My Theory to Why COD sucks

It fails due mto the fact that there is no balancingin it 1-3 shots per kill, also the amount of glitches in it. Moder Warfare 1 was good because idle sway affected the weapons to be balanced, a little.

 

You forgot that CoD is also a twitch shooter, and is unbalanced, but I wont mark your theory down for that.

EDIT* Now that I've gone through and read the thread, I can see why I went back to CoD4. It's jsut more balanced, though not perfect (as scobra pointed out) there is almost a counter for everything.

 

They hit on something that almost no other game offers, almost perfect class customization. Think about how many more weapons and other customizations are in Modern Warfare 2 than CoD 4. Really competitive games like Halo want everyone to be perfectly equal starting out, so they make the maps bland, make everyone pick up better weapons since they spawn with the same ones, and require many shots to kill. Such requirements slow down the game because everyone has to go find a better weapon when after spawning, and hope they do not get killed and have to take another ten seconds to respawn...again. Modern Warfare has fast paced gameplay, great customization, and things to reward people who do well.

Why would you want innovation? If everyone wants something different, go buy a different game.

Unless you are one of those competitive jerks who thinks he never deserves to die you cannot deny that it's more fun when you have all that to do.

 

Newer players always do complain that the game is way too hard on, well, newer players. Even though I agree with them to some extent, this might probably be the same thing as complaining about not being a manager of a major corporation on your first day as the receptionist.

 

I think CoD 4 was the height of the series. The campaign was cool (but not over the top ridiculous like MW2) and the multiplayer was right where it needed to be for a game like that. CoD 5 and 6 just didn't make the grade and tried to fix things that weren't broken. I don't think any CoD game to come will top #4.

 

I play matches with my friends where we will only use the default classes or only use one of the starting guns like the M4 or FAMAS, and surprisingly we do better then using higher level guns or custom classes almost every time.

 

CoD games may have a good campaign, and I think they are well put together, lacking action in certain parts, but they are ok. But the multiplayer is complete BS, I mean, you can get 100 kills just from camping, and once you get a nuke.... (in MW2) You can win the match, or even better, get a helicopter gunner and get over 50 killed. The only way to get a high killstreak is by years of practice and skill, luck, or camping like a b#$%#. Plus, some of the weapons are over powered to Hell-like damage, and some are underpowered to junk! The worst thing that you can say about a CoD game is that it is realistic... Just cause it has guns from real life doesn't mean nothing, I can shoot a guy in the foot and he dies. If you want realism, play America's Army 3, it was developed by the army!
Also, if you want a long campaign, play Oblivion or Morrowind. If you want a medium sized campaign with lots of Action, play Half-life 2.

My Scores for the FPS games I've played

CoDMW2 - 7.5/10 - good campaign, bad multiplayer

Halo (all) - 9.5/10 - Good campaign, good multiplayer

Half-life 2 - 10/10 - HOLY SH!T good campaign, No multiplayer (it's in HL Deathmatch)

 

Yeah same here...
We have the same issues...
If there's anybody out there who share something with regards to this
please post it here and share..
Thanks...

 

Honeslty I hate it how you die so fast that winning a game doesn't so much depend on your skill as your connection speed. A good 75% of the time I just can't fight back even if we see each other at the same time. And whenever I see a video when someone owns somebody who was already shooting them I can only wonder how much slower the other persons connection was. Seriously, I have never seen a gameplay video where somebody has played awsome and they weren't host or at least green.

I think my problem is because of their servers being crap. Battlefield can have something like 32 people at a time! How can I be horribly laggy everytime I play CoD yet not lag at all whenever I play that game?

 

i consider myself a PC gamer first, and i have been playing CoD since vanilla.

i hope i haven't dumbed this down to much and condescended to the console gamers.

in my experience i find a lot of them have no idea how good a PC is for FPS.

there is a rather long and complex argument about this.

to shamelessly plug PC gaming, many of the 'innovations' that have come about in this franchise have come from the CoD community.

maps, mods, gametypes, skins etc. all community made. the good ones would be added to the stock game next time round.

much as i enjoyed the game, CoD2 was where CoD changed.

and the booming market of the Xbox.

we are all capitalists here, as a company, targeting the console gamer was the best move Activision and IW made. they make millions upon millions.

UO was an expansion pack, made by what is now Treyarch (more or less).

it was a reskin of vCoD. basically this means they used all the assets of the original and made a new game. new maps, new single player etc. but they also expanded the multiplayer. vehicles, massive sprawling maps with new gametypes and it was awesome.

we played that game for close to 2 years. and the community thrived. but as it was all self created, all free.

(it retailed at half the usual price as it wasnt a 'new' game. this is also essentially what Treyarch does now, but its no longer half the price. i digress)

when CoD2 came out they had not used any of the expanded gameplay from UO.

no vehicles, no massive maps. small, lovingly created maps. not really suited to the 32 players we were used to on the PC at this time.

we didnt get CoD3, CoD4 - looking back now, that was a good game. but not stock (stock being out of the box) this game was very good once the community magic men were given the tools, created some good maps, removed all the shitty parts of the game. the noob toobs, the HUD, limiting weapons, changing the ballistics of said weapons etc. etc.

everything i hated about CoD4 was being lapped on on console. and the PC became the minority.

CoD5 was alright, (i am also very partial to ww2) the community was being supported (map and mod tools) so what we didn't like of the game we could change.

but maps and mods take time. and it doesnt make them money. with games every year players migrated.

