UESP Forums

Does anyone else play these amazing games, that require tactics, skill, and teamwork? Then this thread is for you! /sarcasm

I really, really hate Call of Duty. Unfortunately, it wasn't always like that for me. I will admit... I played... a lot of Modern Warfare 2. Granted, more than half that time was just laughing at how bad it was while I took down 10-year-old kids that scream into their mics whenever they die, then yell at their mom for more mac and cheese...

These games have been a cash-in since Modern Warfare 2, and since then, they have sucked all intrigue or hype that the franchise may have had when the Modern Warfare series began (a.k.a when it became big). Also, I found a great video that basically shows you exactly what Call of Duty is. Link.

Do I hate Battlefield because it's popular? No. Do I hate Halo because it's popular? No. We're not hating these games just to hate them, it's because they're generic military shooters that have seen very little innovation over the past 4 years.

People like different things. Somebody likes Call of Duty, fine. Somebody dislikes Call of Duty, fine.

And I dislike it. I'm not saying people can't enjoy it.

Nothing wrong with a bit of Call of Duty in my opinion... it's a very social game that is fun to blow off steam with. I like the competitive aspect of it when I'm chilling out at a mates house. Clearing out a room of bad guys with grenades, or having a throwing knife competition is all good fun.

The graphics are good, the gameplay is fluid, there are lots of choices for weapons and perks... I don't get why it's slated so much. Annoying kids on there? you can simply mute them, it's not really that much effort.

The whole point of multiplayer is just to keep you entertained, thank god it isn't realistic. If you want more realism just play the single player campaign... which a lot of people seem to forget is part of it.

After a few months the game goes down to like 25 quid anyway(second hand can be even cheaper).. that's only about five hours work if you have a crappy fast food job.

The games themselves aren't really that horrible, and I've even had a few enjoyable times with my friends. That said, the only times I actually do enjoy Call of Duty is when I'm with a bunch of my friends, and not alone listening to a bunch of 11-year-olds swear at me. The single-player campaigns are alright, but not nearly long enough to get into and enjoy.

Really, what irks me - and I think this is the obvious main problem - is that (ever since Modern Warfare) they simply keep releasing pretty much the same game, every year, with only minor improvements to the graphics, a few different guns, and a couple new multiplayer modes. And then they charge 60 bucks for it. Really, if they waited a few years between releases to think about what would actually make it fit the description of a "new" game (and then implement it, of course), they wouldn't face so much criticism.

EpicAbrad wrote:The games themselves aren't really that horrible, and I've even had a few enjoyable times with my friends. That said, the only times I actually do enjoy Call of Duty is when I'm with a bunch of my friends, and not alone listening to a bunch of 11-year-olds swear at me. The single-player campaigns are alright, but not nearly long enough to get into and enjoy.

Really, what irks me - and I think this is the obvious main problem - is that (ever since Modern Warfare) they simply keep releasing pretty much the same game, every year, with only minor improvements to the graphics, a few different guns, and a couple new multiplayer modes. And then they charge 60 bucks for it. Really, if they waited a few years between releases to think about what would actually make it fit the description of a "new" game (and then implement it, of course), they wouldn't face so much criticism.

Yep. And I agree, I've spent countless nearly sleepless nights having silly competitions with my friends online or offline. Modern Warfare 2 is where I draw the line, everything else after that lost the fun for me.

Modern Warfare would've been the best CoD if it had gotten rid of the gamebreakers (quick-scoping, tubes, commando, last/final stand). It had the best hitmarker system.
Black Ops improved a lot, but it's hitmarker detection was god damn awful.

i liked modern warfare two i didn't mind getting 5 kills in a 1 hour death match but when my mute feature stopped working i just stopped playing, 12 year old kids really don't know how to shut up and enjoy the game

Sure I play Call of Duty. Not that much, but I enjoy it. I will always buy a new CoD (except when MW3 came out, and I decided to buy BF3, turned out to be a bad decision), just for the new graphics, new guns and new maps etc. But I will always gravitate back to CoD4 and World at War, why? Those two were the best in the series, the pinnacle for CoD, ever since then the quality in game has dropped like a bag of [&@%!] hanging from a washing line.

