OPM: Infinity Ward’s Mark Rubin has explained Call Of Duty: Ghosts’ take on the branching paths introduced in Treyarch’s Black Ops 2. That system previously let you make defined gameplay choices at specific points. Rubin says Ghosts won’t use the same system and instead promises something ‘Easter egg-ish”.
An update on the release of XDefiant from Mark Rubin!
Been real hungry for a more simple multiplayer fps for a long time. I really dislike all the hero shooters we keep getting. I'll definitely give this a shot and if it ends up crap then it ends up crap.
How broken is the game when Sony and MS failed certification? And they still think it may fail and planning on a day 1 patch, somebody was slacking.
He literally came out to clarify that this is very standard of a process for a game to be denied the first cert. They're just giving a update to the people waiting and explaining what's going on
They were too late to do this. Also, the beta versions of the game were absolutely a disaster, if they are like this at launch, they will destroy themselves without the need for CoD anyway. Besides, it is an extremely negative thing that the game was rejected by Sony or MS or both during quality control, and that is why they waited so long to announce it. Moreover, there is still a chance of being rejected again.
What I wonder is, at what point did people love Mark so much? Many years ago, when Mark was working in CoD teams, people were swearing at him. Now, it really surprises me that Mark has his defenders. People either forget things very easily, or younger generations are not very aware of Mark's past...
Well, yeah but not really. The problem is you set certification for a specific date, and then you have to deliver something mostly working to get a cert. However, often times first cert is set too soon, because you start doing it before the game is actually ready, so the process is mostly used to see how much effort it would still require to deliver something passable on second cert, because you get a nice report after the first one. It's absolutely possible to deliver on first cert. You do not deliver if you're way behind with development.
Very standard? I can't think of a time where I've read a story of a major publisher failing the certification process and having to delay the game as a result.
The game has pretty bad issues in the open beta. It's a shame because a f2p proper fps is needed at the moment.
Ubisoft dev Mark Rubin tells us how Call of Duty rival XDefiant will defy player expectations with its maps and thrilling multiplayer gameplay.
BLG writes: "Call of Duty has to be the most recognizable franchise on the planet. They didn’t get that way by only making a handful of games.
COD has a long and storied career. Launching as a PC WW2 first-person shooter, Call of Duty has gone through numerous makeovers and been on just about every system. The series has gone through some serious highs and tragic lows. I’ll be looking at each Call of Duty game, the good the bad, and the ugly."
Vanguard better be at the fkn bottom. Can’t believe ppl haven’t eviscerated that game with all its lacking
Same for me.
I was never huge into Call of Duty, but I sunk a lot of time into WaW.
Both the campaign and the multiplayer are on point. Wouldn't mind a remaster.
I quit on CoD for a long while. Though I'm the odd man out that actually really enjoyed the campaign for WWII, being I got it through Humble monthly way back when.
I agree, The Infinite campaign feels more like it's own thing that they slapped the CoD name on. If it stood on it's own, (sans the CoD name) I think it could have been it's own scifi franchise. And a damn good looking game, to boot. I never bothered to play the multiplayer.
That was one I grabbed for Playstation because it pretty much just came out during the Redbox purge of videogames, and I got it for dirt cheap.
It was great coming home to an update every night, and watching one game eat up almost half my console's memory.
Will get disagrees but Infinite Warfare campaign was really good. Decent story, set pieces were amazing and if it didn't have the CoD game on it I'm sure people would have been more into it. Advanced Warfare was alright too. Titanfall 2 was just 1000 times better than both but I enjoyed them for their campaigns. I literally barely gaf about the story I'm in it for the set pieces and 5 hours of being stoned watching cool nonsense happen if I'm in the mood to play a CoD campaign. If I'm looking for a deep plot I'm gonna go somewhere else.
Ghosts was the worst story-wise though lol that cliffhanger ending was so bs.
Also MW 2019 was sick and is one of the best CoD games in yeeeears not sure why it's so low on this dude's list. Campaign was great, multiplayer was great and Warzone was fun for a while. Over it now but shrugs.
Beat the Vanguard campaign too but I can't even remember a single thing about it other than that it felt like it was 45 minutes long. Might be the most forgettable thing I've ever played lol just fully erased from my brain
So, basically it has like Intel documents scattered around the levels, but basically they are linear? Just say it, don't dance around it.
Seems like BF4 might be the ticket. I'm sure this will appeal to the CoD fans that choose to move on to the X1 or PS4.
Different strokes for different folks.
Bf4 might be the ticket dude its the biggest ticket.
In spite of taking the time to comment here....Why don't I care about this game???
....Ghosts feels extremely long in the tooth.
This is not bad IMO. Actually, I prefer linear games. Non-linear gameplay in a linear story is something else. If it has different endings, even better.
MGS4, Last of Us, Heavy Rain, Bioshock...
Why is it when Treyarch introduce something great into the series IW dont improve on it. We had zombies, interactive MP maps, dive to prone, branching story missions, Strike Force missions.
The best thing IW could do would be to release a HD version of COD 4.