We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing
analytics and serving ads.
Learn More
Forums → Games → [Main Thread] CoD? Put it here!
| 3993 | 503441 |
Apparently the effort of cleaning up the forums has been biased, so the CoD group get their own thread for discussing as well.
Enjoy.
- 3,993 Replies
While I don't play WoW myself, I heard differently. More specifically, that Cataclysm is actually harder and the people that started Lich King are angry because of it.
Yeah that's kinda the point. Wrath spoilt the players and Cataclysm is slowly reverting to the ways of Vanilla and Burning Crusade - those who prefered eZ mode are whining, put simply.
Not saying veterans weren't whining -- it's essentially the same thing when you listen to them, it sounds like a lot of herpa derp. :P
Also what does the difficulty have to do with popularising Multiplayer? Just because something is simple doesn't mean it should be EASY, if that makes sense.
Yeah I understand that but what I'm saying is Wrath raiding was so simple which is, in WoW's case, easy. :P
Even then, Wii Sports has long since outsold it ;D
Bare in mind the population growth - that's why I'd rather they done it in %. :P
So would it be safe to say that you don't think it is "bad", but instead that it is overrated? If so, I might have misuderstood your arguments ;P
Kind of both. CoD is certainly overrated but the debate can be taken further by saying it is bad -- technical issues for computer, balance issues on MW2 and etc.... My god.
points up*
It's really not specific to any game. The main problem lies with the standard industry practices of today.
For me I recognised it when MW2 started releasing map packs, somewhere around that time - I recognised it in WoW before that but not so much in other games, it's bloody disgraceful. What happened to the CoD4 method for PC (I think it should apply to consoles but sadly it did not)? Patch 1.6 introduced four new -- FREE maps to CoD4, why?
I don't know. But selling a "free DLC" off as a bonus when it was made prior to games release would bring in such customer goodwill and such, I don't know why they don't do it :<
I was using Batlle.net as an argument for something that made "online gaming" more popular.
Without a doubt.... Yes.
Absolutely. At the very least, they shouldn't be put as gospel above the average consumer. They're opinionated just like all of us.
Yep, they're not even professional if you ask me, it's not honest and that is the worst thing you can have as a reviewer. :P
In conclusion, I think this discussion shouldn't continue in this thread in particular, since we tend to move away from CoD farther and farther (or atleast I do). :S
I don't want to be the guy that derailed the CoD thread, ya know? xD
To reach a conclusion on the actual game I think it's acceptable.
- H
Even then, Wii Sports has long since outsold itActually, it hasn't. Black Ops still holds the top spot for largest media sale in recorded history, closely followed by MW2. And besides, Wii Sports wasn't sold, it came with the Wii, therefor it can't be best selling.
Call of Duty 4 was the greatest shooter of all time, but ever since then the series has gone downhill. The game has become very unbalanced, they ruined sniping, and the new killstreaks are awful. IW and Activison are trying to much to appeal to the casual fan and IMO it's ruining the franchise.
I just wish they strip the game down and make it like CoD 4: balanced guns and perks, with a fair killstreak system.
Actually, it hasn't. Black Ops still holds the top spot for largest media sale in recorded history, closely followed by MW2. And besides, Wii Sports wasn't sold, it came with the Wii, therefor it can't be best selling.
And why do people buy consoles? To play games obviously. And since Wii Sports sold the numbers that it did even when they introduced several Wii bundles should be more than enough proof.
Not to mention I'm fairly sure this only works if you count all sales of all the CoD versions together. So really, if you discount Wii Sports for being bundled, you shouldn't count Multiplatform sales of CoD.
New Super Mario Bros. alone sold well over 20 million. And that's on a single console.
And why do people buy consoles? To play games obviously. And since Wii Sports sold the numbers that it did even when they introduced several Wii bundles should be more than enough proof.
Not to mention I'm fairly sure this only works if you count all sales of all the CoD versions together. So really, if you discount Wii Sports for being bundled, you shouldn't count Multiplatform sales of CoD.
New Super Mario Bros. alone sold well over 20 million. And that's on a single console.
Who cares? Black Ops sold more copies, on multiple platforms. That doesn't mean its unfair. My point is COD games are sold while Wii Sports is given, therefor it can't be the best selling game. And it wouldn't even matter, more copies of Black Ops have been sold than Wii's anyways.
