Top
190°

TIMJ: Why I’m no longer buying into the yearly Call of Duty con

Andy Corrigan writes "I dismay sometimes, I really do. Whenever we hit the silly season release period, we get our usual glut of new big games, and as always, the fair amount of them are sequels. I can live with sequels, they’re important to the industry, and hell, who doesn’t like more of something they enjoy? That said, there definitely comes a time when you have to say ‘enough is enough, we’ve taken this too far’, and I’m looking at you Activision."

Read Full Story >>
thisismyjoystick.com
The story is too old to be commented.
TurismoGTR2574d ago

I think im going to just stick to purchasing the Modern Warfare games. Hopefully Iward returns to deveople it. Call of Duty isn't a bad overall game, it's just... theres nothing ground breaking.

deadreckoning6662574d ago (Edited 2574d ago )

I've never bought a COD game in my life, but a game doesn't need to be groundbreaking to be fun. Fun is the reason we play games in the first place. When I play a game I'm only concerned about how much fun I'm having and how well every aspect of the game (graphics, gameplay, sound, content, story) helps add fun to the game.

If groundbreaking games determined what gamers in general wanted, Modern Warfare 2 wouldn't be the most played game between the PS3 and 360 and Wii exclusive party games wouldn't be the best selling games of this generation.

@D4RKNIKON- The ONLY people who complain that COD games are exactly the same every year are haters. COD's gameplay is "similar" to past COD's because its a COD game. Just like GOW's gameplay was largely unchanged from GOW2 because GOW3 is a God of War game. If you completely changed the gameplay style and design of a COD game, then it wouldn't be COD.

Every year, the gameplay gets tuned, adds new features. new story, new characters, new weapons etc. If it was the same game...why are more and MORE people buying it every year? You are aware that Black Ops shattered MW2's sales record right?

As for me, I don't buy COD games, because they don't appeal to me..but I know PLENTY of others that are COD fans. Theres no problem milking a franchise as long as the milk tastes good.

TurismoGTR2574d ago

if Call of duty is pulling off huge sales..there next game better be ground breaking.

zerocool33972574d ago

but if you are buying the same game over and over... whats the point. you are paying for the same game every year. Groundbreaking is one thing but clone after clone is another

D4RkNIKON2574d ago

I stopped buying the annual COD con this year. I didn't get Black OPS and I don't really plan to. I have owned all of the COD's since the 2nd one and as of late, COD4, World at War, Modern Warfare 2 and Black OPS are ALL THE SAME GAME. I refused to keep buying the same game repackaged and resold to me year after year...

Active Reload2574d ago

"Why I’m no longer buying into the yearly Call of Duty con"

Because you have a PS3?

RoboRyan2574d ago

There are plenty of arguments that can be made in defense of COD, but the fact that more people keep buying it every year isn't one of them. If you look at any form of popular media, you'll find that some of it has widespread appeal because it's actually good and deserving of it, and some of it gains popularity because it plays it safe enough to not turn the average viewer/listener/gamer/reader off. Millions of people have bought Twilight, but it doesn't mean it's a literary masterpiece. COD has made a name for itself as one of the most popular FPS franchises out there and has tons of money to spend on advertising, so anyone with even the most remote interest in games knows about it. Everyone has their own criteria for what makes a great game. For some it's as simple as having a good multi-player component, while others want to see an in-depth story and strongly developed characters. I'm not knocking COD and would be interested to give Black Ops a shot, but it's more because I'm curious about how they convey a specific time period they haven't touched on before than it is because it's COD.

EeJLP-2574d ago

Only about 3 years too late TIMJ...

VerbalKint272574d ago (Edited 2574d ago )

The point was more how the type of yearly strategy in this instance stifles creativity in a franchise that desperately needs it after six samey iterations in the same number of years. It was never stated in that piece that CoD was ever a bad game.

In the God of War example, you don't see a new one every year. It gives it a cooldown period, and I think you're misjudging Jaffe if you think he'll rest on his laurels and reskin the same game every single freaking year.

Like said in the piece, there is quality in nearly all of the CoD games. The problem is that it's become too successful for its own good and Activision are happy for it to not evolve or actually innovate, because people are buying it no matter what the quality is like. Why would they? There's no point as they'd raking it in.

jetlian2574d ago (Edited 2574d ago )

jaffe has no say in GOW seeing as he only worked on the first 1!!! Another thing we have had 6 GOW games in a 5 year span of time so hows that not yearly?

COD has more changes than GOW has.

Edit: 2,3,5 are ww2 4,6,7 are modern.
2 was the first successfuly next gen game
3 added vehicles
4 went modern added penitration and Killstreaks
5 Added splitscreen campaign, zombies
6 added KS (some with player control) and spec ops
7 added splitscreen online,wadger matches,customization

VerbalKint272573d ago (Edited 2573d ago )

@Jetlian

I know that... You've just proved my point about Jaffe. Even still, that analogy doesn't work:

For a start, you're looking at just 3 core games. I'm not going to count PSP or Mobile games. If we do it simply doesn't change the point, it just adds more games to the list...

