COD Black Ops MP Trailer!

I love how he called it a shooter for "simple people" and yet gave Gears 10/10.

Now believe me, I love mindless run n' gun shooters as much as the next guy, but when this little is changed and has a $60 price tag, it is hard to fall for Activision's illusion of a full game. I mean the trailer looks the exact same as MW2 except for the ridiculous weapons added in.

I love how he called it a shooter for "simple people" and yet gave Gears 10/10.

biggest_loser

There's a bit of a problem with your post though. There's no thumbs up button on it.

[QUOTE="MyopicCanadian"]You can say DICE gave it their all, but at the end of the day.. I uninstalled BC2, I'm done with it, and yet I'm still playing MW1 and MW2. But oh wait, I must just be a stupid lemming... it's not like I made that choice for myself or I'm just playing the games I like or anything.THA-TODD-BEAST

I'm still not sure you even understand what I'm saying. My point is not that Call of Duty is a terrible series, but rather that paying $60 for nothing more than a re-skin is something only lemmings do. The games have shown few-to-no improvements from one Modern Warfare-esque game to the next, and the fact that they're charging full price while making so few changes to the formula is ridiculous. Much of what I'm seeing could easily be coming in the form of Download Content or expansion packs. In comparison, Bad Company 2 offers far more new things and emphasizes more teamwork and tactics than Modern Warfare, and that's why I was saying it's the superior game in regards to its depth and teamplay. Modern Warfare is an "idiot's shooter" in which you run around like, well, an idiot, killing enemies in sight with no real objective in mind unless you're on one of the few maps that doesn't involve meeting a score or time criteria. Because I know you'll take this the wrong way, too, I'm not calling you an idiot if you enjoy the game. What I mean by "idiot's shooter" is that it takes no more thought than seeing someone, getting them in your sights, and pulling the trigger. There is no recoil to worry about, no teamwork to be concerned with, and few to no objectives to meet. It's a shooter made for simpletons.

Oh come off it. A reskin? Please. Think about any games series, few of them change substantially from iteration to iteration, including your beloved battlefield series. Changing the CoD formula is like changing the CS formula... very tricky thing to do.

Also I love how you're tying to make out like BC2 players are of a higher class and taste than those who play CoD, perhaps people prefer CoD because it's a fun game (yes I said it) and BC2 isn't. As much as I love dealing with horrible sluggish controls, poor hit detection and 'teamwork' in public matches I think I'd rather just save myself the frustration and play CoD.

At the end of the day it's better to play a fun mindless shooter than it is to play a crap one. These are games after all.

I love how he called it a shooter for "simple people" and yet gave Gears 10/10.

biggest_loser

That was probably a mistake I made when I was checking the user ratings way back when it was first released, seeing as how I've not completed Gears of War nor its sequel. I've never been interested in either game.

Jeez, if I were you guys i would not hope for a more blanced game, I mean this is the same studio that thought it wasa a good idea to put tanks into multiplayer and their balance testers dont seem compitent enough to notice that they made the MP40 into the mostOPed gun in cod history

Think about any games series, few of them change substantially from iteration to iteration, including your beloved battlefield series. Changing the CoD formula is like changing the CS formula... very tricky thing to do.the_mitch28

Every PC Battlefield title, other than going from 2 to 2142, has been substantially different from its predecessor, especially in regards to gameplay and features.

Also I love how you're tying to make out like BC2 players are of a higher class and taste than those who play CoD, perhaps people prefer CoD because it's a fun game (yes I said it) and BC2 isn't. As much as I love dealing with horrible sluggish controls, poor hit detection and 'teamwork' in public matches I think I'd rather just save myself the frustration and play CoD.the_mitch28

I knew at least one guy would take my post the wrong way. Rather than saying BC2 players are of a higher class, I'm saying BC2 players are playing a deeper, more tactical game that is set on a larger scale and encourages teamwork far moreso than Modern Warfare ever has. One game revolves around running around mindlessly, killing anything in sight just for the sake of doing so. The other revolves around either defending or destroying positions and requiring a well coordinated team to do so.

