Black Ops--top selling game of all time

[InsaneBlaze23]

@RB, you still seem to be under the impression I was genuinely complaining we were discussing video games. Christ. Hop off the high horse, it should've been obvious I was poking fun at myself visiting to debate video games on a forum I joined to talk about football, and how boring GD has been lately. Even InsaneBlaze took it the right way, and the two of us don't get on too well!



Everything else is a difference of opinion that iCBA to argue about anymore since it's clear our vibes are fundamentally different and one of us actually needs to say "I don't care" and write a post that reflects that. Hopefully when we run into each other during the season (if there is a season, touch wood) we can still talk football properly. In my opinion I suspect Call of Duty gets a rather hurried production compared to many titles people have mentioned before in this thread, specifically one about a big dude in power armour (actually that doesn't narrow it down as much as I'd hoped). I've explained why I think that way and you're free to think differently. We're debating something I added as a postscript. It's sad.

Bottom line is people tend to dislike a game and write it off too often (e.g. the game must be bad because I don't enjoy it) and other people tend to defend games they like too avidly (e.g. everyone who dislikes this game is wrong because I have fun playing it) but we all tend to be too blind to our own faults to see that. All games have problems, whether we overlook them or not generally comes down to whether we have fun more often that we get frustrated, and that'll be different for every person.

My personal opinion is, CoD2 > BO > CoD4 > MW2 > WaW > sitting on the dashboard > CoD3. People can disagree but that doesn't make me or anyone else "wrong", and making a statement like "MW2 was better" doesn't make you right.

But it really doesn't matter because it'll all be irrelevant when Skyrim gets released.

I agree completely, I have have nothing against you, I'm just blunt with my words. I have nothing against any poster, but some comments, like "Your a Hater" you didn't make the comment, but that annoyed me, because it seems like you can't just dislike a game.

We all have completely different opinions, not only in games, but sports. Yes some will agree with others, but nobody truly shares the same opinion.

I talk about everything, sports, gaming, science,history,etc. You will notice that I'm kinda involved in every thread on these boards, truth is, there is nothing special, or big happening in football other than there is a lock-out, other than that whats there to talk about? The Draft, well until it happens, every draft thread is the same.

As for the last thing you said, when Mass Effect 3 comes out, all will fall

[Sync]

@RB, you still seem to be under the impression I was genuinely complaining we were discussing video games. Christ. Hop off the high horse, it should've been obvious I was poking fun at myself visiting to debate video games on a forum I joined to talk about football, and how boring GD has been lately. Even InsaneBlaze took it the right way, and the two of us don't get on too well!



Everything else is a difference of opinion that iCBA to argue about anymore since it's clear our vibes are fundamentally different and one of us actually needs to say "I don't care" and write a post that reflects that. Hopefully when we run into each other during the season (if there is a season, touch wood) we can still talk football properly. In my opinion I suspect Call of Duty gets a rather hurried production compared to many titles people have mentioned before in this thread, specifically one about a big dude in power armour (actually that doesn't narrow it down as much as I'd hoped). I've explained why I think that way and you're free to think differently. We're debating something I added as a postscript. It's sad.

Bottom line is people tend to dislike a game and write it off too often (e.g. the game must be bad because I don't enjoy it) and other people tend to defend games they like too avidly (e.g. everyone who dislikes this game is wrong because I have fun playing it) but we all tend to be too blind to our own faults to see that. All games have problems, whether we overlook them or not generally comes down to whether we have fun more often that we get frustrated, and that'll be different for every person.

My personal opinion is, CoD2 > BO > CoD4 > MW2 > WaW > sitting on the dashboard > CoD3. People can disagree but that doesn't make me or anyone else "wrong", and making a statement like "MW2 was better" doesn't make you right.

But it really doesn't matter because it'll all be irrelevant when Skyrim gets released.

[InsaneBlaze23]

I thought MW2 was much worse for a variety of reasons.

1. Camping. There was sooo much camping, and the maps seemed to be built for it. It was enraging. Getting rid of the super high kill streak awards and kill streaks adding on to your kills streaks helped alleviate that.

2. Total BS weapons/balancing issues. Springing knife class, noob tubes, dual 1911's, HB sensors, so much stuff that just sucked.

