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

[Kramer on the phone]

Except it's made by 5 dev teams, and by all leaked accounts it absolutely needed more time in the oven. But hey, you do you.

you could say the same thing about the last one, honestly its sort of amazing they still do yearly releases, its like the last DJ. it would literally be better if after wwII, they did one game every other year. yet they dont, and the games are still relatively better than the competition. imagine an extra year on MW or CW, they could even have the excuse of "well warzone is taking up a lot of our time" CW would have been a better RPG than CP2077 or Fallout 76.

 

[Milwaukee Macho Man]

I honestly don't understand why they still have yearly releases at this point.

I don't know a single person that would have been upset at Modern Warfare just continuing for another year while they actually got Cold War ironed out.

And after all the criticism of Cold War, they're going to go ahead and push Vanguard out now?

It really makes me wonder if the people spending all the money on skins and shit actually play Warzone or if it's just streamers that make it seem popular.

 

[The Last Stand]

I honestly don't understand why they still have yearly releases at this point.

I don't know a single person that would have been upset at Modern Warfare just continuing for another year while they actually got Cold War ironed out.

And after all the criticism of Cold War, they're going to go ahead and push Vanguard out now?

It really makes me wonder if the people spending all the money on skins and shit actually play Warzone or if it's just streamers that make it seem popular.

I would think it WOULD be a loss of investment and resources with yearly releases after the foundation that Warzone created. You have all of Activision studios working on ONE title for continued support, revenue and popularity. And you want three of them to churn out yearly releases of a franchise WITH a F2P title from that series?

It'd actually be cheaper and consumer friendly to just let Modern Warfare and Cold War develop as separate but equal experiences in the same cloth. Want a grounded experience? Play MW. Want more arcade action? Play Cold War. As far as I can see, although they are structurally similar, they have mechanical differences in gameplay to where they are two different beasts.

 

[Dumpster dived waifu]

I honestly don't understand why they still have yearly releases at this point.

I don't know a single person that would have been upset at Modern Warfare just continuing for another year while they actually got Cold War ironed out.

And after all the criticism of Cold War, they're going to go ahead and push Vanguard out now?

It really makes me wonder if the people spending all the money on skins and shit actually play Warzone or if it's just streamers that make it seem popular.

This year was supposed to be MW2, but IW has enough power to pushback on Activision, espeicllay with the gigantic success that was Warzone. As a result, Activision looked at the next subsidiary making a game and told them it's releasing 2021 or else. And that's how Vanguard got slotted to this year.

 

[Serbian Peacekeepers]

I have some hopes for vanguards campaign , cod ww2 had a decent one even if it was more movie like than realistic , and the whole alt history shit might be interesting.

 

[ZMOT]

I honestly don't understand why they still have yearly releases at this point.

570 + tip, deluxe shit, reset progress so people are more eager to for MTX again to get where they were before, free marketing, less cannibalizing between titles etc.
it's the same model WoW uses for expansions.

 

[Kramer on the phone]

I have some hopes for vanguards campaign , cod ww2 had a decent one even if it was more movie like than realistic , and the whole alt history shit might be interesting.

if they were going to do alt-history they should have gone full nut, fuck the berlin airlift, we got nukes. and have it be a 1950s wunderweapon filled extravaganza. the protoganist isn't a random person, but elvis and other famous veterans of the era. you get the eastern front but combined with the war in the pacific with korea. macarthur doing his thing, hell even through in india/pakistan with some commie vs capitalist action (sure why not?) and you could even do some stuff in africa too, not northern but the lower sub Saharan parts, maybe SA or Rhodesia feels its time to deal with their issues now that the war got the allies occupied.

 

[With the actors on it?]

Yeah, I give a lot of CoD autists shit for how they try to make the skins and shit "work" in a storyline for a fucking battle royale game.

Buuuuuut I'm also kind of autistic and fucking hate all the skins in this game. The base Perseus operators are about as "far out there" as I want it to get. They're fun but they still look military. All these clown outfits and graffitti artist skins are way too stupid to me.

It was so much better when there were specific skins for specific maps IMO.

You know what they should've done?
Made it so you had the option for your outfit (e.g the clown robbery one for Baker) to be able to dressed according to the map

e.g white and black suit for Yamantau, dirt yellow and orange for satelite, etc etc.

 

[ZMOT]

You know what they should've done?
Made it so you had the option for your outfit (e.g the clown robbery one for Baker) to be able to dressed according to the map

e.g white and black suit for Yamantau, dirt yellow and orange for satelite, etc etc.

they could probably sell even more this way since now people have to e-peen in different outfits instead of just one.

 

[X Pac Heat]

I'd hate it

It's hard to see people as it is without them having legit colors of the map

 

[The Last Stand]

I'm hearing that Modern Warfare 3 is broken on Xbox One (BC); you cannot find games.

