I want you to explain to me why nobody plays CoD on PC anymore instead of...

"OMFG CoD sucks!, PC players has better taste! and BF is betters!".

lol more people are playing old CoD4 then the newest CoD's on PC. Kinda sad to see really, coming from someone who put in 600+ hours in CoD1, 2, WaW and CoD4 individually.

The new CoD games on release date doesn't even reach the top ten on Steam anymore.

Because they became more console centric, and removed basic features that PC gamers were use to.

Same example: Star Wars: Battlefront .... terrible game in mechanics and available features.

Developers don't care anymore, shove s*it ass matchmaking in and call it a day.

Going to sound like an old man, but gaming was better when everything wasn't about making everything appeal to the basic common idiot. How is a server browser hard to use? filter by ping and players and have a good time.

But along came the console $$$

people do bash new COD game and i agree they suck.

but COD1 was no better. it was same linear, scripted, on rail segment, short, only NPC can open doors etc.

Well, no point in rebuying the same damn game every year. That's basically what the new games are, rehashes of the older ones. Also, they removed modding in the newer CoD games, which a ton of PC players took advantage of.

The older cod games are just more fun to play without the distractions of loot boxes and shit like in the current games.

Right now world at war had 2,500 players online..thats amazing considering it turns 10 years old next year.

They started cutting PC features PC gamers took for granted from Modern Warfare 2 onwards.

COD once started on PC but it is firmly a console franchise now with a PC version ported over from console version, often resulting in terrible optimization.

That and Battlefield is simply better.

@ghosts4ever: COD1 is the longest game in the series.

And newsflash: Half Life 1 is scripted, linear and on rails too. More than that: some doors can only be opened by NPCs so according to your logic Half Life 1 is bad

Half life doesnot have any moment that take you away from game. every thing is in game. plus Half life level design and pacing was the reason it was way ahead of its time.

you cannot even open door in COD1. but in half life you can explore the enviroment.

@ghosts4ever: Nope, Half Life is on a rails and linear.

It's just, unlike you, I don't believe those are bad things.

A number of the COD PC releases have had performance and server problems (or lack of servers). And COD games aren't really worthwhile for just Singleplayer considering activisions shit pricing. I've also found that the recent COD MP has a lot of annoying bullshit

Im one of them. I had a blast with COD4 and i had plenty of hours in game on PC. I never liked the next installments as much. The last game i owned from the series and i was upset with it was MW2. From there i didnt give a shit anymore for COD.

Sooo many games on pc and so little time to play, why would people keep rebuying the same game every year? Used to love cod but think it's 5 years since I bought a new one...

if linearity done right. its not bad

see Metro.

Can't speak for all PC gamers, but the reason I've stopped buying COD games after Black Ops 1 was that it was basically the same game every year: same 5 1/2 hour linear campaign, same gimmicky multiplayer, same zombie mode.

I also think there are already plenty of multiplayer shooters on PC, many of which do far more interesting things than COD. But more importantly, and this is just my impression, I think PC players tend to prefer games that update regularly over the long term rather than ask them to buy a new game every year, such as Counter-Strike, Team Fortress 2, Overwatch, Paladins, etc.

We have shitty Dayz clones to play, that may or may not be finished in the next 3 years.

Gamers developed taste, Call of Duty is a bad franchise

Because most PC gamers have standards.

I dont get the hate, I personally enjoy Call of Duty games.

Not interested. That's reason enough.

I'm afraid to say MBirdy88 here is right on the money. They removed features standard for online PC games. They made it inferior to other PC shooters in doing so. They lied about it several times. They overpriced their products ($60+ instead of $50). And then separated their community with 10 mappacks that are also overpriced. The games are too generic. The online code not up to modern standards. Graphics were falling behind. The spawn point issue was silly for its time. The AI took steps back instead of forward. It's many things combined, but it starts with what MBirdy88 said. Oh and to kill all goodwill they stopped paying their employees when it became successful.

Plus, more competition. The games were good enough for console reviewers but not for someone who had been gaming a long time and had a PC.

BTW I don't know anything about the last 3 or so COD releases. Maybe they fixed things. Ha. I would have a hard time believing it.

I don't know, because they suck? Console gamers tend to have lower standards and there's not many other popular FPS series for consoles.

These newer games cater to the lowest common denominators, of which there are more of on console, and less of on PC.

Folks on console seem to accept what they are given, take it without question. "This is the game of the season, and you will like it! Look at our awesome ads with that popular song you hate but won't say you hate because no one else says they hate it! REVEL IN OUR AD CAMPAIGN! You don't care that there's no in-game footage, you buy what we say you will!"