At the end of the day it's better to play a fun mindless shooter than it is to play a crap one. These are games after all.the_mitch28

Were you trying to make a point somewhere here? Doom is a mindless shooter, and it's better than the majority of games released today. But that's not the point, nor does it have anything to do with this discussion. Neither Modern Warfare or Bad Company are crap shooters. Bad Company 2 is just the deeper game, and in my opinion has done far more in regards to taking multiplayer shooters past their limits than any of the rehashed Call of Duty games ever have. I not once said any of these games are horrible. This is more about the pricing than anything else ($60 for a rehash, whereas Bad Company 2 is cheaper gives us PC gamers an experience we've never seen before).

BC2 has one of the laziest single player campaigns I've seen in a long time. biggest_loser

Bad Company 2's campaign sucked indeed. Anyone who purchases a Battlefield title looking for a solid campaign deserves to be disappointed. There's no real way to take the same exhilarating Battlefield experience found in a match with human opponents and replicate it offline, so there's not much else you can do other than a poor Modern Warfare clone with spawning enemies, scripted A-to-B-to-C missions, and crap A.I.

[QUOTE="biggest_loser"]BC2 has one of the laziest single player campaigns I've seen in a long time. THA-TODD-BEAST

Bad Company 2's campaign sucked indeed. Anyone who purchases a Battlefield title looking for a solid campaign deserves to be disappointed. There's no real way to take the same exhilarating Battlefield experience found in a match with human opponents and replicate it offline, so there's not much else you can do other than a poor Modern Warfare clone with spawning enemies, scripted A-to-B-to-C missions, and crap A.I.

[QUOTE="THA-TODD-BEAST"]

[QUOTE="biggest_loser"]BC2 has one of the laziest single player campaigns I've seen in a long time. biggest_loser

Bad Company 2's campaign sucked indeed. Anyone who purchases a Battlefield title looking for a solid campaign deserves to be disappointed. There's no real way to take the same exhilarating Battlefield experience found in a match with human opponents and replicate it offline, so there's not much else you can do other than a poor Modern Warfare clone with spawning enemies, scripted A-to-B-to-C missions, and crap A.I.

This post is going to focus just on single-player and I still have more to say, but here are some of my thoughts and ideas in a nutshell:

The first thing you've got to do is change the AI all-together, and going by some of the videos it looks like they're at least trying to make it a little better. The enemies need to have something other than a few lines of code that tells them to spawn, then shoot, take cover, repeat. It would be cool to see a Call of Duty game with fellow characters you influence with your actions, battles that take place according to choices you make, non-linear segments in which you determine if you drive vehicles or go on foot, and so forth. These games take you by the hand so much, you, the player, have absolutely no choice about how the game plays other than who your crosshair is aiming at and when the trigger is pulled. The characters are always the same, the path through levels is always the same, enemies are always encountered in the same place and always act the same way, and so forth. I would love to see a game that, rather than relying so much on scripting, relies more on player choices. Crysis I think is one of the best examples of this, as disappointing as it was. If someone could do a modern-day game such as Call of Duty in Crysis or Far Cry fashion (Here's your map and objectives, now approach it however you want), I would be all for it.

[QUOTE="the_mitch28"]At the end of the day it's better to play a fun mindless shooter than it is to play a crap one. These are games after all.THA-TODD-BEAST

Were you trying to make a point somewhere here? Doom is a mindless shooter, and it's better than the majority of games released today. But that's not the point, nor does it have anything to do with this discussion. Neither Modern Warfare or Bad Company are crap shooters. Bad Company 2 is just the deeper game, and in my opinion has done far more in regards to taking multiplayer shooters past their limits than any of the rehashed Call of Duty games ever have. I not once said any of these games are horrible. This is more about the pricing than anything else ($60 for a rehash, whereas Bad Company 2 is cheaper gives us PC gamers an experience we've never seen before).

What has BC2 done that's so impressive? It's like a smaller worse version of BF2 with scripted semi destructible environments and a lack luster campaign.

And wasn't trying to make a point I was just saying personally I would rather play a fun game (CoD) than a crap frustrating game (BC2).

What has BC2 done that's so impressive? It's like a smaller worse version of BF2 with scripted semi destructible environments and a lack luster campaign.the_mitch28

The obvious thing that's impressive is the destruction, because it's not been seen this way before. Yes, it's true that not everything is destroyable, but most objects are, and that's more than most games can vouch for.

