Why COD is still the #1 online shooter

There's alot of COD-clones. Alot of games trying to rip off aspects of COD. But they always leave out some of the most essential aspects that made COD popular in the first place. People have to remember that COD was not very popular until COD4. Even if you check COD4 opening week sales, it had pretty average sales in it's first few weeks. It didn't get huge off massive marketing. It got popular off word of mouth because it was a very good game. Now it's become a part of pop-culture and is one of the best selling franchises of all time.

1. Silky smooth 60fps while maintaining decent enough graphics. IW-engine especially.

2. No silly running animations or motion blur while running. I don't know why Gears, KZ, Resistance3, etc all insist on this nonsense. It's hard on the eyes and can give players a headache after awhile.

3. Full prone! Being able to lay down behind cover. I can understand with Battlefield's massive maps why they dont allow it in their games, but games like KZ have no reason not to include full prone.

4. Unobstructed movement. You can jump and climb onto almost anything that looks like you should be able to jump on it. This gives unrestricted movement and a sense of freedom. SOCOM 4 is pathetic in this area. I just played the Resistance 3 beta and could not even jump over a 3ft railing. It made R3 feel restricted and confined.

5. Tons of Guns and gadgets. It's a shooter after all, right? Fans of shooters like guns. Lots of them. The more the better. Crysis 2(and many others) in comparison have very limited selection of weapons and gadgets.

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

7. Innovation. Perks, killstreaks, Spec Ops, Zombies, Customizable Guns, etc.

8. Maps. Every COD these days releases with 14-15 maps. Plus another 4-5 maps a couple months after release. And then another 4-5 maps a few months later. It keeps the game fresh, eventhough each game usually has 1 or 2 horrible maps (Estate for example). KZ3 in contrast only had like 6 maps. Pathetic. You can't compete with the big boys when you only include half the content on the retail disc. Even Homefront had a limited amount of maps IIRC.

So go ahead. Hate all you want. Success breeds envy. COD is still #1 for a good reason.

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

drakekratos

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

Steameffekt

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

We can tell you stopped reading considering he explains that it is somewhat realistic in nature.

It's #1 because it's really easy to get into and the younger gamers love the repetition and literally constant rewards. Playing CoD basically means you're rewarded for mediocrity and even failure and constantly shown your rewards. Other shootes don't do that. They don't provide the instant action of CoD (if you haven't seen a guy in CoD for more than 20 seconds, something is wrong), and constant rewards (congrats, you just sprinted for 10k, here's a reward and some points).

It's not #1 for any of the reasons you posted.

There's alot of COD-clones. Alot of games trying to rip off aspects of COD. But they always leave out some of the most essential aspects that made COD popular in the first place. People have to remember that COD was not very popular until COD4. Even if you check COD4 opening week sales, it had pretty average sales in it's first few weeks. It didn't get huge off massive marketing. It got popular off word of mouth because it was a very good game. Now it's become a part of pop-culture and is one of the best selling franchises of all time.

1. Silky smooth 60fps while maintaining decent enough graphics. IW-engine especially. It's umm, how old is the engine exactly?

2. No silly running animations or motion blur while running. I don't know why Gears, KZ, Resistance3, etc all insist on this nonsense. It's hard on the eyes and can give players a headache after awhile. Can't comment, haven't played those games, or for Gears didn't notice it.

3. Full prone! Being able to lay down behind cover. I can understand with Battlefield's massive maps why they dont allow it in their games, but games like KZ have no reason not to include full prone. Guess you have only played Bad Company then, 'cause that's not true

4. Unobstructed movement. You can jump and climb onto almost anything that looks like you should be able to jump on it. This gives unrestricted movement and a sense of freedom. SOCOM 4 is pathetic in this area. I just played the Resistance 3 beta and could not even jump over a 3ft railing. It made R3 feel restricted and confined. It's called game design, they WANT it to be like that.

5. Tons of Guns and gadgets. It's a shooter after all, right? Fans of shooters like guns. Lots of them. The more the better. Crysis 2(and many others) in comparison have very limited selection of weapons and gadgets. Except most of the guns are just essentially repeats.

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun. Comparing a military modern FPS to Sci Fi FPS good job, and no CoD is not realistic in teh slightest

7. Innovation. Perks, killstreaks, Spec Ops, Zombies, Customizable Guns, etc. Most of those have been done before CoD or make it imbalance.