Instead of looking at how you added a secondary line of defense in your argument I'll go back to what I said before -- it doesn't matter, the basis of sales means NOTHING. Do I trust people to be intelligent or informed enough to make an educated decision? No, and I question peoples sanity if they do.
Given the amount of crap I've seen on CoD I doubt it even further, it is not up to sales, it's a severely inaccurate system, it's like giving your score on a race course in a mario games based on how fast you finished it. Because of all the banana peels, bombs (or is it shells? ) and etc that can be unstoppably thrown your way it is inaccurate.
- H
Given the amount of crap I've seen on CoD I doubt it even further, it is not up to sales, it's a severely inaccurate system, it's like giving your score on a race course in a mario games based on how fast you finished it. Because of all the banana peels, bombs (or is it shells? ) and etc that can be unstoppably thrown your way it is inaccurate.
Have you never played Mario?!
Call of Duty, is a sell out because so many people think it is realistic. It is not want a realistic game buy Battlefield, I find CoD more of a game to play with freinds, that is why I only go on it when my freinds want me to!
Who cares? Black Ops sold more copies, on multiple platforms.
Do you actually know how many copies it sold? If you add up Black Ops sales for 360 and Ps3, the total comes at around 22.84 million sold copies of the game.
New Super Mario Bros. (just the DS one) sold around 25.67 million. It wasn't a lauch title either.
My point is COD games are sold while Wii Sports is given, therefor it can't be the best selling game.
Really? I see no store handing out Wii Sports for free. In fact, you'd have to buy a whole CONSOLE just to play it. Ignoring popular lauch titles is a way people like to use to overly praise things, like say claiming Black Ops is the "greatest media sale of all time", when it was in fact, outsold by a DS game.
And to reiterate, WHO buys a console if they don't intend to play the game that comes bundled with it? So no, Wii Sports wasn't given for free, it was the reason people bought the console in the first place.
Even it's sequel, Wii Sports resort, sold 27.03 million.
And it wouldn't even matter, more copies of Black Ops have been sold than Wii's anyways.
And now you're just pulling stuff out of nowhere. The Wii is the best selling console of this generation. And you're claiming Black Ops.....outsold a console? >_>
Here's a fun fact: Black Ops sold 22.84 million. In order for that to OUTSELL the Wii, people would need to buy 64.46 million more.
Also, 'twould be cool if you could actually prove some of those claims. Fact supported discussion, eh?
Just to add: this,this,this,this,and that.
it doesn't matter, the basis of sales means NOTHING. Do I trust people to be intelligent or informed enough to make an educated decision? No, and I question peoples sanity if they do.
That's your view of things. So are you going to say 10s of millions of peoples are unintelligent and don't buy a game they wouldn't enjoy? Seems like a bit like a leap of faith if you ask me.
Given the amount of crap I've seen on CoD I doubt it even further, it is not up to sales, it's a severely inaccurate system, it's like giving your score on a race course in a mario games based on how fast you finished it.
How are SALES numbers an inaccurate system? Those aren't some subjective number somebody put out. It's raw data of how much a single game has sold. Being "informed" or not doesn't even matter since they still valued the game enough to spend their money on it in the first place.
Are there some subjective reasons involved that can lead to having big sales? Absolutely.
But that doesn't mean they don't mean anything. Sales numbers are undeniable fact of how successful something is. That doesn't just go for video games, but any entertainment in general.
As for the analogy, it's not perfect. It'd make more sense to say you'd rank a race course, by how many people have played it compared to others. There's no denying that the most played ones are the ones that are the most popular ;P
That's your view of things. So are you going to say 10s of millions of peoples are unintelligent and don't buy a game they wouldn't enjoy? Seems like a bit like a leap of faith if you ask me.
First of all, kinda, yeah. It's exceptionally easy to find entertainment in many things -- I can just switch this off, lie down and think for an hour if I wanted, and I wouldn't be too bothered. The reason why I don't do that is because of the QUALITY, it will surely get boring, as do games, the quality of entertainment is what people look for, not the quality of what's entertaining them.
Do I blame them? No, but it's a different perspective that isn't productive to the gaming industry because as seen - it follows up with CoD.
Also "my view of things" is kinda the reason I don't leave it up to 10s of millions of people to decide which is a better game, as said, I look at things differently from other people - pretty much everyones perspective is unique in some form or another, and therefore it is very difficult to gain a completely unbiased opinion.
Me included.
When I said I was not being biased earlier -- it's still me, this point can go deeper and deeper and deeper but ultimately individuality isn't just the "what" it's the "how", and that "how" can effect us in a bomb of different ways.