There have been other games out there that have done destruction in their own way (Red Faction, Soldner, and a handful of others) but none have applied it in multiplayer as well as Bad Company 2 does. The destruction literally transforms the entire battlefield. Sometimes buildings will be in tact and infantry can have plenty cover, but it takes just one efficient tank operator to level an entire enemy city or town, turning buildings to rubble and making it that more difficult for infantry to defend. Another example is that of camping: In most other shooters, especially Modern Warfare, it's a viable tactic to help rack up tons of kills. In Bad Company 2, campers must fear not only those who approach from the front, but also the building's integrity after being rocked by tank shells or that of the walls surrounding them if someone knows they're there or is just trigger happy with a grenade launcher.

Aside from the destruction, there are a few other things BC2 does that are impressive or well done overall and make it more enjoyable to play:
- Weapon unlocks and upgrades
- Stat tracking for literally everything
- Kit variety and balance
- Squad spawn system
- Objectives-focused gameplay

I think BF2 was the more memorable game overall, because it was a PC-tailored Battlefield experience and allowed for more players to fight at one time and had better communication options, too, and so forth. But Bad Company 2 isn't an awfully bad game itself, and even with the lower player count and no ability to effectively communicate with teammates other than using voice chat, it's one heck of a multiplayer game with just the right amount of depth, features, and action to put it above everything else that has been recently released.

So I guess the conclusion is that Black Ops will be a very similar experiance compared to the previous titles (Madden syndrome) so the full price tag is really asking too much from people.

For people like me though that never really properly played the previous games its all good :)

Jeez, if I were you guys i would not hope for a more blanced game, I mean this is the same studio that thought it wasa a good idea to put tanks into multiplayer and their balance testers dont seem compitent enough to notice that they made the MP40 into the mostOPed gun in cod history

pl4yer_f0und

Is this one having dedicated servers?

[QUOTE="THA-TODD-BEAST"]

[QUOTE="biggest_loser"]BC2 has one of the laziest single player campaigns I've seen in a long time. biggest_loser

Bad Company 2's campaign sucked indeed. Anyone who purchases a Battlefield title looking for a solid campaign deserves to be disappointed. There's no real way to take the same exhilarating Battlefield experience found in a match with human opponents and replicate it offline, so there's not much else you can do other than a poor Modern Warfare clone with spawning enemies, scripted A-to-B-to-C missions, and crap A.I.

Is this one having dedicated servers?

Daytona_178

[QUOTE="Daytona_178"]

Is this one having dedicated servers?

dakan45

Every PC Battlefield title, other than going from 2 to 2142, has been substantially different from its predecessor, especially in regards to gameplay and features.

Were you trying to make a point somewhere here? Doom is a mindless shooter, and it's better than the majority of games released today. But that's not the point, nor does it have anything to do with this discussion. Neither Modern Warfare or Bad Company are crap shooters. Bad Company 2 is just the deeper game, and in my opinion has done far more in regards to taking multiplayer shooters past their limits than any of the rehashed Call of Duty games ever have. I not once said any of these games are horrible. This is more about the pricing than anything else ($60 for a rehash, whereas Bad Company 2 is cheaper gives us PC gamers an experience we've never seen before).

THA-TODD-BEAST

Myself and many others are "gamers", not "PC gamers". That being said, BC2 is a BC1 rehash with more crap on it. It could've easily been released as an expansion for consoles under your same logic, the only difference is they decide to throw PC players a bone this time while we impatiently await BF3.

BC2 is not taking shooters past their limits.. it adds destructible environments, which is pretty neat, but all around does not make the gameplay experience better. You're pushing BC2 as the better and more innovative game when that is simply not correct.. change for the sake of change is not necessarily better. Many people find BC2 to be the inferior game to MW2, despite how many times you want to call it a re-skin.

All that being said, multiplayer in Black Ops has yet to be fully revealed and there are a bunch of new features they haven't told us about, according to the dev video dakan posted. I'm interested to see the new stuff they added on top of the MW2 formula.

