Page 3 of 3 First 123
Results 51 to 74 of 74

  1. Post
    #51
    Matthew James Maguire wrote:
    I know that's probably a rhetorical question, but: on the tiny chance that they read the GP forums and take what is being said to heart, I'd say they'd be more swayed by reasoned arguments regarding a game's flaws than "MW3 players are ***gots LOL". I'd almost be willing to bet this has never happened during the development of any game though, unless a developer has for some reason wished to read about why they should consider inserting a rusty sword into their basal ganglion via their urethra.

    Lords knows if I know if I were developing a game I would surround myself with yes-men of the highest order rather than attempt to gauge public opinion, and be happily oblivious as to the shite-ness of my game until repo men showed up to take my couch from under me.

    But as we all know, in the end it all comes down to money. Acti will keep on doing the Acti thing until their revenue streams dry up, because they have grown quite accustomed to jetpacking to the supermarket, among other things. Maybe at this point the glorious CockBlastorama 3000 will finally get a distribution deal and the fans its cockblast-centric gameplay demands. But I'm not holding my breath.
    If it's any help, my argument has never boiled down to "CoD players are phaggots"

    I wasn't meaning only Gpforums, but all forums in general. There are heaps of trolls out there sure, but also plenty of people complaining with good reason. They shoulden't be muzzled because fanboys are getting their feelings hurt.

  2. Post
    #52
    Oh, totally. I wasn't directing that at you or anyone on these forums in in particular. And honestly I'd never want anyone to feel that they couldn't express their opinion - opinions are what make the Internet great. Or am I confusing opinions with pornography? Whatever.

    And yeah, I know even when people do write stuff that makes me facepalm, it's usually out of frustration with a game rather than hatred. I just wish there was a bit more constructive criticism going on, and less anger/personal attacks between members of the gaming community. We all love gaming so why feel the need to hate on each other so hard? But yeah now I sound like a condescending jerk so I'll shut up. There is Baconing to be played. Peace out

  3. Post
    #53
    Ramza wrote:
    Nice to see you have to resort to personal attacks. Calm down son. Call of Duty will be a giant regardless of it's continued lack of quality because it's fanbase is massive. So if people don't speak out, how will they ever learn how people really feel? Or is it not ok to have an opinion, one must like it or GTFO these forums.

    Like it or not, Call of Duty doesn't get hated on for no reason, and not just because it's popular, it get's hated on because it does nothing to innovate, continues to get by with minimal effort by it's developers under the oppression of a company that only cares about profit, and is basically the same old shit for the last several years because Acti knows they will reap oceans of cash regardless of what they do. I'm hopeful for BF3 but realistically, it's not going to crush CoD even if MW3 turns out to be 1 hour long with 12 guns and 1 map.

    If that wasn't true, i'm sure everyone here would be worshiping from the altar of Kotick, just like you.

    1. I never use personal attacks, if anything thats just the way I speak

    2. I'm not a CoD fanboy, I only ever liked the storyline from MW1 and MW2 and I dont even like the multiplayer that much

  4. Post
    #54
    attack_by_fire wrote:
    1. I never use personal attacks, if anything thats just the way I speak

    2. I'm not a CoD fanboy, I only ever liked the storyline from MW1 and MW2 and I dont even like the multiplayer that much
    Wait, what, you like the MW2 story? I mean fair enough, personal taste and all, but it was a terrible story, plot holes galore, pointless characters, little to no character development. Jesus, at least CoD4 made you care about characters so when they died you were like "ZOMG not them!"

    Spoiler:


    Makarov didn't make sense either, just a generic villain. Zakhaev had a history, and tbh it was awesome in CoD4
    Spoiler:


    The campaigns in CoD appeal because they're like playing an action movie, but cool set pieces etc. only stay cool for so long. "Run to position A, save person B, shoot wave of enemies C" Wash, rinse, repeat

    CoD4 awesome, anything past that bad

  5. Post
    #55
    The_Pard wrote:
    The campaigns in CoD appeal because they're like playing an action movie, but cool set pieces etc. only stay cool for so long. "Run to position A, save person B, shoot wave of enemies C" Wash, rinse, repeat

    CoD4 awesome, anything past that bad
    Pretty much. Which is why I found Medal of Honor 2010 so good. That also had great character development along with missions that were fun, but never seemed insanely over the top.

  6. Post
    #56
    BLOPS campaign was the most boring SP experience of my life. Only endured it to unlock the president zombie mode

  7. Post
    #57
    s0cks wrote:
    Pretty much. Which is why I found Medal of Honor 2010 so good. That also had great character development along with missions that were fun, but never seemed insanely over the top.
    I'll never agree with you on MoH but BLOPS was definitely sub-standard. Tried to pull off the feel MW1/2 gave but didn't really cut it.

  8. Post
    #58
    COD 2 was the last good Call of Duty title.

  9. Post
    #59
    The_Pard wrote:
    Wait, what, you like the MW2 story? I mean fair enough, personal taste and all, but it was a terrible story, plot holes galore, pointless characters, little to no character development. Jesus, at least CoD4 made you care about characters so when they died you were like "ZOMG not them!"

