De You Got Some Competition

[TheErebus.]

Stuck on PC, generally inclined to believe that the COD games don't give much of a toss about the PC, will stick to Warframe and other games.

I heard Erebus say BLR is good now? Despite all the PWE crap?

Oh it's not with PWE anymore, the dev team left it. 

It's now run by Hardsuit labs (original devteam). 

 

Lol.

Every goddamn time.

Its almost becoming a meme.

Learn the forum sections.

[StinkyPygmy]

I see that point but nobody forces people to buy it xD

 

I just feel like there is a large margin especially on PC of players that get their pitchforks at the very sound of Call of Duty.

True dat.

Still, when triple A publishers keep releasing blatent, overpriced cash grabs naturally it rubs people the wrong way.

Evidently not enough people though because they're making a killing off a franchise built off overpriced DLC (still).

If you build it, they will come.

 

I'll be interested to see if Blops 3 ends up being worth its price tag.

 

 

Learn the forum sections.

Preaching to the choir compadre.

Do you think there are people that do it deliberately now just for "the lulz"?

Edited August 29, 2015 by StinkyPygmy

[TheErebus.]

Preaching to the choir compadre.

Do you think there are people that do it deliberately now just for "the lulz"?

Not sure. 

I'm pretty sure most of them are real.

[Brynslustafir]

You'd sooner find me jumping into the Lion exhibit at a zoo than playing CoD. 

[Eldnacpeek]

You'd sooner find me at the Teen Choice Awards than playing CoD

 

 

FTFY

[Brynslustafir]

FTFY

I don't know what that means. 

Wait, it's Fixed that for you. OK.

 

I still would rather be in a lion exhibit than attend the teen choice awards or play CoD. 

Edited August 30, 2015 by Plasmaface

[Eldnacpeek]

I don't know what that means. 

Wait, it's Fixed that for you. OK.

 

I still would rather be in a lion exhibit than attend the teen choice awards or play CoD. 

 

 

Now that I really think about it, I'd go with the lion exhibit. Teen Choice Awards has to be the lowest one can go.

Edited August 30, 2015 by LazerSkink

[Brynslustafir]

Now that I really think about it, I'd go with the lion exhibit. Teen Choice Awards has to be the lowest one can go.

Pretty much. 

[(PSN)Pharen]

 

Black Ops 3 is pretty enjoyable minus the technical difficulties:

 

 

 

I mean, yeah it is still CoD, but from somebody who hasn't gotten into any CoD game since MW (dem mods) and MW2 Black Ops 3 is pretty fun. Not too sure why people love to give it trash but it is hella fun :D

 

 

Anybody else play it? What do you think?

 

I played a bit of the beta, it feels like they are mixing it up a bit, I wish you had both the ability and power weapon per unit though. I still wish they'd get rid of point streaks though.

 

Learn the forum sections:

Needs more and bigger arrows.

 

I'm playing Destiny right now and I actually enjoy it.

THE HORUS HERESY BEGINS AGAIN.

*Heavy Breathing* MURDER HIIIIIM

[(PSN)Pharen]

People just give COD sh1t because they more or less release the same game every year, have a rabid fanbase that insists other wise, and they charge upwards of 80 clams for it too.

I mean, 80 bucks for what is more or less DLC? Come on now.T

 

That being said, Advanced Warfare isn't bad. Brings enough new stuff to the table that it doesn't completely feel like another very average cash cow.

We'll have to see how blops 3 fares

The reason CoD and alot of other games don't mix it up (or change/fix there mechanics, in some peoples opinion) too much each iteration is because they are appealing to a fanbase, to quote the devs of Disgaea: "Taking care of the fans who’ve gotten you here is often better than trying to bring in imaginary new ones." source: http://au.ign.com/articles/2015/07/05/a-promise-unforgotten-why-disgaea-just-wont-die

 

It's the same way I look at Monster hunter, Dark Souls and it's spinoffs, and others. These games to me never seem to change or improve. And they wont, and the reason is because of the above quote. If they change it too much they could lose there fanbase while not gaining any new ones in return.

