Call of Duty Thread - Potential return to form? Or nothing but cope on the horizon? You decide!

Vault Boy said:
I'd settle for it being better than III's campaign, that shit was just fucking horrendous.
Click to expand...
I saw gameplay where that new mason guy was screaming about keeping calm and imagining an ocean waving or something. What was that about
 
carltondanks said:
I saw gameplay where that new mason guy was screaming about keeping calm and imagining an ocean waving or something. What was that about
Click to expand...
It wasn't even a Mason, the game had barely anything to do with Black Ops other than a brief Menendez reference and Nova 6 playing a minor role in the backstory. The game tried way too hard to be a cerebral story, which made the whole thing damn near incomprehensible (it took some guy with way too much time on his hands making a Reddit post to make any sense of the ending).

That's not even getting into how dull the missions themselves were, or the asinine decision to make them rely on a consistent online connection (checkpoints didn't matter, you'll have to restart a mission if you disconnect from the server at any point).
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Draza, A Friendly Hoovy, The Last Stand and 1 other person
Vault Boy said:
It wasn't even a Mason, the game had barely anything to do with Black Ops other than a brief Menendez reference and Nova 6 playing a minor role in the backstory. The game tried way too hard to be a cerebral story, which made the whole thing damn near incomprehensible (it took some guy with way too much time on his hands making a Reddit post to make any sense of the ending).

That's not even getting into how dull the missions themselves were, or the asinine decision to make them rely on a consistent online connection (checkpoints didn't matter, you'll have to restart a mission if you disconnect from the server at any point).
Click to expand...
That sounds terrible
 
carltondanks said:
That sounds terrible
Click to expand...
It was, and then Treyarch didn't bother with a campaign for BO4 (or it got canned, I'm not sure which).

I thought having an additional year would benefit them, but Treyarch just kept dropping the ball after BO2.

From what I've seen, Cold War seems to be a nice return to form, at least this time it'll fit in with the series.
 
  • Optimistic
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Draza, A Friendly Hoovy, The Demon and 1 other person
Vault Boy said:
It was, and then Treyarch didn't bother with a campaign for BO4 (or it got canned, I'm not sure which).
Click to expand...
I heard they canned it after the tepid response from Black Ops III. An online only CoD was experimental for sure. Look at CoD: Mobile. I'll give them that.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: The Demon
I think Cold War is interesting since its actually picking up right after Bo1 and not flash backs. I am not impressed with the multiplayer since to me I think MW2019 was a much needed advancement for COD in terms of gameplay, engine, and presentation. Its clear cold war was rushed due to the bad history we know but maybe the story will be cool.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Draza and The Last Stand
The Last Stand said:
I heard they canned it after the tepid response from Black Ops III. An online only CoD was experimental for sure. Look at CoD: Mobile. I'll give them that.
Click to expand...
That was the official story

Unofficially most people believe the story got canned to work on Warzone instead.

I'm more likely to believe the Warzone story because eventually unfinished footage of the story mode surfaced.

The video has been deleted but you can read a bit about it here:
 
Vault Boy said:
and then Treyarch didn't bother with a campaign for BO4 (or it got canned, I'm not sure which).
Click to expand...
The "Blackout" battle royale mode probably took most of their time and budget.

iceteayo said:
Its clear cold war was rushed due to the bad history we know but maybe the story will be cool.
Click to expand...
I wonder what SledgeHammer was working on before Activision decided to restructure the company and order Treyarch to make CoD 2020.
 
iceteayo said:
I am not impressed with the multiplayer since to me I think MW2019 was a much needed advancement for COD in terms of gameplay
Click to expand...
If I might ask, are you more of a Battlefield guy? Something I've noticed is that the people who really like the way MW2019 plays are the ones who came over from BF or players who are new to the franchise, whereas people who've played CoD since ~BO2 tend to hate it with a passion. It's been interesting to watch both sides go at it. (Even if I have to visit R*ddit to see it.)

I put this down to MW playing slower and more ""tactical"" (read: sitting inside a door with a shotgun instead of rushing), where most other CoDs allow both slow and rushing playstyles. The game was built to cater to lower skill levels, and has many, many problems for people on the higher end of the skill curve. This also resulted in CDL pros unilaterally hating the game. (To the point where Seattle Surge player Octane was fined multiple times because Activision got butthurt about the criticism. Octane ended up posting a clip to Twitter of him deleting MW after getting knocked out of champs.)

As to Cold War's graphics, both games use Infinity Wards new engine, with 3arch tweaking it to fit BO's gameplay/graphics style. The game simply looks more colourful and slightly more stylized due to the art direction.

The animations, however, are one of the things I won't defend. They look worse across the board, likely a casualty of the rushed dev cycle.

A few more complaints I have* are:
-Strict scorebased matchmaking. (Quick rundown on SBMM, the game tracks your score/KD, and tries to match you with similar players.) The complaints against this are that it prioritizes levels over connections, so if you play well, you might never have a good ping as it matches you with pros from the other side of the world. This is a problem for people like myself with sketchy Internet connections. It also means that there is no games where you can mess around with random weapons, as everyone else in your lobbies will always be using the meta guns and whatever exploits/advantages they can find.
-Tanks on Crossroads are brutally OP.
-Crossroads in general isn't a good map. It needs more players to flow properly. (I went an entire game running around finding maybe a dozen gunfights.)
-Snipers were OP.
-Gun balance in general needs a bit of work. The AK74u/Type 821 were beating ARs at range which made ARs feel weak.
-The alpha apparently used dynamic resolution, scaling the game from 1080p to 720p to keep 60fps. This is likely where most of the graphical complaints come from. It needs to be optimized before launch, as this is unacceptable.
*A lot of these will be or already have been fixed, apparently the Alpha build was already a few months old.

