Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 Reveal

[Trik'Stari]

3 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I don't think any shooters, aside from the one that shall not be named, is good at giving a realistic and broad feel. 

Battlefield?

 

Honestly, they're the best balance of realism and fun in my opinion.

 

I don't want pure realism because honestly I think ARMA sucks completely. Terrible engine. But I do want some realism, particularly the ability to run like hell, amazing sound design (nothing to my knowledge has Battlefield beat in that area when set to War Tapes with a good sound system or pair of headphones, i.e. not a "gaming headset"), and large match sizes.

 

Although they've largely been getting the balancing wrong since Bad Company 2. That game had perfect class balancing and they ruined it with BF3

 

Give my medic his goddamned light machine gun back.

[ZestyJalapeno]

On 15/03/2018 at 1:14 AM, Trik'Stari said:

Battlefield?

 

Honestly, they're the best balance of realism and fun in my opinion.

 

I don't want pure realism because honestly I think ARMA sucks completely. Terrible engine. But I do want some realism, particularly the ability to run like hell, amazing sound design (nothing to my knowledge has Battlefield beat in that area when set to War Tapes with a good sound system or pair of headphones, i.e. not a "gaming headset"), and large match sizes.

 

Although they've largely been getting the balancing wrong since Bad Company 2. That game had perfect class balancing and they ruined it with BF3

 

Give my medic his goddamned light machine gun back.

I've truly hated BF since they introduced the ubiquitous ability to revive dead teammates and the COD-esque maps. I literally kill 3/4 of a squad, the last guy gets me and that whole group rises up from the dead like nothing because the last guy is apparently a necromancer. Total immersion breaker. BC2 was great though, I felt like that was the only BF in recent times where if you make the combined effort to take a map position and cover all sides then you win an engagement, and if you're attacking it's not just pack as much infantry in an IFV with no close support and autowin.

[Trik'Stari]

7 hours ago, Dogeystyle said:

I've truly hated BF since they introduced the ubiquitous ability to revive dead teammates and the COD-esque maps. I literally kill 3/4 of a squad, the last guy gets me and that whole group rises up from the dead like nothing because the last guy is apparently a necromancer. Total immersion breaker. BC2 was great though, I felt like that was the only BF in recent times where if you make the combined effort to take a map position and cover all sides then you win an engagement, and if you're attacking it's not just pack as much infantry in an IFV with no close support and autowin.

I am very often that crazy necromancer.

 

I happily run out into heavy fire to revive as many people as I can before I die. I enjoy being top of the team in a match with little or no kills.

 

Personally I find that makes the game fun. I do find that the vehicles ruin the game, especially the goddamned immortal helicopters.

 

Also, where are you playing that you, or rather the other team, have good team mates? I need names lol

[DanielMDA]

On 9/3/2018 at 7:42 AM, Drak3 said:

 

Treyarch is only doing a good job at pandering to the lowest common denominator.

 

BO3's single player campaign was garbage. Characters were bland cardboard cutouts, it barely tied into the stpryline at all, and the story itself was boring as all fuck. The multiplayer also excessively repetitive, most of the maps offered no chance at strategy, and the inly guns that stood out were the ones that were hot garbage.

BO2's was at the same level as MW2's, not fantastic, but good enough.

 

I'd say that AdvancedGh Warfare, Infinite Warfare, and WW2 are all superior to BO2 & 3, and that Ghosts was VASTLY superior.

Guarantee it will. Treyarch locked EVERY DLC weapon in the lootbox last time, without increased odds of getting them.

Whereas Sledge made them extremely likely to get via box in AW, and you can get them through rotating challenges in WW2. IW made them unlockable through crafting, challenges, and loot box.

Ghosts is trash. A Turd when compared to classic CoD.

 

CoD Golden Age: MW (CoD 4) to Black Ops

CoD Silver Age: MW3 and BO2

 

After that it all went to shitsburgh, except maybe for the AW Campaign, Kevin Spacey did a good job.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, DanielMDA said:

Ghosts is trash.

Ghosts was significantly better that BO2+, WW2, AW, IW, and Battlefield 3+.

[DanielMDA]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Ghosts was significantly better that BO2+, WW2, AW, IW, and Battlefield 3+.

No. Its universally accepted that Ghosts and IW have been the Franchise´s lowest points. Trash MP, trash "Zombies" (Extinction) and horrible campaign.

 

Also, how can you call Ghosts better than BF3, 4 and 1 those are far superior games, specially 3 and 4. You don´t have great taste in videogames. BF3 probably had the best MP in all of the 7th Gen of Consoles (Tied with Halo 3 and Reach)

[Drak3]

7 minutes ago, DanielMDA said:

Its universally accepted that Ghosts and IW have been the Franchise´s lowest points.

No, it isn't. That's the pathetic reality of those that sucked at the game. That weren't pandered to. That drive CoD to be the brainless, rehashed, run and gun bullshit that it is now.

 

7 minutes ago, DanielMDA said:

Trash MP

Skill based MP that kept squeakers in their fucking place, with weapon balancing that gave different weapons specific, realistic purpose. The maps offered different players some assemblance of strategic advantage, where there were many points that only had one or two points of vulnerability. One had to be on their toes. One couldn't just run and gun and win every match.

 

9 minutes ago, DanielMDA said:

trash "Zombies" (Extinction)

At least it wasn't the same exact rehashed shitfest Treyarch continually pushes.

