What is wrong with the Call of Duty series?

CoD is a major player and isn’t wholly negative. It was largely responsible for the tiresome WWII trend of the early 2000s and the tiresome gritty special forces trend we’ve been going through since 2007. They spawned those trends because they were pretty good examples of it. That, and CoD:MW’s Death from above level is eerily disturbing/satisfying.

I would like to discuss what is wrong with CoD. I have some ideas of my own which relate to various elements but I would first like to hear what others have to say.
So, what is bad about the CoD series and why is it bad? Aside from the fact that a lot of lesser developers ape them and produce ersatz clones, which is hardly CoD’s fault.

I don’t play them and don’t have any real objection to them (blah blah “Call of Madden brogamers”). However, my kid spent his money on CoD: Ghosts and was bored with it within a week because it was (in his words) exactly the same as CoD: Black Ops II aside from a few minor differences. He’s rather play BO2 and have his weapon unlocks, skins, etc than play Ghosts because Ghosts just has nothing new going for it.

I’m with Jophiel, in that I don’t really have a horse in this race - I don’t play CoD, because I basically don’t play FPS games.

The only thing ‘wrong’ with this series is that it is successfully bilking a lot of people for a lot of money with surprising frequency by selling them iterations of a game that are basically the same thing, and this is not something I appreciate, even in games I do play.

Otherwise? Meh. Nothing wrong with it. Is it overhyped? Yeah, probably, but whatever.

See, I loved the CoD WWII games, especially multi-player. There was nothing like popping up behind a Tiger Tank with a bazooka and taking it out, or hot wiring a Panzer and infiltrating a German column of tanks. I got bored with the later versions, though.

I’m more of a Battlefield fan. I like the larger maps and vehicles. CoD feels a little “arcade-y” to me.

I feel both series are basically the same game every year with some different weapons.

Not bad exactly , just as someone already posted once you finish the campaign story mode and move onto the multiplayer, it has not really changed all that much. I got ghosts for the xbox one for free, but the last time I bought modern warfare, i was disapointed that the multiplayer had not improved much and could have skipped that title.

Figure you pay 60 bucks for the game, seems like 10 bucks is invested in the story and the rest is pure profit, as they did make any radical changes.


The last one I played was MW3, and my only objection is that it’s based around Multiplayer deathmatches for its longevity, which involves; me doing my best - execution by teen on other side of world - disenchantment.

I think Call of Duty offended the traditional FPS crowd with its consolidation and skill-diminishing mechanics like equipment progression and long-range melee insta-gibs. The quality varied wildly between games and sequels were obvious half-assed cash-ins. The monetization was pretty lame, compared to the old days. The folks at Activision spent too much time talking about the business of gaming instead of a love for gaming, which offended people too.

That said, I think CoD4:MW is the best FPS ever made.

Every year, we’ve got the same game pretty much coming out. It sells a bajillion copies because its a very accessible FPS, its palatable for so many sections of society, and because its a known commodity. It has effectively dulled the collective gaming IQ of the FPS market, as well, and sucked a lot of time and resources out of FPS. If someone makes an FPS that doesn’t have COD-esque features, focus groups would probably pan it.

I was talking about this with some folks while playing Titanfall. I remember playing Halo 1, 2, and 3, where if you got against someone who was better than you, you could tell pretty much right away, and you could know to either avoid that person on the battlefield, or try other tactics to get them into respawn. I can’t tell in Call Of Duty (or Titanfall, for that matter) if someone is better than I am. Maybe that, right there, is part of that secret sauce. My pet opinion is that if the connection winds blow your way in any given game of Call Of Duty, you can go 54-2. I think its that gaming lottery ticket that a lot of folks glom onto, in addition to constant unlocks and the veil of progression that makes the game so accessible.