Edited August 30, 2015 by (PS4)Pharen

[StinkyPygmy]

The reason CoD and alot of other games don't mix it up (or change/fix there mechanics, in some peoples opinion) too much each iteration is because they are appealing to a fanbase, to quote the devs of Disgaea: "Taking care of the fans who’ve gotten you here is often better than trying to bring in imaginary new ones." source: http://au.ign.com/articles/2015/07/05/a-promise-unforgotten-why-disgaea-just-wont-die

 

It's the same way I look at Monster hunter, Dark Souls and it's spinoffs, and others. These games to me never seem to change or improve. And they wont, and the reason is because of the above quote. If they change it too much they could lose there fanbase while not gaining any new ones in return.

I find those other games do actually improve and bring new things to the table though, whether that be through story/plot, mechanics, environments, and general gameplay.

 

CoD on the other hand, has a story about as interesting as a wet paper bag which never really grows or changes and it takes about 3 games in each iteration before they branch out enough to justify labeling it a sequel and putting on the huge price tag.

I understand your point, and it makes sense, its just that by comparison COD brings almost nothing new to the table each game. Only enough that makes it roughly equal to a DLC pack.

I actually wouldn't have much of an issue if they didn't charge so much for each new game and didn't pretend it was more then an expansion.

 

But eh, opinions and stuff. Overall I've never disliked the series particularly. I just felt it wasn't one worth buying every release for and that there were other, more interesting FPS to spend my time on. I do enjoy getting together with mates and having a decent run of zombies or deathmatch though. 

[(PSN)Pharen]

I find those other games do actually improve and bring new things to the table though, whether that be through story/plot, mechanics, environments, and general gameplay.

 

CoD on the other hand, has a story about as interesting as a wet paper bag which never really grows or changes and it takes about 3 games in each iteration before they branch out enough to justify labeling it a sequel and putting on the huge price tag.

I understand your point, and it makes sense, its just that by comparison COD brings almost nothing new to the table each game. Only enough that makes it roughly equal to a DLC pack.

I actually wouldn't have much of an issue if they didn't charge so much for each new game and didn't pretend it was more then an expansion.

 

But eh, opinions and stuff. Overall I've never disliked the series particularly. I just felt it wasn't one worth buying every release for and that there were other, more interesting FPS to spend my time on. I do enjoy getting together with mates and having a decent run of zombies or deathmatch though. 

" I find those other games do actually improve and bring new things to the table though, whether that be through story/plot, mechanics, environments, and general gameplay." - I really hope you weren't referring to souls, or monster hunter with that, because neither of them have story, plot is weak, mechanics have had next to no change since initial release, and even environments haven't really changed either.

 

Advanced Warfrare, Modern Warfare 1, and Black Ops 2 all had good campaigns. And to be fair, We should be glad they even have campaigns, most people buy those games solely for multiplayer.

[Renegade343]

Advanced Warfrare, Modern Warfare 1, and Black Ops 2 all had good campaigns. And to be fair, We should be glad they even have campaigns, most people buy those games solely for multiplayer.

I have not played Black Ops 2, but I will agree on Modern Warfare 1 (not the other two though). Advanced Warfare was passable, although I lost it when the antagonist decided to declare open war against the rest of the world. In an UN conference, no less. And then he gets killed in the end as well.

 

I think that falls under "Stereotypical villain rule #1: Always announce your plans out loud for everyone to hear.", in which for a relatively smart character, is just jarring. 

[Alan]

And I always thought this was DE's biggest contender.

 

[OverlordMcGeek]

Is it suppose to look cartoonish?

[Brynslustafir]

And I always thought this was DE's biggest contender.

 

OG Roomba. 

[(PSN)Pharen]

I have not played Black Ops 2, but I will agree on Modern Warfare 1 (not the other two though). Advanced Warfare was passable, although I lost it when the antagonist decided to declare open war against the rest of the world. In an UN conference, no less. And then he gets killed in the end as well.

 

I think that falls under "Stereotypical villain rule #1: Always announce your plans out loud for everyone to hear.", in which for a relatively smart character, is just jarring. 

Idk, I found the campaign in advanced warfare quite enjoyable. It had a lot of variance in gameplay than the other cods which are generally: 1 stealth mission, 1 helicopter mission, 1 on rails vehicle mission, 1 mow down mission, 1 mission with door breaching, a QTE finale and the rest just filler. Advanced warfare had a lot of vehicle sections that were for the most part controllable, and the missions were mixed up a bit from usual cod style, although there was still one "Obligatory stealth mission" and a QTE ending.

