its because that bar got raised with CoD 4 and now the expectation is even higher. I would just like to see a shooter come along and really change things up in a good way.

    No matter the opinion I am sure all of us want to see a great game come our way.

    Reply
  5. zero_19 - May 26, 2011 12:17 pm

    Ok, I’ll be the dissenter here.

    While I agree for the most part with what you’re saying here are my counter arguements.

    1. You don’t like it because it’s not changing yearly. But let’s consider this, you’re buying a shooter, and it is behaving like a shooter (forget all the leveling gimmic crap, it’s still a shooter, that’s just their “Thing”). I don’t buy a pizza and then wonder why it’s not meatloaf. I bought pizza because I wanted pizza.

    2. The story is actually quite interesting, if you pay attention it’s clear that one man, a terrorist, is playing world power against each other. This next installment appears to be carrying that story arch further.

    3. It’s not updating/changing drastically. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if it aint broke don’t fix it. They have found a formula that works, why would they alter it dramatically? This point kind of feeds into my first one, it’s a shooter, not an RTS or a puzzle game, the mechanics of a shooter are pretty straight forward, run, gun, blow shit up, achieve objectives, progress the story(if there is one, some games don’t even have that).

    I’ll probably pick it up, along with BF3, I’d like to see where the story goes, I’ll be getting it because of the story, not because I want it to suddenly break the mold on what a shooter is.

    Reply
  6. CABXYZ - May 25, 2011 9:19 pm

    I couldn’t agree more, the main purpose of sequels is to evolve and progress while retaining a flowing narrative; COD sadly has neither going for it. By the end of MW2 I was to the point of “Don’t know who I am fighting or what I am fighting for, but the explosions are pretty”, MW3 looks like the same. Lets set up locals every one knows and put alot of Michael Bay “Mother F@cking explosions” and call it “destructable enviroments”. The game is running on a modified ID tech 4, which not to put ID down, is EXTREMELY out dated and can’t hold a candle light to the behemoth that is Frostbite 2. The multiplayer is standard fare and honestly do not get what everyone goes apeshit over, I feel like Battlefield has a more well developed multiplayer, atleast in my opinion anyway. Will it sell like hotcakes? Yes the Lemings need their yearly CoD and to the average gamer it feels new but to people that work in the industry or play games quite a bit can see the same rehash year in and year out, this is the same reason I burned out on the Madden franchise and held out last year, not enough change for my money. I’ll buy Battlefield 3, I love the guys (and women) at DICE and feel they always produce a top notch product, but I am beginning to grow tired of the modern shooter,it’s alot of brown. Brown buildings, brown dirt, brown weapons, shooting brown people(whoops!). I would welcome a change next year, space marines are always popular.

    Reply
  7. DrPixel - May 25, 2011 4:57 pm

    I HONESTLY hope that MW3 will at least throw us something new this time. Black Ops was literally just World at War…..in a new setting. As you stated, the new additions to Multiplayer were pretty “meh”, but they weren’t anything worth getting a whole new game for. Great rant by the way. 😀

    Reply
  8. CharcoalCoyote - May 25, 2011 3:07 pm

    Allow me to continue ranting on Call of Duty. At this point, gameplay is more akin to Borderlands than Counter-Strike. In Modern Warfare, I was able to put up with the leveling up to get better guns and “perks”. However, at this point, CoD is a shell of a shooter that’s employing the same tactics as World of Warcraft and Farmville to get people to play the same crap over and over for no reason. Is there a good competitive scene? Sure. I played a few seasons of Modern Warfare 2. However, there’s also competitive WoW. 95% of the gamers that play it are measuring their e-peens with their “levels” and “kdr”. Who gives a damn? I want to win! Now, these CoD games are not terrible. They’re just nothing new, and mediocre.

    I’m quick to hold Halo in higher esteem. People might point out that they tend to do a similar “repackaging thing”. However, pretty much anyone will agree that Halo has a far deeper story that holds throughout, and the change from Halo 3 to Reach was far more significant than Modern Warfare 2 to Black Ops.

    Great idea! I think I’ll rant like this similarly in the future. I’m a ragey person.

    Reply

Have your say

Archives - Powered by WordPress - A theme by cssigniter.com