3. Constantly joining matches that were with you losing 7300 to 1200. Constant disconnects screwed me over as well.

I could add more, but I'm just taking a short break from my programming work. Overall BO just felt like a far more polished and balanced game than MW2.

1. Though I do agree that the maps are made for camping, the same can be said about each of the current 3 games (cod4,mw2,Bops). Black Ops campers are more annoying that mw2 campers, mainly because you can predict the camp spot in mw2, where as in black ops, every building you walk in, you gotta check even the smallest corners. Overall both games annoy me with camping.

2. Commando Knifing is not as annoying as getting knifed from 4 feet out, with no contact, or the player knifing the air, missing you completely but still gets the kill. In fact I got a video for the people that say there is nothing wrong with the knifing in Bops. Noob tubes are in both games, though I agree that there more used in MW2 and more powerful(area wise), Black Ops noob tubes are annoying because you would think people would have gotten over that, but no, the community of cod games are cheap players. Theirs a counter for the KB sensors just as theirs a counter to the motion sensors.

3. I've gotten put in 175-12 dom matches, 7400-1000 TDM matches allot in Black Ops, there is just no excuse for it.

Bottom line, there is not much that can be said that separates either of the 2, but it does give more fuel to why CoD is bad. It seems there is issues that not only hasn't been fixed, but more than likely will not be fixed.

Why do I like MW2 over Bops(even when I dislike the series in general), MW2 flows better to me, there is more of a balance and realism IMO in MW2. I don't have to worry about putting half a clip or a whole clip into a guys back, just for him to turn fire 3 bullets and kill me.

Anyways here is the knife video, I was not even gonna post it, but my friend wants "the world" to see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVbB2...layer_embedded

And no it's not a ballistic knife, he was playing one in the chamber.

There are more vids like this, I posted a video on "the magic" on youtube, so has a youtube "big name" Jai Easy.

At least there is a excuse for the knifing in MW2.

[Hoserman117]

I thought MW2 was much worse for a variety of reasons.

1. Camping. There was sooo much camping, and the maps seemed to be built for it. It was enraging. Getting rid of the super high kill streak awards and kill streaks adding on to your kills streaks helped alleviate that.

2. Total BS weapons/balancing issues. Springing knife class, noob tubes, dual 1911's, HB sensors, so much stuff that just sucked.

3. Constantly joining matches that were with you losing 7300 to 1200. Constant disconnects screwed me over as well.

I could add more, but I'm just taking a short break from my programming work. Overall BO just felt like a far more polished and balanced game than MW2.

[InsaneBlaze23]

My issue with nukes isnt people gettng them, its people 1 cheating for them(tac ins with a buddy) and 2 camping the whole time trying to get them.

People camp for dogs,chopper,gunship,etc in Black Ops. Using tacs with a buddy is a part of boosting, which runs wild in Black Ops games like Search, Headquarters, and Demo.

[Bernie24]

My issue with nukes isnt people gettng them, its people 1 cheating for them(tac ins with a buddy) and 2 camping the whole time trying to get them.

[InsaneBlaze23]

In what ways were MW2 better than Blackops? I felt like they took the things that made me the most angry (cheating for nukes, Severe camping to get nukes, juggernaut and stopping power eliminated, hell even noobtubes are less common now) and for the most part got rid of them.

Actually Juggernaut is in Black Ops, but not as a perk. It was built in, so everybody has Juggernaut. One guy was talking about, in he said it's dumb that they have juggernaut built in, but not stopping power.

To me stopping power is like Rapid fire for damage. Both games have severe camping, Black Ops campers are more annoying.

Nukes I don't care for, someone has only used a nuke once, while I played in a game, he was on my team. So I didn't care. I could of had a nuke the last time I played, but I find the other streaks useful.

Noob tubing is less common than MW2, but it's not less common as in whole.

There is less bs in MW2, the game flows better, shots count, server is better,etc.

Black Ops has tech issues along with other things, that I have named over a 100x.

[Bernie24]

In what ways were MW2 better than Blackops? I felt like they took the things that made me the most angry (cheating for nukes, Severe camping to get nukes, juggernaut and stopping power eliminated, hell even noobtubes are less common now) and for the most part got rid of them.

[BarkdogRX7]

I'm right everyone here is wrong!!! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh


Wait I didn't make a point did I, oh well lol

[InsaneBlaze23]

i think people actually hate on WaW and BO because they actually aren't very good games. not because of some previous installment. that would be completely unwarranted lol. they aren't bad games... but given their counterparts, they could be much better, especially within the same franchise. BO is still inferior to MW2 and that just should never have been allowed to happen.