CoD 2 is the only CoD.

Crepe the Ashlander wrote:Sure I play Call of Duty. Not that much, but I enjoy it. I will always buy a new CoD (except when MW3 came out, and I decided to buy BF3, turned out to be a bad decision), just for the new graphics, new guns and new maps etc. But I will always gravitate back to CoD4 and World at War, why? Those two were the best in the series, the pinnacle for CoD, ever since then the quality in game has dropped like a bag of [&@%!] hanging from a washing line.

A Bad decision? Why?

Mars wrote:CoD 2 is the only CoD.

*brofist*

I actually have an unopened copy of MW3, with signatures of all the devs on the case. Pretty awesome. Never going to play it, though.

ClottedCream wrote:

Crepe the Ashlander wrote:Sure I play Call of Duty. Not that much, but I enjoy it. I will always buy a new CoD (except when MW3 came out, and I decided to buy BF3, turned out to be a bad decision), just for the new graphics, new guns and new maps etc. But I will always gravitate back to CoD4 and World at War, why? Those two were the best in the series, the pinnacle for CoD, ever since then the quality in game has dropped like a bag of [&@%!] hanging from a washing line.

A Bad decision? Why?

Didn't really like it, I listened to my friend's judgement that BF3 would be better but it turned out it was better in their opinion, I thought it would be better than previous BF's (I have a bad history with Battlefield), turned out I was wrong.

Heh, I like BF3 much more than any COD since 4. (Never played WAW)

yeah, CoD 4 is the best, really. Frag grenades was big problem but the overall game was just too much fun.

By far, I prefer nearly any other game. Fantasy or Sci Fi RPGs, ...Whatever other types of games there are that I totally forget...I love story based games with depth and interesting characters and plotlines that tug at your heartstrings.

COD...Is not this. (Though it was satisfying, after spending X amount of hours on MW3 struggling through the campaign on Veteran, killing the last super duper boss baddy and watching the credits roll. [After having spent X MORE hours beating it on Veteran for my brother.])

But that doesn't mean it's garbage. It's fun, it's engaging, I like the rush when you're running to defuse the bomb, only a few seconds left on the clock, bullets flying everywhere and explosions and death. But I just die playing multiplayer. It's satisfying enough killing mobs of noobs or casual players or a few veteran CODers, but I do not handle my deaths well.

Nowadays, I only play it to vent steam if I feel like murdering something.

But their "fan service" is TERRIBLE! They throw out scraps of DLC for ungodly prices, and they throw them out fairly OFTEN. I totally refuse to buy any future COD games. I will not support that wh*rishness.

But, if somebody gives me COD as a bday or xmas gift, I won't object

Pfft, COD.

Give me Arma 2 any day.

First I thought BF was the better game by far. Now that they already announced BF4 I have my doubts.

Abel wrote:First I thought BF was the better game by far. Now that they already announced BF4 I have my doubts.

Well, since they don't have any immediate ideas on the next Battlefield, looks like EA better start cashing in before it dies!

EA are worse than Activision. Worse than Activision. Seriously, that is bad. They put forward the idea of charging money for bullets.

Knight Captain Kerr wrote:EA are worse than Activision. Worse than Activision. Seriously, that is bad. They put forward the idea of charging money for bullets.

God lord, get the blast shields.

I mean, they REALLY try to kill any amount of fun you can have in most of their games, excluding BF. I mean, you need an online passcode for an offline RPG (Reckoning) .

And yet you schmucks still buy the games because they advertise them well.

Really, its the consumers fault for it being in this case.

Spiney wrote:And yet you schmucks still buy the games because they advertise them well.

Really, its the consumers fault for it being in this case.

I haven't bought a CoD game in over two years.