Basically, to tl: dr this spergery, if you enjoy slower shooters, stick to MW, you'll enjoy it more. If you like Treyarch's past titles, such as BO2 and BO4, you'll probably get more enjoyment out of Cold War.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: The Last Stand and Bush did USS Maine
Favorite campaign moments?

"Baseplate, this is Hammer Two-Four. We have visual on the target. E.T.A sixty seconds."
(Sonar pinging in soundtrack)
wp3115630.jpg
 
  • Feels
Reactions: MrJokerRager and Draza
A Friendly Hoovy said:
Basically, to tl: dr this spergery, if you enjoy slower shooters, stick to MW, you'll enjoy it more. If you like Treyarch's past titles, such as BO2 and BO4, you'll probably get more enjoyment out of Cold War.
Click to expand...
Will Activision or IW/3arc allow that? When a new Call of Duty comes out, the previous one loses support and relevance. A lot of care was put into MW (2019), I'd hate to just see it fall off the waste side just because another CoD is out. They could coexist with each other for a while. Warzone may or may not help with that.

They're built on the same foundation, but handled slightly different as you said. One's more "slower", another is "faster."
 
The Last Stand said:
Will Activision or IW/3arc allow that? When a new Call of Duty comes out, the previous one loses support and relevance. A lot of care was put into MW (2019), I'd hate to just see it fall off the waste side just because another CoD is out. They could coexist with each other for a while. Warzone may or may not help with that.

They're built on the same foundation, but handled slightly different as you said. One's more "slower", another is "faster."
Click to expand...
Servers stay up for a number of years. If you want, you could still play back to BO3 for sure, past that I'm not sure. There are fan-run servers for BO2 and MW3 on PC though through a custom client, Plutonium.

As for the population, you can often fill a match of TDM, although lesser played modes are usually dead by year three of any given game.

Infinity Ward will probably stop supporting MW when CW launches, although Warzone will keep getting updates perpetually. IIRC, Raven handles of Warzone, while IW will work on whatever the next CoD is.
 
A Friendly Hoovy said:
If I might ask, are you more of a Battlefield guy? Something I've noticed is that the people who really like the way MW2019 plays are the ones who came over from BF or players who are new to the franchise, whereas people who've played CoD since ~BO2 tend to hate it with a passion. It's been interesting to watch both sides go at it. (Even if I have to visit R*ddit to see it.)

I put this down to MW playing slower and more ""tactical"" (read: sitting inside a door with a shotgun instead of rushing), where most other CoDs allow both slow and rushing playstyles. The game was built to cater to lower skill levels, and has many, many problems for people on the higher end of the skill curve. This also resulted in CDL pros unilaterally hating the game. (To the point where Seattle Surge player Octane was fined multiple times because Activision got butthurt about the criticism. Octane ended up posting a clip to Twitter of him deleting MW after getting knocked out of champs.)

As to Cold War's graphics, both games use Infinity Wards new engine, with 3arch tweaking it to fit BO's gameplay/graphics style. The game simply looks more colourful and slightly more stylized due to the art direction.

The animations, however, are one of the things I won't defend. They look worse across the board, likely a casualty of the rushed dev cycle.

A few more complaints I have* are:
-Strict scorebased matchmaking. (Quick rundown on SBMM, the game tracks your score/KD, and tries to match you with similar players.) The complaints against this are that it prioritizes levels over connections, so if you play well, you might never have a good ping as it matches you with pros from the other side of the world. This is a problem for people like myself with sketchy Internet connections. It also means that there is no games where you can mess around with random weapons, as everyone else in your lobbies will always be using the meta guns and whatever exploits/advantages they can find.
-Tanks on Crossroads are brutally OP.
-Crossroads in general isn't a good map. It needs more players to flow properly. (I went an entire game running around finding maybe a dozen gunfights.)
-Snipers were OP.
-Gun balance in general needs a bit of work. The AK74u/Type 821 were beating ARs at range which made ARs feel weak.
-The alpha apparently used dynamic resolution, scaling the game from 1080p to 720p to keep 60fps. This is likely where most of the graphical complaints come from. It needs to be optimized before launch, as this is unacceptable.
*A lot of these will be or already have been fixed, apparently the Alpha build was already a few months old.

Basically, to tl: dr this spergery, if you enjoy slower shooters, stick to MW, you'll enjoy it more. If you like Treyarch's past titles, such as BO2 and BO4, you'll probably get more enjoyment out of Cold War.
Click to expand...

I did play Battlefield games but my first COD was probably big red 1 and I have always been a fan of the franchise. I understand MW2019 feels "different" but it is in no way realistic or slow to me. I mostly play objective modes CTF, Demolition, and Search and Destroy. I find all the maps in MW2019 play HORRIBLE in Team death match it feels like a slog and can see where all this realism/slow accusations MW gets. I also think MW2019 does cater to rushers did you know the stim shot can refresh your tactical sprint? Or how strong shotguns/SMGs are. Though I understand your problems so I wont go further I just feel like MW2019 is an actual step forward the franchise needed.

Warzone is also the best BR on the market I used to hate BR games till Warzone got me hooked.
 
When will Black Ops 1 get discounted on the PC as the game is fun.

Apparently since I changed my Playstation username, Black Ops 1 doesn't save my progress on Ps3 multiplayer. Only thing that game is good for though is Nazi Zombies.
 
MrJokerRager said:
When will Black Ops 1 get discounted on the PC as the game is fun.

Apparently since I changed my Playstation username, Black Ops 1 doesn't save my progress on Ps3 multiplayer. Only thing that game is good for though is Nazi Zombies.
Click to expand...
Yeah, changing your PSN name doesn't retroactively work for PS3 titles. That will mess some things up.

It's not like XBL where that was built in from the beginning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back