8. Maps. Every COD these days releases with 14-15 maps. Plus another 4-5 maps a couple months after release. And then another 4-5 maps a few months later. It keeps the game fresh, eventhough each game usually has 1 or 2 horrible maps (Estate for example). KZ3 in contrast only had like 6 maps. Pathetic. You can't compete with the big boys when you only include half the content on the retail disc. Even Homefront had a limited amount of maps IIRC. If you didn't have to pay $15 for the new maps, that would be great, but you do.

So go ahead. Hate all you want. Success breeds envy. COD is still #1 for a good reason.

drakekratos

It's #1 because it's really easy to get into and the younger gamers love the repetition and literally constant rewards. Playing CoD basically means you're rewarded for mediocrity and even failure and constantly shown your rewards. Other shootes don't do that. They don't provide the instant action of CoD (if you haven't seen a guy in CoD for more than 20 seconds, something is wrong), and constant rewards (congrats, you just sprinted for 10k, here's a reward and some points).

It's not #1 for any of the reasons you posted.

Wasdie

I don't agree with this because even hardcore gamers like COD. I know people who aren't really gamers and it isn't the rewards that keep them playing. They don't keep playing becasue they get 3 kills in a row or some points pop up on screen. It is easy to get into but I think many under estimate the difficulty. It is fast and frantic gameplay with quality maps. It is addicting and a fantastic multiplayer.

Reason 2 is ridiculous. Those games actually feel like you are running on solid ground and not moonwalking. Killzone has some of the best animations you'll seein an FPS...COD arguably has the worst.

It's #1 because it's really easy to get into and the younger gamers love the repetition and literally constant rewards. Playing CoD basically means you're rewarded for mediocrity and even failure and constantly shown your rewards. Other shootes don't do that. They don't provide the instant action of CoD (if you haven't seen a guy in CoD for more than 20 seconds, something is wrong), and constant rewards (congrats, you just sprinted for 10k, here's a reward and some points).

It's not #1 for any of the reasons you posted.

Wasdie

I lol'd when i got some Exp by jumping off a cliff....

[QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

15strong

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

We can tell you stopped reading considering he explains that it is somewhat realistic in nature.

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

Steameffekt

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's #1 because it's really easy to get into and the younger gamers love the repetition and literally constant rewards. Playing CoD basically means you're rewarded for mediocrity and even failure and constantly shown your rewards. Other shootes don't do that. They don't provide the instant action of CoD (if you haven't seen a guy in CoD for more than 20 seconds, something is wrong), and constant rewards (congrats, you just sprinted for 10k, here's a reward and some points).

It's not #1 for any of the reasons you posted.

15strong

I don't agree with this because even hardcore gamers like COD. I know people who aren't really gamers and it isn't the rewards that keep them playing. They don't keep playing becasue they get 3 kills in a row or some points pop up on screen. It is easy to get into but I think many under estimate the difficulty. It is fast and frantic gameplay with quality maps. It is addicting and a fantastic multiplayer.

What's your definition of hardcore, because it apparently is way different than mine.

It's not a difficult game, especially on the consoles. If the insanely unbalanced perks or stupidly over-powered killstreaks (oh look you killed 3 people, here's something to give you a bigger advantage) didn't destroy any shred of competitive gameplay to be found, the massive amount of auto-aim did.

I play CoD for fun but I've never taken it seriously. That alone is why CoD is #1, because people play it for fun. It's not difficult, it's fun. Don't try to make it more than what it really is.

[QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

drakekratos

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

Steameffekt

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

[QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

drakekratos

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

[QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

drakekratos

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

Why not Arma, Red Orchestra, etc?

mitu123

those games don't exist, they are just figments of peoples imaginations.

/sarcasm

[QUOTE="drakekratos"][QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

Steameffekt

He actually has a point though. I wouldn't say it's a main reason why it's popular, but it is one of the reasons why CoD 4 was able to survive next to Halo. People were sick of WWII shooters. The modern shooter seemed so much more relevant and believable. People prefer "what-if" scenarios over sci-fi anyday.