    Spoiler:


    Makarov didn't make sense either, just a generic villain. Zakhaev had a history, and tbh it was awesome in CoD4
    Spoiler:


    The campaigns in CoD appeal because they're like playing an action movie, but cool set pieces etc. only stay cool for so long. "Run to position A, save person B, shoot wave of enemies C" Wash, rinse, repeat

    CoD4 awesome, anything past that bad
    I agree the house cleaning made little to no sense.

  10. Post
    #60
    Skorky wrote:
    I'll never agree with you on MoH but BLOPS was definitely sub-standard. Tried to pull off the feel MW1/2 gave but didn't really cut it.
    Lol, one day you'll play it and see all the good that I see. But yeah BLOPS was painful. On par with Homefront for worst FPS campaign of that genre. I mean, unlimited enemy re-spawns until you hit an invisible checkpoint? That's so 5 years ago (Call of Duty 3).

  11. Post
    #61
    From what I've seen and heard looks like MW3 might actually be quite good. Looking forward to it's release any way as it never hurts to have lots of good games to play.

  12. Post
    #62
    attack_by_fire wrote:
    This game looks shit

  13. Post
    #63
    matt8485 wrote:
    So basically its MW2 minus all the bullshit.
    That bullshit will be added back in with DLC

  14. Post
    #64
    MoxPearl wrote:
    That bullshit will be added back in with DLC
    Really? Thought they just released over priced map packs rather than actual weapons.

  15. Post
    #65
    all they need to do now is add some kind of crop planting/gathering system and a cash shop. maybe slip in some advertising billboards in every map to maximise profits.

  16. Post
    #66
    void wrote:
    Really? Thought they just released over priced map packs rather than actual weapons.
    Mox is just trolling. Don't take that post of his seriously.

  17. Post
    #67
    s0cks wrote:
    Lol, one day you'll play it and see all the good that I see. But yeah BLOPS was painful. On par with Homefront for worst FPS campaign of that genre. I mean, unlimited enemy re-spawns until you hit an invisible checkpoint? That's so 5 years ago (Call of Duty 3).
    I played MoH through on day one and enjoyed it thoroughly (for the most part, minus a few angered moments with a couple silly bugs) but didn't think it was anything special, overall. And while it may not have as many fantastical moments comparatively, don't forget the (****ing annoying and seemingly endless) level where you're stuck holding out the remains of a house while angry arabs close in from all corners? Made me rage

    Multiplayer was also nothing special (DICE made sure of that) but kept me entertained for a little bit, even if I found the killstreaks weak and amusing :P

    On BLOPS vs Modern Warfare, I just think Infinity Ward do a much better job of creating a smoother, more finished multiplayer and singleplayer experience... Treyarch always seem to miss the level of polish that they bring, even if the over-the-top storytelling isn't everyone's cup of tea. As for the gameplay, they've definitely never involved any huge changes to that department and the fact that Treyarch develop a very similar product doesn't help at all. Maybe there'd be less animosity among fans of FPS had Treyarch gone in a different direction and used a different engine. I don't doubt there was little point in developing a different engine for MW3, but it's definitely going to be used as flak. I will never ever say that CoD has been "low quality". People who say this just don't like the sort of gameplay that defines CoD, and that's fine, but don't kid yourself.

    There's a stigma attached to Call of Duty that shall remain among communities like this, but this doesn't worry me. One day you'll realise DICE is the same, producing rehashed, albeit prettier, games, with stupidly priced map packs which add little, and, overall, the same greed and desire to run their respective franchises into the ground. If you owned the Call of Duty or Battlefield names... wouldn't you do the same?

  18. Post
    #68
    hav0k wrote:
    all they need to do now is add some kind of crop planting/gathering system and a cash shop. maybe slip in some advertising billboards in every map to maximise profits.
    Modern Farm Warfare ??

    "Defend your crops against hordes of derp zombies"

  19. Post
    #69
    Skorky wrote:
    If you owned the Call of Duty or Battlefield names... wouldn't you do the same?
    No? But I value integrity and selflessness over material wealth and greed so apparently i'm in the minority.

  20. Post
    #70
    Bt wrote:
    No? But I value integrity and selflessness over material wealth and greed so apparently i'm in the minority.
    Your values are irrelevant.

  21. Post
    #71
    Skorky wrote:
    Your values are irrelevant.
    You asked brother and the answer is no

  22. Post
    #72
    Honestly I don't understand the default to hating on so many sequels these days.
    BF3 looks like it's going to be a thoroughly solid game, and will hopefully serve to appease the PC market who weren't always too happy with BFBC2 at the same time as reaching a broader console market; perhaps a few of the CoD gamers will see it and give it a try.

    MW3 appears to be something like a refined attempt at MW2. If it wasn't for the big balance issues in MW2 (broken killstreaks, one man army, team spawn issues) then it really wasn't bad. Sure, the rapid pace of CoD gameplay isn't for everyone but that's something which is central to the game's appeal. I never purchased MW2 or BO because they were always so damn expensive and I didn't care, but if this game actually does turn out well I don't see why I should be opposed to it.

  23. Post
    #73
    MW2 was trash in every way when compared to MW. And it doesn't look like they are going to change from this style anytime soon.

    They are console games now.

  24. Post
    #74
    streets wrote:
    COD 2 was the last good Call of Duty title.