How are SALES numbers an inaccurate system? Those aren't some subjective number somebody put out. It's raw data of how much a single game has sold. Being "informed" or not doesn't even matter since they still valued the game enough to spend their money on it in the first place.
Take into account a few possible things that could alter the results of sales:
1) False advertising
2) "Bonuses"
3) It was a cheap game
4) Other people were doing the same -- this means that it wasn't the game it was your friends who were getting it that convinced you to get it
There's almost certainly more, advertising alone, for example, nevermind false advertising.
But that doesn't mean they don't mean anything. Sales numbers are undeniable fact of how successful something is. That doesn't just go for video games, but any entertainment in general.
Business-wise, it's a pretty solid successmeter, but I am not talking about business.
When have I been? O.o
There's no denying that the most played ones are the ones that are the most popular ;P
Say that to the Starcraft II mod playing system.
- H
What would we do without COD? I'm almost addicted.Still, What's better? A PS3 or a XBOX 360 Slim for COD games?
And btw, Black Ops only sold more copies cause of the succes of Modern Warfare 2. Cause Modern Warfare was so awesome, everybody pre-ordered Black Ops which actually turned out te be a giant failure. Once you pre-order, there's no way back.
And btw, Black Ops only sold more copies cause of the succes of Modern Warfare 2. Cause Modern Warfare was so awesome, everybody pre-ordered Black Ops which actually turned out te be a giant failure. Once you pre-order, there's no way back.MW2 sucked. Black Ops had a lot better balance and gameplay. The only thing MW2 has on Black Ops is graphics.
The reason why I don't do that is because of the QUALITY, it will surely get boring, as do games, the quality of entertainment is what people look for, not the quality of what's entertaining them.
Only bad games do ;D
Or at the very least, bad games become boring much faster than very good ones, which can be replayed several times.
Also "my view of things" is kinda the reason I don't leave it up to 10s of millions of people to decide which is a better game, as said, I look at things differently from other people - pretty much everyones perspective is unique in some form or another, and therefore it is very difficult to gain a completely unbiased opinion.
Again, I'm not saying that games that do not sale are bad.
A sale for ANYTHING, in essence, means that a customer finds the value of the item in question acceptable enough to spend their money on it.
Take for example the PS3 and 360. Now imagine, for arguments sake, that both had the same price. If someone bought say, a PS3. That means that this specific customer thinks the PS3 offers MORE value for the price than the 360 does. The reasons for why do not matter.
To follow up on that, if something becomes very successful, it simply means a large amount of people value the product. Does that make product X better than product Y? No, it doesn't.
It simply means people value product X.
Sales are simply a way to show consumer interest and how successful the product is. Not "quality" in how you think I mean it.
Of course, from a business sense, a good product is only a successful one.
When I said I was not being biased earlier -- it's still me, this point can go deeper and deeper and deeper but ultimately individuality isn't just the "what" it's the "how", and that "how" can effect us in a bomb of different ways.
Arguing "what made someone buy a game" is pointless, when they end up buying the game regardless, which is the main point ;P
1) False advertising
Not everyone keeps products that were falsely advertised. Heck, it's why places like Gamestop exist.
2) "Bonuses"
Bonuses won't bring someone over that wasn't considering buying the game in the first place
3) It was a cheap game
A price is simply something a customer has to compare a products "value" to. While it's true that a cheap price can help increase sales, it's not a guarantee. There's plenty of indie games that remained unsuccessful even at a 10$ price tag. It simply means people don't value the game enough to buy it (even at such a price).
4) Other people were doing the same -- this means that it wasn't the game it was your friends who were getting it that convinced you to get it
And the problem is? Nobody buys a game they know they won't enjoy just because their friends have it. Again, one must value the product first, before convincing is possible.
There's almost certainly more, advertising alone, for example, nevermind false advertising.
5) Brands
I'd say this is probably the one thing you'd criticize about CoD the most. People value the brand, which leads to people buying the game because of said brand recognition.
However, keep in mind that any brand is perfectly capable of destroying itself with bad quality products. Just look at poor Sonic nowadays T_T
Business-wise, it's a pretty solid successmeter, but I am not talking about business.
When have I been? O.o
One cannot talk sales without talking about business, because those are inseperably linked. ;D
Say that to the Starcraft II mod playing system.
Sorry, but I don't play SC2, so I can't exactly relate. :S
You must be logged in to post a reply!