 

Black ops 2 is the only CoD where you had mulitple paths and endings, which made your choices more relevant.

[Renegade343]

Idk, I found the campaign in advanced warfare quite enjoyable. It had a lot of variance in gameplay than the other cods which are generally: 1 stealth mission, 1 helicopter mission, 1 on rails vehicle mission, 1 mow down mission, 1 mission with door breaching, a QTE finale and the rest just filler. Advanced warfare had a lot of vehicle sections that were for the most part controllable, and the missions were mixed up a bit from usual cod style, although there was still one "Obligatory stealth mission" and a QTE ending.

I am more on "is the story better than the previous CoD game, or are there going to be more of the same thing, with rather inconsistent villains, mediocre plot twists, and so forth?". Modern Warfare 1 was rather nicely crafted on the story part for the genre, but later games just sunk on the campaign in terms of story (and we do not talk about CoD: Ghosts's storyline, because that is in another league of its own in awfulness). 

 

Black ops 2 is the only CoD where you had mulitple paths and endings, which made your choices more relevant.

I am rather ambivalent on the "multiple endings" part of games, because I played a few of them where there are such "multiple endings", and either the outcome was basically the same (see Runescape with its quests), or just rather shallow that it would be better to have just one ending. 

[(PSN)Pharen]

I am more on "is the story better than the previous CoD game, or are there going to be more of the same thing, with rather inconsistent villains, mediocre plot twists, and so forth?". Modern Warfare 1 was rather nicely crafted on the story part for the genre, but later games just sunk on the campaign in terms of story (and we do not talk about CoD: Ghosts's storyline, because that is in another league of its own in awfulness). 

 

I am rather ambivalent on the "multiple endings" part of games, because I played a few of them where there are such "multiple endings", and either the outcome was basically the same (see Runescape with its quests), or just rather shallow that it would be better to have just one ending. 

I see what you mean about CoD Goats, That game really deserved the abuse it got for it's campaign. Especially the unbelievable plot armour at the end. They made some good additions to multiplayer, but at the same time also made a lot of bad additions too.

 

I mainly enjoyed advanced warfare campaign for it's gameplay, and you have to at least give it some credit for that, even if you didn't like the story.

 

Also black ops 2 was well done in it's multiple choice campaign, it was like they took some cues from deus ex, there were small things in gameplay that attributed to the way the campaign played out and which ending you got. It's also half the reason people question black ops 3's existence, because the endings were so different there was no way it could be a continuation of the storyline.

[Renegade343]

I mainly enjoyed advanced warfare campaign for it's gameplay, and you have to at least give it some credit for that, even if you didn't like the story.

Yes, but then again, given that the developers say that this would be a "new era" for this series, I was hoping that they would be able to recapture a bit of the spark that was in Modern Warfare 1's story. Granted, it was pretty fun with the added vertical mobility options in the campaign and a bit of multiplayer itself, along with other gameplay additions, but from the story development, I was kind of expecting the antagonist to win in that campaign, since the campaign characterised him as a rather sly and clever man. 

 

Also black ops 2 was well done in it's multiple choice campaign, it was like they took some cues from deus ex, there were small things in gameplay that attributed to the way the campaign played out and which ending you got. It's also half the reason people question black ops 3's existence, because the endings were so different there was no way it could be a continuation of the storyline.

Maybe, but I just find some multiple ending games liking to leave things untied or having the player choice be so inconsequential to the chosen ending that the developer might as well save time and just make one ending. 

[(PSN)Pharen]

Yes, but then again, given that the developers say that this would be a "new era" for this series, I was hoping that they would be able to recapture a bit of the spark that was in Modern Warfare 1's story. Granted, it was pretty fun with the added vertical mobility options in the campaign and a bit of multiplayer itself, along with other gameplay additions, but from the story development, I was kind of expecting the antagonist to win in that campaign, since the campaign characterised him as a rather sly and clever man. 

 

Maybe, but I just find some multiple ending games liking to leave things untied or having the player choice be so inconsequential to the chosen ending that the developer might as well save time and just make one ending. 

Well lets face it, Advanced warfare wasn't sledgehammers original concept, they were initially working on a WW2 CoD, they changed to AW after activision said that's what they wanted them to make. So I'd say that's why the campaign wrapped up the way it did, I just hope it doesn't go the way of goats and use plot armour to make a sequel, like saying "oh that was just a body double, we're so clever you never saw it coming!!"