Modern Warfare 3 Backwards Compatibility Issues

Hi just a quick note about the way MW3 is running on the Xbox One at the moment there is just frequent lag spikes which myself and my friends are getting whilst playing multiplayer and survival and

answers.microsoft.com

Can anybody confirm that? Shame, MW3 was my favorite CoD.

 

[OJ Simpson]

MW3 was my favorite CoD.

Damn, bruh. You don't see that too often.

It was a good CoD, though. I liked it, I just thought it was a mediocre entry, especially given it came out during the Golden Age of the series and had to contend with the heavyweights that dropped before it.

 

[The Last Stand]

Damn, bruh. You don't see that too often.

It was a good CoD, though. I liked it, I just thought it was a mediocre entry, especially given it came out during the Golden Age of the series and had to contend with the heavyweights that dropped before it.

I've heard that consensus that Modern Warfare 3 was mediocre.

Perhaps it was burnout with the modern military game genre being saturated since Modern Warfare. I understand that.

 

[Cpl. Long Dong Silver]

I'm flying th "Not Interested" flag for yet another nigger pandering WW2 game ala BF5

 

[The Last Stand]

It was a good CoD, though. I liked it, I just thought it was a mediocre entry, especially given it came out during the Golden Age of the series and had to contend with the heavyweights that dropped before it.

Unpopular opinion, but I consider Black Ops II the mediocre Call of Duty.

 

[Milwaukee Macho Man]

Unpopular opinion, but I consider Black Ops II the mediocre Call of Duty.

I've said it before, but I enjoyed it enough but will never forgive it for introducing the future shit into the series.

The original idea of Mason being on the run from the CIA searching for an alive Reznov, if true at least (and based on all the computer stuff in BO1 seems like it) sounds like it would have been much more interesting for a campaign.

I guess the multiplayer still might have been eh though. I dunno.

 

[OJ Simpson]

Unpopular opinion, but I consider Black Ops II the mediocre Call of Duty.

That reply made it seem like I based my opinion off that dude, I hope it wasn't taken that way. I just lived through it.

But yeah don't get me started on BO:II. I felt that was the beginning of the end for CoD (at least as I knew it, and likewise for the generation of CoD players I was a part of). When twitter became bigger than it ever needed to be and devs started listening to the competitive faggots.

 

[ShortBusDriver]

What? A WW2 themed shooter with no garand? It's literally the single most popular gun that was used back then.

Battlefield V was supposed to be the British vs. the Germans, a slightly different take on the story.

 

[ShortBusDriver]

I honestly don't understand why they still have yearly releases at this point.

I don't know a single person that would have been upset at Modern Warfare just continuing for another year while they actually got Cold War ironed out.

And after all the criticism of Cold War, they're going to go ahead and push Vanguard out now?

It really makes me wonder if the people spending all the money on skins and shit actually play Warzone or if it's just streamers that make it seem popular.

Because it grosses a $1 billion dollars like clockwork every year.

And when they were selling DLC that was another $250,000,000 every year.

I get it, it's a cash cow, but I could have easily played MW2019 for another year and that's coming from someone who didn't like the game at first.

 

[The Last Stand]

I've said it before, but I enjoyed it enough but will never forgive it for introducing the future shit into the series.

The original idea of Mason being on the run from the CIA searching for an alive Reznov, if true at least (and based on all the computer stuff in BO1 seems like it) sounds like it would have been much more interesting.

I feel Black Ops II was the start of mediocrity that plagued the CoD series up until recently.

Don't get me wrong, it was a fun time with multiplayer and campaign. The Pick 10 system was a much needed change for class loadout customization. The maps were distinct enough to be standouts. Hell, they even "fixed" sniping from Black Ops 1. It does reward you through progression with extended weapon usage.

I was largely uninterested with the campaign compared to Modern Warfare 3. I liked the concept of going back and forth with past and future. I had more fun with the past segments than the future; it felt like an extension of Black Ops. Strike Force missions were just multiplayer maps of infinitely spawning enemies.

Best way to describe Black Ops II is throwing everything on the wall and hoping it sticks. The futurist twist, while not bad compared to Black Ops III, felt cliche. I couldn't remember what happened once it all ended. They tried to turn Zombies into an "adventure" mode with TranZit. The execution was horrible. You have to rely on the bus to take you all over the map. There's too many dead spots with that bus mechanic. And don't even get me started on the aesthetic and Easter egg.

You had to buy DLC to get the most out of Zombies. Even so, they relied on players doing complex Easter eggs to fully experience those maps. Not everybody has the time or skill to party up and do outrageous tasks to further your bullshit lore.

DLC, there was a LOT of it with Black Ops II. Weapon camos, calling cards, even extra class slots. In retrospect, it's not as bad compared to what would come afterwards. I'm referring to them adding loot boxes, purchasable currency, P2W weaponry. But, I will argue that Black Ops II started the microtransactions trend that plagued Call of Duty.

Overall, Black Ops II was overrated in my personal experience. Modern Warfare 3 was better.