I agree on allot of things you said, but I find this one more point.

I never played CoD3, mainly because I'm not a huge fan of the CoD series in general, there was better games out at the time, so I never played. I did own CoD2, which I did enjoy allot. I agree that Bo is inferior to MW2, and that having 2yrs to make a game for a large company is enough time.

Like you said about movies, some make more than 1 at once, Pirates 2-3 was film at once, I'm sure video games are the same.

Maybe thats why there is a MW3 easter egg in MW2, but yet MW3 comes out this year, while MW2 came out in 2009.

I don't really care for the controls that much for any game, if there different from a game I've played, I learn em. Controls is not my issue with CoD games.


As for that uptight comment: I'm not uptight, just blunt and I tend to not bite my tongue.

[RealBronco]

I understand very well how these games are produced, I had some interesting conversations with fourzerotwo back in the day about the direction Treyarch were taking with IW's game.

i'm not quoting everything because i just don't care enough. but my point is: 2 years is plenty of time to put out a quality game, especially if it's a sequel. Naughty Dog did it with Uncharted, and Santa Monica did it with God of War.

you have to realize that just because the game released every 2 years doesn't mean they ONLY spent 2 years developing it. These development companies are huge, much like movie studios, and you don't think Warner Bros. only works on one film at a time do you?

anyway, there's no point in making vast improvements over a game if it's a sequel or even of the same line of games. no gamer wants to sit and learn new control setups every time a new game of the same title comes out. that's a waste of time and money for the developer as well.

*shrugs* i dunno. i just don't expect a developer to waste their time or mine on a franchise with stupid changes like re-arranging the control setup or what have you. you'll find most developers forgo difficulty for graphics these days and that's been the trend for every console generation that's come out. i'm personally fine with that for a lot of games. some games are meant to be difficult and others are meant to just be fun. i don't think FPS have ever been meant to have any sort of ridiculous difficulty levels.

And I'm not quite sure how clever you truly thought you were being with that last comment but if we're gonna be pedantic, this is a video gaming subforum on a football message board, and my sadness about visiting DenverBroncos.com to talk about video games because there's nothing worth discussing in GD at the moment was the gist of my parting comment. It was made lightheartedly but I can completely understand it was necessary to ride me over it.

why is everyone in this thread so darn uptight? lol good grief. i don't mean to be clever, i mean to be clear. i'm really tired (even though it is quite humorous) of people coming into the SUB-FORUMS that don't involve football, and are clearly labeled thus, and complain about football not being discussed.

i was merely drawing attention to the fact that you used the more finite term "forum" as if this entire message board just had one huge forum that talked about football, with occasional threads about something else.

you're right. this is a sub-forum on a message board that contains multiple sub-forums. there should be no football being discussed in this particular forum unless it is related to a video game.

in fact it's against the CoC. you would be hijacking the thread and taking it off-topic. why am i making a big deal out of it? i'm not really. like i said, i find it funny when people complain about forum topics in the wrong forums. and i'm also really bored. as you said, there's not much to talk about in the football world. but if you don't have any football related things to discuss, and you seem to be an avid gamer i'm sure there are actual video game MESSAGE BOARDS you could visit and honk your horn on.

but they just changed the kick off rule and there are daily developments (though small) in the lockout situation. there are things to talk about in football if you look hard enough

P.P.S. People "hate" on Treyarch not because of WaW (which was a decent game) and not because of Black Ops (which is the best modern release since CoD4 IMO, and CoD4 only gets ahead of it because it established the series moving away from WW2). People "hate" on Treyarch because of the abomination that was Call of Duty 3 and that bad feeling has permeated within the community for a while, because it was just so terrible compared to CoD2. The people who think WaW and BO (that made me lol) are the reason people favour IW are new.

i think people actually hate on WaW and BO because they actually aren't very good games. not because of some previous installment. that would be completely unwarranted lol. they aren't bad games... but given their counterparts, they could be much better, especially within the same franchise. BO is still inferior to MW2 and that just should never have been allowed to happen.

