Call of Duty criticism 'unfounded,' Carmack argues

I still think that thanks to CoD4, there's way too many shooters trying to be that game, much to the point where I think a Doom clone would be considered fresh despite using gameplay elements from 1993. I know that there are naysayers to the idea that there needs to be a retardation of the genre, Doom in my opinion, provided a fast-paced, frantic experience which could definitely use a revival right now.

Additionally, if we are to EVER see Doom 4, it should go back to its roots as a gonzo shooter.

The issue isn't with CoD in and of itself, it's with the sheer number of developers/publishers who think the way to make a successful shooter nowadays is to do their level-headed best to rip off as many facets of CoD as they can without attracting a copyright infringement lawsuit. If CoD was an isolated phenomenon I don't think anyone would have a problem with it, but instead we get to deal with bull**** like the current MW3 vs BF3 pissing contest and developers morphing what were otherwise unique and interesting titles into bro shooters.PBSnipes

Carmack is ignoring two things:

milking of a franchise

re-hashed simple gameplay

CoD is the Transformers of the game world; you know what you will get, and how much you will dislike it in the end, but something about 'sploding things keeps you coming back.

It's one thing to like something, but to say CoD criticism is 'unfounded' is just wrong.

I'm fine with people enjoying Call of Duty and if they're having a good time then I leave them be. However, what I find annoying is when they critize other FPS franchises for not being similar to Call of Duty.

In all fairness, it's not like the majority of devs copying CoD would have created a good game anyways.IronBass

True, but there's still the minority of devs that are letting those bro-shooter/summer blockbuster-type influences get into games that have no business being bro-shooters/summer blockbuster action games. Mass Effect has gone from a thoughtful shooter-RPG hybrid to a more "turned up to 11" action-y game to goddamn turret sections; Uncharted 3 looks like its falling into the same "OMG ALL ACTION ALL THE TIME!!!" trap; Crysis dropped its open-world gameplay for more linear and scripted levels; and the aforementioned Rage has gone from a big-budget STALKER to "seriously? This is what id has spent years upon years of development time on?", among other titles.

i wonder if id still gets money from the cod series

True, but there's still the minority of devs that are letting those bro-shooter/summer blockbuster-type influences get into games that have no business being bro-shooters/summer blockbuster action games. Mass Effect has gone from a thoughtful shooter-RPG hybrid to a more "turned up to 11" action-y game to goddamn turret sections; Uncharted 3 looks like its falling into the same "OMG ALL ACTION ALL THE TIME!!!" trap; Crysis dropped its open-world gameplay for more linear and scripted levels; and the aforementioned Rage has gone from a big-budget STALKER to "seriously? This is what id has spent years upon years of development time on?", among other titles.PBSnipes

I find a hard time relating CoD to ME's and UC's approach, but both where always designed as action-based series anyways, and both saw a massive improvement with their second, more blockbuster-like releases. So even if CoD is actually responsible for that, it's a very, very good thing. Rage is unreleased, so meh, we'll see when it comes out.

I give you Crysis 2. But that's it, one game.

Am i the only one who thinks that we could use a Doom clone these days? Naysayers (who are probably CoD fans) would say that it's nothing more than a corridor shooter, but Doom was a game that required you to backtrack just to open that locked door. Also, I personally think that the pacing in these sorts of games are significantly faster than the shooters we see today.

pretty sure the beef most people have with Call of Duty is the yearly installments.

and i find it difficult to call that "value" in any way.

I've come to the conclusion that John Carmack's stance on anything is that if it's popular, he has nice things to say about it. He backs wherever the money is at.

I've come to the conclusion that John Carmack's stance on anything is that if it's popular, he has nice things to say about it. He backs wherever the money is at.

thatisfalse

pretty sure the beef most people have with Call of Duty is the yearly installments.

and i find it difficult to call that "value" in any way.

-The-G-Man-

[QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]

pretty sure the beef most people have with Call of Duty is the yearly installments.

and i find it difficult to call that "value" in any way.

viper-kid

kindly explain how yearly installments represent a good value.

[QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]

pretty sure the beef most people have with Call of Duty is the yearly instalments.

and i find it difficult to call that "value" in any way.

viper-kid

Had MW3 been the first game, I'm sure many people would embrace it, including me.....yet we've seen this pile of **** every year since 2007. I think the hate is quite justified, thanks :)

That's why Doom 3's gameplay was nothing new and just 'more of the same'. That's why it was so loved by fans and critcally acclaimed.