This post is going to focus just on single-player and I still have more to say, but here are some of my thoughts and ideas in a nutshell:

The first thing you've got to do is change the AI all-together, and going by some of the videos it looks like they're at least trying to make it a little better. The enemies need to have something other than a few lines of code that tells them to spawn, then shoot, take cover, repeat. It would be cool to see a Call of Duty game with fellow characters you influence with your actions, battles that take place according to choices you make, non-linear segments in which you determine if you drive vehicles or go on foot, and so forth. These games take you by the hand so much, you, the player, have absolutely no choice about how the game plays other than who your crosshair is aiming at and when the trigger is pulled. The characters are always the same, the path through levels is always the same, enemies are always encountered in the same place and always act the same way, and so forth. I would love to see a game that, rather than relying so much on scripting, relies more on player choices. Crysis I think is one of the best examples of this, as disappointing as it was. If someone could do a modern-day game such as Call of Duty in Crysis or Far Cry fashion (Here's your map and objectives, now approach it however you want), I would be all for it.

THA-TODD-BEAST

COD2 and World at War allowed a bit of freedom.

The last Medal of Honor struck the right balance between arcade hand-holding and player choice IMO. Trying new paths was always fun, even if the game wasn't balanced and polished at all.

BC2 is not taking shooters past their limits.. it adds destructible environments, which is pretty neat, but all around does not make the gameplay experience better.MyopicCanadian

It definitely improves the experience, because once-static environments can now dynamically be changed as the game progresses. How you can say it doesn't improve the experience or isn't pushing the limits of multiplayer shooters is beyond me. It's probably one of the most impressive things done with a multiplayer shooter in the past several years. And yes, it's true that Bad Company 2 doesn't appear to be entirely different from the original Bad Company, but we're discussing Bad Company in a PC Gaming forum, and Bad Company 2 is the first taste PC gamers got of its style of gameplay and destruction.

Many people find BC2 to be the inferior game to MW2, despite how many times you want to call it a re-skin.MyopicCanadian

It is a re-skin. It's very much the same game, with new maps and weaponry. I don't care that many people like MW2 more than Bad Company 2 - that has nothing to do with whether or not MW2 is an expensive rehash.

The last Medal of Honor struck the right balance between arcade hand-holding and player choice IMO. Trying new paths was always fun, even if the game wasn't balanced and polished at all.Baranga

Airborne? That's a perfect example of what I would like to see, except, as you noted, with far more polish and a better storyline. Airborne was a very cool game, but made too many mistakes to go down as one of the better Medal of Honor games out there.

i would like to see Black Ops's campaign actually make sense. MW2's campaign was a giant mess of plot holes and ridiculous moments smashed into a 6 hour long campaign. As long as the campaign makes sense it already has a step over MW2.SF_KiLLaMaN

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]i would like to see Black Ops's campaign actually make sense. MW2's campaign was a giant mess of plot holes and ridiculous moments smashed into a 6 hour long campaign. As long as the campaign makes sense it already has a step over MW2.MyopicCanadian

I agree.. it would be super awesome to have them focus 100% on multiplayer and I think the end result would be that much better.

Reminds me of the MW2 trailer and those remote control cars will be extremely annoying.

I'll probably wait until after the release to see everyone else's opinion on the game.

Suffca

[QUOTE="MyopicCanadian"][QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]i would like to see Black Ops's campaign actually make sense. MW2's campaign was a giant mess of plot holes and ridiculous moments smashed into a 6 hour long campaign. As long as the campaign makes sense it already has a step over MW2.THA-TODD-BEAST

I agree.. it would be super awesome to have them focus 100% on multiplayer and I think the end result would be that much better.

Black Ops could be an expansion pack, or even a mod if a lot of time is put into it.

There is sp you know and there are other franchises that are a bigger rehash.dakan45

What other game series is a bunch of rehashes for $60? None.

If it had dedicated servers, I would consider getting Black Ops only if I could find it cheaper than the retail price.the_ChEeSe_mAn2

What other game series is a bunch of rehashes for $60? None.SF_KiLLaMaN

Well we don't know the price of this game yet do we? But by default Madden wins the biggest rehash title, CoD games at least come with like a dozen new maps even if you think all the weapons/sounds are the same.

[QUOTE="dakan45"]There is sp you know and there are other franchises that are a bigger rehash.SF_KiLLaMaN

What other game series is a bunch of rehashes for $60? None.

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]

[QUOTE="dakan45"]There is sp you know and there are other franchises that are a bigger rehash.dakan45

What other game series is a bunch of rehashes for $60? None.