[Sync]

the way you've worded this sounds like you don't understand what you're saying here, or you're cleverly wording it to make it sound like something it isn't. the key words in this are "alternating developers"

I understand very well how these games are produced, I had some interesting conversations with fourzerotwo back in the day about the direction Treyarch were taking with IW's game.

The game comes out every year but obviously, since IW didn't make WaW they had two years between CoD4 and MW2. That being said they would have about a year of production time before the game needs to be approaching a beta stage and such with screenshots and some footage to leak to the media shortly after their counterpart's release hits the shelves. You pointed out yourself the emphasis I put on "alternating" developers - and seem to have based your reply on the assumption I don't understand what alternating means!

You do make one decent point which is that the game shouldn't change dramatically for a sequel, but having less production time to create a game means things go unattended to and unfixed, and it also doesn't allow for the game to progress performance-wise. They're pretty much recycling the same game engine. Which is fine up to a point, but eventually it will start to feel dated.

And I'm not quite sure how clever you truly thought you were being with that last comment but if we're gonna be pedantic, this is a video gaming subforum on a football message board, and my sadness about visiting DenverBroncos.com to talk about video games because there's nothing worth discussing in GD at the moment was the gist of my parting comment. It was made lightheartedly but I can completely understand it was necessary to ride me over it.



P.S. It's very easy to get kills on CoD but conversely it's also very easy to die. It's certainly easier to be pulling positive on a game like Call of Duty compared to a game like Halo due to the health/shield system, but consistently getting triple, quadruple, etc. your deaths on either game is a challenge if you're up against half-decent competition. Halo is also a lot more about teamwork whereas Call of Duty encourages a more lone-wolf style of gameplay, which is why I prefer it. Easier to jump into a game by yourself and carry your team... and you will have to carry your team.

P.P.S. People "hate" on Treyarch not because of WaW (which was a decent game) and not because of Black Ops (which is the best modern release since CoD4 IMO, and CoD4 only gets ahead of it because it established the series moving away from WW2). People "hate" on Treyarch because of the abomination that was Call of Duty 3 and that bad feeling has permeated within the community for a while, because it was just so terrible compared to CoD2. The people who think WaW and BO (that made me lol) are the reason people favour IW are new.

[InsaneBlaze23]

@Horseman, You are right about those weapons, in Halo the main focus before killing people is to get rid of the assault rifle, either find a DmR, needler,sword, shotgun,etc any gun will do, just not that rifle.

But CoD, every gun in the game can do damage, the guns most used in the game, are guns you get just with 4hrs of online gameplay.(Mp5k,Famas, Ak-74,AUG,etc)

Now I'm not saying nobody use the higher up weapons like the Commando,Ak-47,Hk-G11, pm63, mpl,etc. But the most common guns are Famas and 74u.

[Bernie24]

Halo easier than CoD...

Just commenting on the whole CoD is harder than Halo thing....

1. You kill people in about 4 shots on CoD, you don't need to aim for any reasonable amount of time to score a kill. My girlfriend can go 15-34 in a game (bad, yes I know) but she has basically no idea what's going on and just looks at people and squeezes the trigger. In Halo she'll go like 0-25 because you actually have to do some consistent aiming.

2. You start with awesome weapons in CoD, in Halo you have to go find them. Anybody remember the noob tubes from MW2? Please kill me.

3. I've played Halo religiously for years and truly care about my KD ratio online. I keep it around a 1.7, and that's pretty good. I just run around maps and unload on people in CoD and I think it's a 1.66.

Also... in what universe was MW2 better than Black Ops? Noob tubes, nukes, heart beat sensors, dual 1911's, sprinting knifing ass wagons, the list goes on and on, that game was unbalanced garbage. Black Ops is much better IMO. The only thing I preferred about MW2 were the maps. Also Black Ops had a kick ass storyline, something I really wasn't expecting.

Also a hardcore gamer doesn't have to play the game professionally. To be a hardcore movie buff do you have to make movies, or professionally review them? Do I have to be a coach to be a hardcore football fan? Hardcore gamers are simply the jaded crowd of video gamers, and expect a little extra something from the games they buy. They can also come off as a little d-bag-ish, which is understandable (I consider myself to be one of them).

Lol i agree, owned.

[Hoserman117]

Well, majority then. I think games like FF and the like are more of the exception and not the rule, otherwise this thread wouldn't exist.

I'd agree with that, but there are still plenty of devs. out there that cater to hardcore gamers.