Meanwhile, on PC, there are higher standards, and a lot more alternatives. Furthermore, there are cheaper, funner alternatives.

• good netcode
• server browsers
• dedicated servers
• game modes
• free maps
• community made content (maps, mods, etc)
• fair pricing
• generally speaking, you don't find a billion expensive map packs cutting up the community into pieces on a lot of games PC gamers play

These and many other reasons are why PC gamers play games other than COD. I mean I've been playing Team Fortress and Counterstrike (in the form of TFC and TF2, and Counterstrike Beta ___ and CS: Source, respectively) for over a decade now but I can't stand to play more than 30 minutes of COD, new Battlefront, and I've already grown tired of BF1.

I think I put 100 hours into COD 4 multiplayer when it released in 2007, the point is given that cod is now an annual release, there is no incentive for me to put in hours levelling my profile, prestiging and collecting all the weapons when a new game is going to release every year and kill the old community. Simply not efficient use of game time. At least for battlefield, the release window is every 2 years or more.

I find it hard to believe it didn't sell well on PC, I mean a simple Google search shows it did make the top 10 the week of release. Still, the big selling point in the last one was tying-in Modern Warfare bundled with Infinite Warfare, and being that PC players probably don't care for that since they still have access to the older game cheaper, I can see PC players being less enthused on that. I'll ignore how last year there were simply better shooters with better SP and MP.

Seriously though, I've no desire to buy any COD game at full price these days, I've no interest in the MP, but I'd play it for the SP, but I'd need a modest price cut to go into effect before I even bother, and these games almost never see a substantial price cut within their first year, I'm still waiting for one just to play Infinite Warfare's 5 hour campaign. The only digital sales i've seen of it on consoles are for the versions that bundle it with Modern Warfare, IW DLC, and/or Destiny, for way more than I want to spend for a 5-hour campaign.

@ghosts4ever: Have you ever had a good or valid opinion? If so I've never seen it.

@mrbojangles25: PC gaming having higher standards never kept me away from COD. I knew COD was shit going in but I didn't care since it's always fun to dick around with those ridiculous load outs.

I just remember it always being a bad choice on PC, since the "community"/player-base isn't there like on consoles (or so it seemed). Cheaters also seemed to be rampant on PC and nothing was done to reduce that. I was never a serious player (I don't think I even hit the max level, or did that prestige thing) but those two things were enough to ruin it for me. I think the last one I played was one of the Black ops games, haven't bothered going back since then.

To be fair I didn't like BF4 all that much either (haven't tried BF1), maybe I'm just getting tired of these military shooters.

The main reason Call of Duty has tanked on PC is because Activision's studios have recycled the same theme for 5 consecutive years. Back in the old days, CoD of WW2 era were pretty good. CoD wouldn't be so hated if Activision just let the customers breathe. They specifically have 3 studios for CoD titles so it can be released yearly. Damn, let it rest. Let the consumer "miss" the IP.

COD is trash. Look at how they censored the swastikas in the new COD game, they think everyone is too much of a pussy to see an important symbol of hate. No point playing a game like this, erasing parts of history like this is a real crime and an insult to the victims of the war.

I keep wishing the singleplayer and multiplayer could be sold seperatly, but it's never gonna happen.

Yup, totally.

Some series just need a year off because eventhough COD still sells millions, there are many more millions of people that once used to enjoy the series, but are now suffering from series fatigue.

It changes too little, and just going back to WW2 is simply not enough change. Not when the multiplayer sounds the exact same, the weapons handle the exact same, etc...

Better games to play

That's only in multiplayer so the Germans can play without being separated out because the swastika is banned there. It's still in the Single player (except German version).

Not defending the censorship, but it does make sense to not to fracture the muliplayer player base any more than necessary.

oh yeah totally, I always buy CoD...I consider it slumming :P And you're right about the cheaters, awful.

and Infinite Warfare was arguably the best installment since CoD 4 (some might say BLOPs, but I didn't care for that one) imo. I thought it was a really fun game and I totally enjoyed the sci-fi setting.

You know as much shit as I talk and as seriously as I seem to take these things, they're still just games :D I've bought almost every single CoD at some point or another, and I still have fond memories of the earlier games and I still think the singleplayer campaigns are fun Michael Bay-esque romps through the world.

Really? I kinda wanna play it then.... It's the only CoD I have on Steam. I haven't played CoD MP since UO.

because their gameplay is stale and bland beyond belief and there are loads of alternatives

the CoD folks started treating PC gamers as second-class citizens around MW2, so we treat CoD like second class games (which, IMO, they are)

Server browsers is a big deal and the matchmaking was garbo the last time I ever touched CoD on pc.