11 minutes ago, DanielMDA said:

horrible campaign.

Ghosts' campaign was better than the boring drivel that was BO3, BF3, BF4, Hardline, and especially BF1. It didn't end with the typycal, boring bullshit 'we lost some guys but we did it' ending. The entire thing was presented as a gorilla warfare platform where ultimately, you failed to obviously superior forces. Instead of just these one dimensional characters sacrificing for you, you're the one sacrificed, and your death was meaningless.

 

It's a shame that there wasn't a Ghosts 2, because that was a franchise that deserved to go on.

9 minutes ago, DanielMDA said:

lso, how can you call Ghosts better than BF3, 4 and 1 those are far superior games, specially 3 and 4. You don´t have great taste in videogames. BF3 probably had the best MP in all of the 7th Gen of Consoles (Tied with Halo 3 and Reach)

Battlefield is an outright shitty game series. Especially BF1.

And Halo's multiplayer, outside of local, Forge, and custom games of unofficial game modes, was pretty much garbage as well.

[DanielMDA]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

No, it isn't. That's the pathetic reality of those that sucked at the game. That weren't pandered to. That drive CoD to be the brainless, rehashed, run and gun bullshit that it is now.

 

Skill based MP that kept squeakers in their fucking place, with weapon balancing that gave different weapons specific, realistic purpose. The maps offered different players some assemblance of strategic advantage, where there were many points that only had one or two points of vulnerability. One had to be on their toes. One couldn't just run and gun and win every match.

 

At least it wasn't the same exact rehashed shitfest Treyarch continually pushes.

Ghosts' campaign was better than the boring drivel that was BO3, BF3, BF4, Hardline, and especially BF1. It didn't end with the typycal, boring bullshit 'we lost some guys but we did it' ending. The entire thing was presented as a gorilla warfare platform where ultimately, you failed to obviously superior forces. Instead of just these one dimensional characters sacrificing for you, you're the one sacrificed, and your death was meaningless.

 

It's a shame that there wasn't a Ghosts 2, because that was a franchise that deserved to go on.

Battlefield is an outright shitty game series. Especially BF1.

And Halo's multiplayer, outside of local, Forge, and custom games of unofficial game modes, was pretty much garbage as well.

OK, If you want to be a contrarian, so be it. Everyone else understands that game was outright horrible. Just to clarify, MP was broken, the supreme dominance of the Remington R5, MTAR X and Vector. TTK was poorly implemented. I guess you never played MW3 and MW2, because Ghosts is just a remake of that.

[Drak3]

14 minutes ago, DanielMDA said:

OK, If you want to be a contrarian, so be it. Everyone else understands that game was outright horrible. Just to clarify, MP was broken, the supreme dominance of the Remington R5, MTAR X and Vector. TTK was poorly implemented. I guess you never played MW3 and MW2, because Ghosts is just a remake of that.

Played both MW2 and MW3. Ghosts is far from just being a remake. Trying to use the same play styles from those two games in the same scenarios, even on the remade maps, was signing one's own death.

The R5 and MTAR only dominated at long range, which was the explicit point of both. Both were easily bested by most, if not all, other weapons at medium-short range. The Vector was also far from supreme.

 

TTK was decisive. If one didn't have skill, they died. It wasn't even remotely uncommon for people to win firefights after taking a shot or two once the game was a few months old. It's far better than the bullshit TTK in newer games that lets someone take 5 shots to the chest, turn around, and headshot you twice.

 

So, again, Ghosts' multiplayer has been one of the best in a long time, especially since it didn't pander to a bunch of idiots that only want to run and gun and whine because 'X weapon is overpowered."

[DanielMDA]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Played both MW2 and MW3. Ghosts is far from just being a remake. Trying to use the same play styles from those two games in the same scenarios, even on the remade maps, was signing one's own death.

The R5 and MTAR only dominated at long range, which was the explicit point of both. Both were easily bested by most, if not all, other weapons at medium-short range. The Vector was also far from supreme.

 

TTK was decisive. If one didn't have skill, they died. It wasn't even remotely uncommon for people to win firefights after taking a shot or two once the game was a few months old. It's far better than the bullshit TTK in newer games that lets someone take 5 shots to the chest, turn around, and headshot you twice.

 

So, again, Ghosts' multiplayer has been one of the best in a long time, especially since it didn't pander to a bunch of idiots that only want to run and gun and whine because 'X weapon is overpowered."

TTK worked in a way that the one who shot first won, 90% of the time. 

As a rebuttal: 2.1 User Score in MetaCritic compared to BF4s 7.0. Be the contrarian if you want.

[ARikozuM]

Just now, DanielMDA said:

As a rebuttal: 2.1 User Score in MetaCritic compared to BF4s 7.0. Be the contrarian if you want.

Note to self: All 5-star rated games on the Google Play Store are good. Including the ones with Jeff the Killer and the Rake. 

[Drak3]

Just now, DanielMDA said:

TTK worked in a way that the one who shot first won, 90% of the time.

That's how it should be.

 

Just now, DanielMDA said:

As a rebuttal: 2.1 User Score in MetaCritic compared to BF4s 7.0. Be the contrarian if you want.

I genuinely don't give a shit about MetaCritic user scores. Dice panderes, IW didn't with Ghosts. It's not shocking that squeakers hated CoD for not being the derivative bullshit they wanted.