 

But yeah, on BO2, I think you should really try it to see. I personally found it to be very good, I was also surprised with the credits ending (the A7X song).

[Renegade343]

Well lets face it, Advanced warfare wasn't sledgehammers original concept, they were initially working on a WW2 CoD, they changed to AW after activision said that's what they wanted them to make. So I'd say that's why the campaign wrapped up the way it did, I just hope it doesn't go the way of goats and use plot armour to make a sequel, like saying "oh that was just a body double, we're so clever you never saw it coming!!"

Maybe I'm just biased because I was rooting for the antagonist rather than the protagonist the whole time, thinking about it. Although saying that, I was waiting for the antagonist just straight up killing the protagonist and his other mate after he went to disable their exoskeletons, rather than just running away afterwards. Might have made a very nice shock to the standard CoD story, but on reflection, the story's still fine. 

[noveltyhero]

-snip-

Ghosts was the biggest piece of $-it I've ever played. I had so many graphical issues with it, at low settings I'd get insanely low FPS, at max settings the game would look blurry and stutter. Not even mention the guys with aimbot in it.

 

As for Runescape stories, I think I found those quests more interesting due to variety and character personalities you got to meet, rather than player option. Oh and the interesting locations. Something CoD kind of did push out after MW but then remained with the same formula.

 

I found that BO2 had a very interesting antagonist, at least for me. But with almost every CoD game (except MW-MW2, poor Ghost) the people on your side including yourself are really the problem in the whole story development. Ghosts tried to help that at the very beginning but then quickly felt short to "who in the world cares, skip."

[Renegade343]

As for Runescape stories, I think I found those quests more interesting due to variety and character personalities you got to meet, rather than player option. Oh and the interesting locations. Something CoD kind of did push out after MW but then remained with the same formula.

Now, I am not going to comment much on of Runescape quests (although I am still wanting another Elemental Workshop Quest because I enjoy the story behind it), but what I find is that with player choices in Runescape quests, they basically affect nothing to the whole quest itself (apart from that one quest of choosing whether to resurrect a powerful person or not, and that affected the subsequent quests a small bit, but that is only visual.).

 

It kind of is like what Mortal Kombat X did with their story-telling (the cutscenes, mind): Player choice is given (in the form of QTEs for Kombat), but the end result is basically the same, and nothing has significantly changed due to player choice, apart from what happens in the cutscenes (and from what I heard, once you either succeed or fail in the QTE, you can just watch the other cutscene without doing the whole chapter again, so if that is true, I would be questioning the inclusion of QTEs in those cutscenes if we can watch the opposite cutscene later on.). 

[noveltyhero]

Now, I am not going to comment much on of Runescape quests (although I am still wanting another Elemental Workshop Quest because I enjoy the story behind it), but what I find is that with player choices in Runescape quests, they basically affect nothing to the whole quest itself (apart from that one quest of choosing whether to resurrect a powerful person or not, and that affected the subsequent quests a small bit, but that is only visual.).

 

It kind of is like what Mortal Kombat X did with their story-telling (the cutscenes, mind): Player choice is given (in the form of QTEs for Kombat), but the end result is basically the same, and nothing has significantly changed due to player choice, apart from what happens in the cutscenes (and from what I heard, once you either succeed or fail in the QTE, you can just watch the other cutscene without doing the whole chapter again, so if that is true, I would be questioning the inclusion of QTEs in those cutscenes if we can watch the opposite cutscene later on.). 

Now turning the issue back on hand, for me Warframe's quests so far feel very much like those standard quests "go fetch this for me" you would have in MMOs and some RPGs. The Vor one was the most exciting minus the bad bossfight part :/

 

I know I can't ask for a rework on these quests but they don't really feel like quests at all. At least their acquisition isn't as standard as could be, but I am very scared for the Second Dream quest. I know they said it will be cinematic but if it falls short of expectation as well as having some silly lore, for me at least, Warframe's lore will just be fan fiction and cannot/will not be invested in it.

 

That is from somebody who can really get addicted to lore. (Witcher, Elder Scrolls etc.) So IMO, DE has a fine line to thread and they better not fail if they want quests to be a thing in Warframe, but that could be just me.