It’s a soul less cash-in hackjob copypaste of a game series that has nothing whatsoever to say for itself and never has (remember how CoD2 ripped entire movie scenes wholesale ?) but nevertheless siphons all of the money because fratboys are predictable and kids just thrive on repetition of the same story ? Oooh, ooh, I know : it went from a rather solemn tone (as much as a blamblampow FPS game can have, anyway pause for obvious counterexample Ha HA ! Gotcha there, Spec Ops:The Line was third person ! :)) to an over the top, whitastic celebration of rah-rah jingoistic power fantasies over the dehumanized brown/yellow/commie foreign hordes ? Its multiplayer community is one of the absolute worst in the entire online world, where the competition is harsh ? They’re just meh games at best, unfun in both solo and multi ? They portray Oliver fucking North of all people as a stand-up guy ?

What do I win ?

There’s nothing wrong with it. There’s nothing great about it. There’s nothing transformative about it, but there’s nothing wrong with it.

It’s a generic shooter that’s been iterated so many times that you know exactly what you’re getting when you buy it. You log on, meet your friends, and shoot stuff. Bottom line, end of story.

Games like CoD and Madden are super popular because they’re super accessible, and so there are a lot of “no true Scotsman [gamer]” sentiments that swirl around it, but hell: I’m a gamer and have been a gamer for an awfully long time, and I enjoy playing CoD with my friends.

Stalker: Shadow of Chernobyl ;):smiley:

Dammit. Quick, think of something

Doesn’t count, outside the boundaries of the frame of reference. [del]Russian[/del]Ukrainian game. Everything post-Soviet is inherently 20% more dour and up to 94% more depressing. High concentrations of permeating, fatalistic existential melancholy have also been reported. Metro 2033 ? *The Witcher *? *The Void *? *Pathologic *? I rest my case.

You almost had me…
…but you forgot Cryostasis.

The point is that, if it’s the same shooter iterated multiple times, it makes no sense for an intelligent person to keep on buying the latest and greatest. Stick with the older versions until the servers go down. Granted, that doesn’t count if you got it on a new console, but, otherwise, it just seems silly. Unless you really are getting it for the single player, which is fine. That’s all I’d ever buy it for.

BTW, it’s not that no gamers would play it, it’s that the majority of people who play it aren’t really gamers in that they don’t like video games in general. There’s nothing saying that a gamer might not like it. But I do expect a gamer to have to be a bit circumspect with their purchases, since they will be buying multiple games, and won’t want to waste money on getting the same game they can already play.

To me, the biggest problem with the CoD games (multiplayer, not the single-player part) is that they’re the lowest common denominator of military themed shooters.

Small maps and a sort of “make-it-take-it” style of rewards based on killstreaks, etc… tend to reinforce a particular style of headless chicken play, and not offer any incentives to play like a real soldier would. The killstreak rewards are enough to drive someone crazy- they basically make a good player better, at the expense of everyone else, which seems to appeal to the CoD kiddies, who seem to be bent on racking up kill counts and “pwning” each other, and not actually playing the game. Plus, the game modes themselves aren’t engineered to actually reward people for playing them- the whole thing’s a big game of team deathmatch in every game mode, because the scoring rewards kills more than anything else.

I gave up on CoD: MW3 and the entire CoD series when Battlefield 3 came out, and haven’t looked back. Not that the BF games are perfect, but they offer a lot more than lip service to being a military shooter, which is about all I can say about CoD.

I also think the user community skews young- I haven’t heard nearly as asinine things over team chat, nor have I seen nearly so many offensive usernames in any game before or since. Also, the in-game behavior of most CoD players is kind of indicative of immaturity in my mind. Not that Titanfall, BF3 and 4 don’t have plenty of knuckleheads, but the knucklehead to normal gamer ratio is relatively low compared to CoD.

Ah yes, the cheerful game where you investigate how the old corpses you find died or killed themselves, and freezing to death is an omnipresent threat :smiley:

(joke aside though, that one does have sort of a happy ending, in a “you live to freeze to death another day” kind of way)