WaW was nowhere near as popular am i right? on console.

then we had MW2. which was the console game on the PC. and i have never played it. no support, no community. not even dedicated servers. (must have for PC gaming folks - its now a 'selling point' on the box for the PC version of black ops! lmao)

then we had Black Ops. and man is it ****. i will even copy and paste the rant i used in the place i have gamed for a long time. (PC gaming is like one big custom game. the dedicated servers runs all the time (like the host, but better) and you connect to whatever dedicated server you would like. they are run by clans and you generally get a good regular bunch supplemented with joe bloggs.)

my point is this: Black Ops is great for the casual gamer. its flashy, fast paced, you can level up, customise, kill streaks, perks (concepts i have great difficulty with)

what i noticed on the PC is that every one was pretty much equal. which to many is a good thing. there is no real difference in player skill.

in closing. and man could i bore you a lot more than this :lol:

but for me, FPS gaming is about being a better shot than your opponent. it doesnt matter in CoD anymore. your death doesn't matter anymore. you are all special.

i am pretty **** at Halo. but you have to pick your shots. one player can turn a game. i love the bloom between shots. its me and my gun.

 

I've played Call of Duty 1 and 2 on the PC and 2 through Black Ops on the 360 (except for Big Red One). I think that all of the Infinity Ward games were good, polished games. Unfortunately they didn't fix the bugs and cheats for MW2 but it is inevitable that if your game becomes this popular lot of 12 year olds will play it, they will want to win, and they will find a way to cheat if they win otherwise. I think if all the spinoff call of duties (Big red one, 3, World at war, Black ops, etc.) did not exist, people would not complain about Call of Duty, if you ignore these and look only at the core games made by the creators it is a great series (in my opinion, of course). I does have competition, but it beats all of them with marketing and that it just has more players, so for multiplayer you pick call of duty. It it also faster paced, with a focus on close quarters rushing. Personally, if I want to play this kind of game, I play Far Cry 2. I prefer it because you can't just rush around killing people like in Call of Duty. The maps are designed much better and allow for actual sniping. There's also vehicles. Shotgun use requires skill, because unlike in Call of Duty, getting up to close range is very difficult to do without dying unless you are actually more skilling than the other person. Are few weapons still are slightly overpowered, but this varies with the map, the SAW is one that is often used, but it can actually be useless on some maps, so every weapon does get used. Also far cry has a really good map editor.

 

I never played cod 2, but cod 4 is really good. I wouldn't even address black ops or mw2 if you want to say cod is bad, because that's not the essence of what cod is, those games strayed badly from what cod is. Cod is cod 4 to me, and I'd be willing to bet many agree. The only reason I don't like cod, is because it attempts to be realistic, and that limits it in a lot of ways.

 

Call of Duty 4 was the first Call of Duty game I ever played, and it was a well-rewarded leap of faith. Then I bought WAW, which I thought was pretty mediocre, but I stuck with it for a while, then MW2, which took getting used to because it was so much better than WAW.

Then Black Ops, which I managed to trade in for more than I bought it for, and now I'm waiting for Respawn Entertainment's game, made by West, Zampella, and the rest of Infinity Ward's talent.

 

All you do is shoot, throw grenade, repeat until dead or game ends. At least Halo has storyline, colourful characters and SPARTANS !!!

 

Nice argument bro.

This thread needs to die, but I feel the need to say the reason why cod sucks is because it has really solid gameplay, but it also frustrates you in a thousand ways at the same time. You have to give it credit for the ability to just jump in and get your frag on.

 

It's like the new tony hawk!

 

Your half true. CoD is fun, seriously I honestly ****ing hate it when people judge others when playing another game thats not Halo. Low-lifes need to play other games. But the truth is that each CoD is only slightly different. So only buy one CoD. Im sticking with MW2 and Black Ops.

 

CoD sucks because, it's all the same. The guns, the gameplay, blah blah blah. Zombies is the only good thing, but Left for Dead beats it easily. Halo is very unique because it is so customizable (Forge, Custom gametypes, armor, Etc.). When you get into custom games, and look at all the different stuff possible, it shouldn't even be classified as a "First person shooter" anymore.

One thing I absolutely HATE about Call of Duty(Probably the reason loves it and hates Halo), it is "realistic". What I mean by that is, one shot, one kill. So basically whoever see's the other dude first wins. So if you're not looking in the right direction at the right time, you're screwed.

 

WaW started the decline of good CoD's, but not to say that it was awful. WaW was decent, and generally underrated, with the most prominent problems being the SMGs, tanks, and Juggernaut. The sniping was unmatched in any other CoD, because of the variety of Bolt Action Rifles. CoD2 and CoD4 were obviously good, I don't have to preach a common opinion, but anything post WaW, is pretty bad.

Every gun in MW2 that wasn't an Assault Rifle or the UMP was so OP, it made Sniping in CoD2 look fair and balanced. Black Ops can be summed up in one list: Famas, Ghost Pro, SoHP, Ninja Pro and Host advantage. I swear I was playing a first person Gears 2, since everyone was using the same gun, and being rapped by host. I'll give these two games that there is a lot of variety if you look past the ****, but it is so rare to run into it, since the game is played by a majority of people that want to do nothing but get good KDRs, whether they win or lose is meaningless to most randoms, which is why I tend to put the controller down so fast.

CoD seems overdone, because the amount of clones out there that comes with any big game. It happened with Halo from like, 2000-2007 with the "let's be like Halo" wave of games. I don't have a blind hatred for CoD, since I still occasionally play CoD4, and BlOps (mostly Zombies), and enjoy myself. I just think the series has blown up and become increasingly overrated, so I'll stick to Battlefield and Halo for my favorite current online FPS', thank you very much.