CoD has one thing people love real, yet extremely obscure weapons, that look all "modern". There are weapons that appear in CoD where less than 100 were ever produced in real life. Why? They are horrible weapons. However they look really futuristic and whatnot but not sci-fi. People love that. We call it tacticool. Take any rifle (like an AKM), making it all metal, put some rails on it, throw on 2 scopes (like you can in MW3), and a grenade launcher, cut down the stock to a collapsible stock, and BAM you've taken a boring wooden AKM and made it some awesome tactical weapon that is apparently superior to the original.

People eat that crap up. Why do you think BC2 had so many obscure weapons? People love it.

Personally this is why I like BF3's direction. Real modern weapons. Marines with M16s, enemies with AKMs, not prototype weaponry. Something believable.

[QUOTE="15strong"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's #1 because it's really easy to get into and the younger gamers love the repetition and literally constant rewards. Playing CoD basically means you're rewarded for mediocrity and even failure and constantly shown your rewards. Other shootes don't do that. They don't provide the instant action of CoD (if you haven't seen a guy in CoD for more than 20 seconds, something is wrong), and constant rewards (congrats, you just sprinted for 10k, here's a reward and some points).

It's not #1 for any of the reasons you posted.

Wasdie

I don't agree with this because even hardcore gamers like COD. I know people who aren't really gamers and it isn't the rewards that keep them playing. They don't keep playing becasue they get 3 kills in a row or some points pop up on screen. It is easy to get into but I think many under estimate the difficulty. It is fast and frantic gameplay with quality maps. It is addicting and a fantastic multiplayer.

What's your definition of hardcore, because it apparently is way different than mine.

It's not a difficult game, especially on the consoles. If the insanely unbalanced perks or stupidly over-powered killstreaks (oh look you killed 3 people, here's something to give you a bigger advantage) didn't destroy any shred of competitive gameplay to be found, the massive amount of auto-aim did.

I play CoD for fun but I've never taken it seriously. That alone is why CoD is #1, because people play it for fun. It's not difficult, it's fun. Don't try to make it more than what it really is.

Anyone who is a member of a game forum in a hardcore gamer to me. Sometimes people think any 4 year old could pick up a controller and perform well in COD. It takes some skill, whether you think its unbalenced or not. You like it becasue it is fun and their is nothing wrong with that. That is why people love it. It is fun to play. People always look at the negatives of COD (you pointed out instant action as if it is a negative) and miss all the postives it has provided.

1.Real guns

2.Small maps

3.No team work required, you can jump right in.

4.Easy to learn

5.Camper friendly

6.Customizable

[QUOTE="JohnF111"][QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

15strong

That's funny since you seem illiterate given the fact you cannot read his comment in context.

But it doesn't even let you shoot bees out of your hands!:o

[QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

JohnF111

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

[QUOTE="15strong"]

[QUOTE="JohnF111"] :lol: You beat me to it, oh it just shows you the intellectual level of CoD fans.JohnF111

That's funny since you seem illiterate given the fact you cannot read his comment in context.

He used the other games to compare the differences between many popular shooters that happen to be science fiction and other that take place in the real world. COD only takes a few bullets to kill someone, has real guns, and recognized locations. His point is it might be popular becuase people would rather play a game taking place in current time rather than one taking place in the future in some unknown location. You missed the entirety of his point.

[QUOTE="JohnF111"][QUOTE="15strong"]

That's funny since you seem illiterate given the fact you cannot read his comment in context.

15strong

He used the other games to compare the differences between many popular shooters that happen to be science fiction and other that take place in the real world. COD only takes a few bullets to kill someone, has real guns, and recognized locations. His point is it might be popular becuase people would rather play a game taking place in current time rather than one taking place in the future in some unknown location. You missed the entirety of his point.

No shooter is realistic in the slightest.

COD is fun though.

[QUOTE="JohnF111"][QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

DealRogers

I find it funny how people who play video games make fun of other people who play video games.

[QUOTE="JohnF111"][QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

DealRogers

http://www.destructoid.com/modern-warfare-2-is-all-f-ck-realism-yo--135515.phtml

Even the MW developer says he's wrong and that it isn't true.