GOW: 2005
GOW2: 2007
GOW3: 2010

Two years apart with significant improvements. In that same time we've seen SIX CoD titles with barely any change between them.

Did changing CoD to Modern Settings change the trip-wire gameplay any? No. It was CoD re-skinned.

Again, the problem is the yearly strategy. I never said every game had to be ground-breaking, but some innovation as the 'market leaders' should be expected?

Unless you're just willing to accept lazy game design?

jetlian2573d ago (Edited 2573d ago )

the psp games are full length games. And I listed the changes COD series had over them. You claim changes in GOW but list nothing. Oh thats right there was none.

Same old QTE, same old button mashing to open(lift) doors same climbing,same combos,same none full 3D camera angles. But I guess that new shoulder charge was the bees knees lol.

But changing the time period did change weapons style over all game play. I don't think a gunship in WW2 was normal just like having flamethrowers today is normal!!
repeling down mountains and into buildings was not apart of ww2 norm

And the biggest of all IW and TA don't work hand in hand

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 2573d ago
ZombieNinjaPanda2574d ago

@Turismo
>their next game better be ground breaking.

It won't be. This is activision, Infinity Ward, and Call of Duty we're talking about here. Most likely the next 2 games are going to be using the same engine with new maps, new guns, new campaign, and call it a brand new game.

Ducky2574d ago (Edited 2574d ago )

New Maps, New Guns, New Campaign, a few new game-modes.
I'd call that a new game.

The engine also has gotten changes through the installments.
I don't think the current-gen consoles have enough juice to improve visuals while still sticking to 60fps. I'd like a developer to prove me wrong, but I have no problem with the same engine being used as long as it works.

That being said, if some other developper actually tried to challenge CoD then I'd jump ships. EA/DICE's MoH was a weak attempt, but let's see what Respawn does.
No-other FPS, aside from maybe Halo and TF2, tries to be fast-paced. I only buy these games because they're the closest to Quake, which is the kind of gameplay I like.
Although I don't buy CoD on a yearly basis...

VerbalKint272574d ago (Edited 2574d ago )

@Fatoldman.

By not buying it every year, you're having that cool down period, so when you do pick up the new one, it'll seem more of a jump I guess.

It's the yearly strategy that's CoD's main problem. It's like being best mates with someone and being inseparable, you don't see them evolve. Don't see each other for a year and it's like they're a new person.

zerocool33972574d ago

I think Activision has gone a little too OTT with the whole franchise and this article voices that. Too much of people buying into the whole thing. The best thing they did was WaW with the zombies. It was different and loads of fun. I tried MW2 but the MP was screwed and I just didnt get the whole game.

sonicsidewinder2574d ago (Edited 2574d ago )

virtually all the innovative stuff was done in COD4. Every cod game since then has borrowed almost everything good about other games.

It shouldnt be a bad thing. I just don't like when these innovations are passed off as 'something new' or 'special' in the cod game.

Zombies? Gun-Game?

1999. Counterstrike.

LordMarius2574d ago

We go through this every year.
Now
"Why I’m no longer buying into the yearly Call of Duty con"

next year
"Why Call Of Duty: Something will be the best one yet"

Neckbear2574d ago (Edited 2574d ago )

Sadly, it does seems like it'll be an endless cycle.

-Buy COD

-MP is broken

-Technical issues

-Vow to not buy a COD game again

-See new COD

-Developers promise to fix things up

-Game releases

-Critics praise it, despite being broken as hell

-Consumers regret buying the game

-Repeat

@visualb

A fair comparison, indeed!

visualb2574d ago

neckbear! I got it!

Politics! Its just like politics!

firefoxprime2574d ago

Hehe...sounds like the sonic cycle! If Sega could break out of it with Colors, then maybe there's hope for Activision? Nah...lol.

zerocool33972574d ago

You really dont know the writer. If he says thats it, thats it. Unless they do something radical and take a gamble with some new style of gameplay and something completely different. I wont be bothering either

va_bank2574d ago

It's not that hard. I've avoided last 3 games and never missed them.

MGRogue20172574d ago (Edited 2574d ago )

I'll keep buying future Call of Duty games.. just as long they don't make us pay for multi-player.

I won't lie.. I enjoy 'em, Especially Black Ops, addictive 60fps fun. I always come back for more. :)

MGRogue20172574d ago

CoD: Black Ops is addictive & fun.

SKUD2574d ago

*cough* ^^^^ part of the problem ^^^ *cough*

electricshadow2574d ago

These yearly releases of Call of Duty games will start to run thin with the gaming community. It might not be next year, the year after that or even later, but CoD will hit it's peak. The CoD games are alright, it's just that they don't bring anything new to the table except new weapons and marginally upgraded graphics. Blops had a short, but fun singleplayer, but I just couldn't get into the multiplayer this time around. I only got to rank 20 before I stopped. To me, it's the same as MW1.

Show all comments (50)
The story is too old to be commented.