No it wasn't ... the only FPS from 2004 that people remember now are Half-life 2 and Far Cry, because those games did something new.

In a few years when everyone has grown tired of COD and the series gets dumped like Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk noone will remember it, unless it tries to innovate.

Sorry carmack but you are full of **** people have a right to criticise the COD series.

[QUOTE="thatisfalse"]

I've come to the conclusion that John Carmack's stance on anything is that if it's popular, he has nice things to say about it. He backs wherever the money is at.

viper-kid

I enjoy the challenges the MP brings, I find it fun killing campers all over the world :twisted:

GTSaiyanjin2

[QUOTE="viper-kid"][QUOTE="thatisfalse"]

I've come to the conclusion that John Carmack's stance on anything is that if it's popular, he has nice things to say about it. He backs wherever the money is at.

KungfuKitten

[QUOTE="viper-kid"][QUOTE="thatisfalse"]

I've come to the conclusion that John Carmack's stance on anything is that if it's popular, he has nice things to say about it. He backs wherever the money is at.

KungfuKitten

[QUOTE="viper-kid"][QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]

pretty sure the beef most people have with Call of Duty is the yearly installments.

and i find it difficult to call that "value" in any way.

-The-G-Man-

kindly explain how yearly installments represent a good value.

I'm a "let people enjoy whatever they like" kinda gamer,so I'm okay with this.

Lto_thaG

Same here. I have mixed feelings on the series for getting stale and changing things I liked from precious games, but I still buy them and I still get great fun out of the games when they come out, so I definitely can't understand the huge amount of hate. Can't understand the massive sales and acclaim too much, but CoD4 for me deserved every sale the sequels made. Its that good.

If the customers find value then who are you say its not valuable. Valuable= worth spending money and Cod's sales are going up so it obviously has more value than BF.viper-kid

it doesn't matter what the customer thinks. customers are sheep that will buy anything they're pointed toward.

[QUOTE="viper-kid"]

If the customers find value then who are you say its not valuable. Valuable= worth spending money and Cod's sales are going up so it obviously has more value than BF.-The-G-Man-

it doesn't matter what the customer thinks. customers are sheep that will buy anything they're pointed toward.

'sheep' because they don't have the same opinion as you. right? viper-kid

it's not an opinion. buying map packs for an older game costs less than buying the newer game and then the eventual map packs. a value would be continuing to heavily support the older installments and then releasing the next game 2 or 3 years later.

[QUOTE="GTSaiyanjin2"]

I enjoy the challenges the MP brings, I find it fun killing campers all over the world :twisted:

PSN-SCRODE

yes challenges.... As I want my playing style to be the best one. Also the game can some times be a pain if you get stuck with bad teammates, which happens to me 90% of the time. You cant exactly walk guns blazing in to a match, and not expect the campers to totally destroy you. Everyone has a different approach on how they play the game, and its one of the reason why I like the game.

carmack is biased since the game uses his engine. plus i'm sure he'd love for activision to use id tech for next gen

So true. Internet dweebs hate everything popular and successful, yet anything unpopular is the greatest thing ever. Internet livers hate the iPhone, COD, any successful movie (Transformers, Avatar), you name it. That's why I tend to stay away from the loneliness of the Internet hermitsBodyElite

Yet you have more than2500 posts, hmm.:roll:

[QUOTE="thatisfalse"]

I've come to the conclusion that John Carmack's stance on anything is that if it's popular, he has nice things to say about it. He backs wherever the money is at.

viper-kid

[QUOTE="viper-kid"]

If the customers find value then who are you say its not valuable. Valuable= worth spending money and Cod's sales are going up so it obviously has more value than BF.-The-G-Man-

it doesn't matter what the customer thinks. customers are sheep that will buy anything they're pointed toward.

I don't like the CoD series, but who are we to brand them sheep? They are the costumers, and they demanded the game.

[QUOTE="viper-kid"]'sheep' because they don't have the same opinion as you. right? -The-G-Man-

it's not an opinion. buying map packs for an older game costs less than buying the newer game and then the eventual map packs. a value would be continuing to heavily support the older installments and then releasing the next game 2 or 3 years later.