I prefer seeing a comparison where modern military shooters are compared to modern military shooters, i missed nothing. His point was realism and now you say it wasn't realism and there was some deeper meaning? Gimme a break. What about MoH, that is modern and yet he did not compare that, Stalker, Arma... So many to choose from yet he chose KZ and Crysis.JohnF111

because its fun

[QUOTE="JohnF111"]I prefer seeing a comparison where modern military shooters are compared to modern military shooters, i missed nothing. His point was realism and now you say it wasn't realism and there was some deeper meaning? Gimme a break. What about MoH, that is modern and yet he did not compare that, Stalker, Arma... So many to choose from yet he chose KZ and Crysis.Androvinus

Wait, you're saying the heartbeat sensor was modern? No such thing exists. :lol:

[QUOTE="Androvinus"][QUOTE="JohnF111"]I prefer seeing a comparison where modern military shooters are compared to modern military shooters, i missed nothing. His point was realism and now you say it wasn't realism and there was some deeper meaning? Gimme a break. What about MoH, that is modern and yet he did not compare that, Stalker, Arma... So many to choose from yet he chose KZ and Crysis.Steameffekt

Wait, you're saying the heartbeat sensor was modern? No such thing exists. :lol:

COD is the #1 online shooter because it's easy to play, rewarding and fun. It's easy for young and casual players to jump in to COD multiplayer and have a good time.

[QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

[QUOTE="drakekratos"]

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

drakekratos

I stopped reading there. Really? You think COD is relistic? :lol:

All three of those games are FAR more realistic when it comes to movement, ballistics, recoil etc than Call of Duty. :lol:

No silly running animationsdrakekratos

COD is the #1 online shooter because it's easy to play, rewarding and fun. It's easy for young and casual players to jump in to COD multiplayer and have a good time.

LazyMushroom

There's alot of COD-clones. Alot of games trying to rip off aspects of COD. But they always leave out some of the most essential aspects that made COD popular in the first place. People have to remember that COD was not very popular until COD4. Even if you check COD4 opening week sales, it had pretty average sales in it's first few weeks. It didn't get huge off massive marketing. It got popular off word of mouth because it was a very good game. Now it's become a part of pop-culture and is one of the best selling franchises of all time.

1. Silky smooth 60fps while maintaining decent enough graphics. IW-engine especially.

2. No silly running animations or motion blur while running. I don't know why Gears, KZ, Resistance3, etc all insist on this nonsense. It's hard on the eyes and can give players a headache after awhile.

3. Full prone! Being able to lay down behind cover. I can understand with Battlefield's massive maps why they dont allow it in their games, but games like KZ have no reason not to include full prone.

4. Unobstructed movement. You can jump and climb onto almost anything that looks like you should be able to jump on it. This gives unrestricted movement and a sense of freedom. SOCOM 4 is pathetic in this area. I just played the Resistance 3 beta and could not even jump over a 3ft railing. It made R3 feel restricted and confined.

5. Tons of Guns and gadgets. It's a shooter after all, right? Fans of shooters like guns. Lots of them. The more the better. Crysis 2(and many others) in comparison have very limited selection of weapons and gadgets.

6. Realistic. Atleast by video game standards. There's no Invisibility crap like in recent games KZ3, Crysis 2, and Resistance 3. Enemies also die from a few shots, which is realistic and keeps games fast paced and fun.

7. Innovation. Perks, killstreaks, Spec Ops, Zombies, Customizable Guns, etc.

8. Maps. Every COD these days releases with 14-15 maps. Plus another 4-5 maps a couple months after release. And then another 4-5 maps a few months later. It keeps the game fresh, eventhough each game usually has 1 or 2 horrible maps (Estate for example). KZ3 in contrast only had like 6 maps. Pathetic. You can't compete with the big boys when you only include half the content on the retail disc. Even Homefront had a limited amount of maps IIRC.

So go ahead. Hate all you want. Success breeds envy. COD is still #1 for a good reason.

drakekratos

2. Eh I don't care either way honestly.

3. I guess, but that's not really important to me.

4. So you can climb over stuff. That doesn't seem too important to me.

5. Eh I don't really care, especially when some guns are clearly better than others.

6. Um, no. Realism =/= good, unless it's a sim like Arma 2.

7. I guess with COD4 kind of, but the new COD games have been anything but.

8. And TF2 has like 30 maps, all for free. You're actually trying to pass off paying $15 for 5 maps as a good thing?