This is bang on point.

I'm surprised the series fatigue hasn't fully kicked in on console as well. Especially when you chuck in the multiple map pack DLC that come along with every single release. Like most things on PC I guess we're ahead of the curve.

Never could get into COD, single or multiplayer. I cant speak for everyone but I was spoiled with Quake III/Unreal Tournament in my hay day and just think the COD games are shit console shooters.

It's simple, really.. There are a thousand great multiplayer games you can play instead, and there's barely a soul that cares about Call of Duty's mind-numbingly iterative single-player enough for an actual purchase. Money doesn't grow on trees, and life is short. If a series of video games is iterative as ****, you generally stick with the best in that series; That's CoD 4, or the original.

Because quality in the series has declined for a long time after the original two and the first installment of Modern Warfare. And as already pointed out, in the annual release installments we get a lot of derivative recycling, which becomes less and less appealing in the face of growing selection that has more to offer in quality and diverse gaming experiences.

You're asking for some other explanation that disregards this, but when all is said and done, this really IS all the explanation that's needed. Trying to avoid the issue doesn't make it any less relevant.

Rehashes of same old. Removal of standard features, especially in multiplayer. No innovation, just flashy no substance gimmicks.

Better alternatives, MUCH better alternatives, of which we have plenty to choose from. Consoles, otoh, are dependent on handouts by mega publishers. And they simply had never experienced the features that PC players are used to so their standards are pretty much non-existent. If only they get a taste of it, they would demand to be treated better. Case in point, modding(like in Skyrim/Fallout 4). They were literally BEGGING for PC mods to cater to them (even though its simply impossible).

Easy. When Modern Warfare 2 came out it was clearly a shitty Xbox 360 port with none of the features of CoD 4 or even World at War and was a bit middle finger to the community. At the same time EA noticed that the AAA shooter market on the PC had just gone unfilled and spent some extra time polishing up a port of Bad Company 2 which was pretty successful.

Activision tried gaining the audience back with Black Ops, but now there was a viable competitor on the market with frankly more compelling gameplay. During this time Team Fortress 2 was also going extremely strong and was basically the king of the FPS on the PC for a few years there.

Activision realized it was a waste of time. The PC community is too loyal to single games, is far more diverse with the player audiences spread out over hundreds of games rather than dozens, PC gamers are more critical of DLC, and that a PC game requires more long-term support due to the easily modified nature of the device (new drivers, hardware, new hacking software, OS updates, etc) so they basically said "**** it" and moved on.

So today the problem is not only that the CoD series aren't very good games anymore, their PC versions aren't the greatest because Activision doesn't bother with long term support.

CoD games on the consoles do not have a lot of these issues. They aren't up against as much competition. The daily player base for retail FPSs is much higher than it is on the PC, so even if you release a game each year, you'll still have a large enough market to sell too. Consoles don't require nearly as much long term support as the PC. Consoles don't have nearly the hacker issue that the PC has (most CoDs on the PC are ruined by cheaters).

what features were removed for consoles from COD MW to MW2?

server browsers/dedicated servers, and support for higher player counts. the maps were also smaller on average and they started charging for DLC (new maps were free for CoD games on PC before MW2)

the pace was also overall faster and the gameplay just felt console-oriented

MW2 had dedicated servers, remained active for many years. Maybe they stil lare, I have no clue.

The maps were smallers across the board in the MW series because that was the whole point. Small, quickfire games as opposed to the larger scale of ww2 Battlefield. Has nothing to do with consoles. (We've seen massive maps and players counts on console games so it's a ridiculous argument anyway).

And what do you mean the pace was faster meaning it was more console oriented? Quake had some of the fastest pace shooting ever and that was PC?

Cmon, lets stop the stupidity now.

There's just better games out there.

Also smaller features like leaning were removed from the game in order to accomodate for controllers.

There was no reason to cut those features in the PC version but it would require some effort, effort Activision wasn't willing to put in.

also this list:

higher price, but less features = lol

A bunch of reasons

>most triple A games, the PC version isn't the highest selling version. It's often behind whatever the "lead" console is, if not both consoles.
>They dropped key important PC features
>More hacking issues than most mp games on PC
>Call of Duty is a shallow game, and the more successful, popular PC mp games actually have depth to them. Usually, not so much with things like Pubg
>PC is an enthusiast platform, enthusiasts are more likely to get tired of CoD and move on to other games

I think it's because controller players don't like playing against mouse and keyboard players.