That's why Doom 3's gameplay was nothing new and just 'more of the same'. That's why it was so loved by fans and critcally acclaimed.

No it wasn't ... the only FPS from 2004 that people remember now are Half-life 2 and Far Cry, because those games did something new.

In a few years when everyone has grown tired of COD and the series gets dumped like Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk noone will remember it, unless it tries to innovate.

Sorry carmack but you are full of **** people have a right to criticise the COD series.

R4gn4r0k

lol, Hipster gamers "COD is like, so mainstream, bleh!" .....You know what, some people enjoy it ...a lot, why u mad though, nooone forced you to buy it, play something YOU enjoy, stop whining and calling others sheep because they enjoy something you dont,

[QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]

[QUOTE="viper-kid"]

If the customers find value then who are you say its not valuable. Valuable= worth spending money and Cod's sales are going up so it obviously has more value than BF.FireEmblem_Man

it doesn't matter what the customer thinks. customers are sheep that will buy anything they're pointed toward.

I don't like the CoD series, but who are we to brand them sheep? They are the costumers, and they demanded the game.

people can keep hating on COD, it won't make the people who love the series play the game less. some people love to play the same stuff with a different coat of paint. I love the mega man, mega man X, mega man zero there is slight difference between them but they pretty much the same thing

[QUOTE="R4gn4r0k"]

That's why Doom 3's gameplay was nothing new and just 'more of the same'. That's why it was so loved by fans and critcally acclaimed.

No it wasn't ... the only FPS from 2004 that people remember now are Half-life 2 and Far Cry, because those games did something new.

In a few years when everyone has grown tired of COD and the series gets dumped like Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk noone will remember it, unless it tries to innovate.

Sorry carmack but you are full of **** people have a right to criticise the COD series.

Cranler

Modern day military shooters are becoming a fad.

I don't agree with Carmack. Its not about revolutionizing anything. Its about changing the gameplay a tadbit, try to make it play differently. Every COD game plays exactly the same. Carmack is basically saying its ok to pay $60 for a larger than average map pack.Im looking thru this thread & alot of ppl are changing their minds about COD just because Carmack siad to stop hating. Its laughable honestly.

Carmack is just defending CoD because it uses his engine :P

[QUOTE="xLFTMx"]

I could care less either way about CoD anymore.

But, Activisions shameless pampering and basically buying off of reviewers is one of the worst things in gaming right now.

biggest_loser

I think it has more to do with reviewers having too much faith that certain franchises deliver each time. A good portion of reviews that are posted the reviewer probably doesn't spend as much time as they should with a certain game before reviewing it because they want their site to have theirs up before everyone elses.. They do gloss over and take into account things like well the graphics are good, the sound effects are good, the multiplayer has a few new modes and stuff... and its another COD so sure 9.0 sounds good enough and then they post it.. They dont seem to me to take into account things like, is it balanced, how much is new? and flat out is the game even fun.

I think this was more evident with Final Fantasy XIII.. Almost all review sites gave it something in the 9s or high 8s.... I think most gamers would agree that is WAY too high a score for that game, but it seems to me reviewers don't really review how much 'fun' a game is because many of them feel that might be too much up to the gamer and its harder to justify giving a game a lower score because its not as much fun as it probably should be rather than reviewing a different game saying oh well graphics are terrible there is constant pop in and the controls aren't precise and increidbly sloppy.. And I believe thats why certain series get high scores regardless of user feedback that comes later, because they seem to be reviewed more on their production value and hype rather than how good they are as a game.

What Carmack said is very true. It's dumb that this "Oh it's the same game every time" arguement is applied only to COD franchise when plenty of other games use the same mechanics almost every game and yet no one complains about that. Examples of this are the 2D Mario games which add very little new game-changing features but since they aren't released every year are hailed as amazing every release and Pokemon which add only new a few new Pokemon (until Black and White) and a usually crappy predictable story. COD games are good games that tell compelling stories, have fun multiplayer elements in which there's a real sense of progress as you unlock weapons and Prestige, and gunplay that feels good. The games deserve a lot less hate than they get and ought to be looked at less in terms of "COD is great/crap" and instead like most other games which we look at in terms of "Hey, it doesn't appeal to me but I can see why others like it".