ZFGC
General => Entertainment => Topic started by: Zhello on November 06, 2010, 02:45:17 am
-
Anyone getting the game? Heard a lot of things, so im guessing it will be a sick game, enough for medal of honor players to join in.
Sadly, I am getting the game later on xD.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDVm8yAGNpg
-
Passing on it. I prefer my shooters to be a lot more... Scifi. It's boring playing a game that has the same 'realism' concept used in games since the 80s. I'd rather have superhuman abilities ;p
-
What the hell... Theres another Call of Duty game ready to be released? Is their development cycle 1 year?
Talk about mass production...
-
What the hell... Theres another Call of Duty game ready to be released? Is their development cycle 1 year?
Talk about mass production...
Yeah, it's 1 year. Quantity over quality, because idiots continue to buy them...
-
What the hell... Theres another Call of Duty game ready to be released? Is their development cycle 1 year?
Talk about mass production...
Yeah, it's 1 year. Quantity over quality, because idiots continue to buy them...
God... I fail to see how you can make a game any much better with a 1 year dev cycle...
BTW No, I am not going to get it.
-
It's a design model set up to polish the engine with every release, but it leads to more of the same crap that retards wait in line for :x
-
It's a design model set up to polish the engine with every release, but it leads to more of the same crap that retards wait in line for :x
Funny because I don't think they look different graphics-wise. I will be one mad mother !@#$% if Diablo 3 doesn't sell more than CoD Black Ops.
-
It's a design model set up to polish the engine with every release, but it leads to more of the same crap that retards wait in line for :x
Funny because I don't think they look different graphics-wise. I will be one mad mother !@#$% if Diablo 3 doesn't sell more than CoD Black Ops.
It probably won't since it's PC/Mac only. COD is for PC, 360 and PS3.
-
It's a design model set up to polish the engine with every release, but it leads to more of the same crap that retards wait in line for :x
Funny because I don't think they look different graphics-wise. I will be one mad mother !@#$% if Diablo 3 doesn't sell more than CoD Black Ops.
It probably won't since it's PC/Mac only. COD is for PC, 360 and PS3.
I'll be comparing it to PC numbers :P
-
CoD kinda sucks only because it's just another crappy FPS whrer the only skill is sitting and playing it for hours and hours... it doesn't take any thinking :-\
-
They have seperate teams that work on each call of duty. The people that made World At War (COD5) made Black Ops. I think.
-
They have seperate teams that work on each call of duty. The people that made World At War (COD5) made Black Ops. I think.
Yeah, but the fact that they're stressing quantity over quality is sickening...
-
world at war was just a ridiculous, unrealistic, american fantasy of WW2
-
world at war was just a ridiculous, unrealistic, american fantasy of WW2
What do you know of WW2? You're like, 13 D:
Ask gramps about it and he'll give you an earful :P
-
believe me, i have. my grandpa was a medic. and I actually do know quite a bit about the war in the pacific.
-
world at war was just a ridiculous, unrealistic, american fantasy of WW2
World At War is a video Game that portrays life/war or what have you in the same light as all other games... a ridiculous unrealistic fantasy. If you want reality then don't look for it on the television screen... Live your life...
On another note though. Props to your grampa for being a vet! :)
-
They have seperate teams that work on each call of duty. The people that made World At War (COD5) made Black Ops. I think.
Yeah, but the fact that they're stressing quantity over quality is sickening...
Was just sayin'..
-
The fact that Black Ops is a Treyarch-developed game, it's probably been in development for longer than a year. Most likely, development started after World at War and the other two games they were working on. Black Ops is looking like a better experience than Modern Warfare 2, that's for sure.
-
Cookie cutter FPS is cookie-cut. CoD is just like Halo in my eyes. You're getting the same gameplay using the same weapons with a few new gimmicky "perks"... And before you CoD fans say "But I'm gonna get hours and hours of fun out of multiplayer!" Unless it's a multiplayer exclusive game, I don't base my judgement on the multiplayer. It's a tacked-on feature to make the player think they're getting their money's worth in "replayability" That would be like me buying a SRPG because I like the fact that you can name your characters... War simulators haven't been fun since... people started making them. They force feed you some bullshitty "What if!" storyline, then match you up with quirky sidekick after quirky sidekick, only to have them keeled off one after the other like you're playing some kind of future-psychiatrist-patient simulator. And what's worse in CoD is the fact that you HAVE to replay the damn levels over and over to get anywhere in multiplayer which is why 90% of the people who bought it, bought it to begin with!
In short, CoD is a cash cow, and will always be a cash cow, just like Halo is. You're gonna keep seeing the same game over and over rebranded with stupid new features that alter gameplay nigh but how quickly you reload your gun. People eat crap like that up though, so yeah.
-
^This, even though I've bought into the Halo franchise (and even though that's simply because of the multiplayer XD It's how I keep in touch with IRL friends)
-
You need a social life.
Topic: I don't like FPS much. Never bought any of CoD games and I never will. People say it is so realistic. Reviews always them for the realism. But the fact is that it is grossly exagerated. A Mario game is far more realistic than any CoD I have ever seen. In short the game will suck.
-
In short the game will suck.
In VERY short... like probably 10 ~5 minute campaigns.
-
You need a social life.
That or you know, no job so I can actually hang out with them. My adult life has sent me hundreds of miles from my previous social groups so yeah <_<..
-
Cookie cutter FPS is cookie-cut. CoD is just like Halo in my eyes. You're getting the same gameplay using the same weapons with a few new gimmicky "perks"... And before you CoD fans say "But I'm gonna get hours and hours of fun out of multiplayer!" Unless it's a multiplayer exclusive game, I don't base my judgement on the multiplayer. It's a tacked-on feature to make the player think they're getting their money's worth in "replayability" That would be like me buying a SRPG because I like the fact that you can name your characters... War simulators haven't been fun since... people started making them. They force feed you some bullshitty "What if!" storyline, then match you up with quirky sidekick after quirky sidekick, only to have them keeled off one after the other like you're playing some kind of future-psychiatrist-patient simulator. And what's worse in CoD is the fact that you HAVE to replay the damn levels over and over to get anywhere in multiplayer which is why 90% of the people who bought it, bought it to begin with!
In short, CoD is a cash cow, and will always be a cash cow, just like Halo is. You're gonna keep seeing the same game over and over rebranded with stupid new features that alter gameplay nigh but how quickly you reload your gun. People eat crap like that up though, so yeah.
I love the Battlefied 1942 Multiplayer, it's basic and for me a ton of fun, and i only play the mutliplayer demo online. When i had the full game it was all multiplayer for me, i touched single player once or twice, its not the same. The multiplayer demo is 1 level, and damn fun. I have most likely sunken atleast 100 hours into it. So yes, a game can be limited, and fun too.
-
I'm sort of looking forward to Homefront in terms of a more original shooter, and I might but Black Ops even though I know it's not going to be that much different than the last two.
-
My two cents:
Almost every "big-name" magazine or website for the purpose of reviewing games(such as IGN for an example) has given the game a great review. Almost every player has given the game a "O.K." review for it.
I do think someone is dipping in Activision's pockets.
/conspiracy
-
Cookie cutter FPS is cookie-cut. CoD is just like Halo in my eyes. You're getting the same gameplay using the same weapons with a few new gimmicky "perks"... And before you CoD fans say "But I'm gonna get hours and hours of fun out of multiplayer!" Unless it's a multiplayer exclusive game, I don't base my judgement on the multiplayer. It's a tacked-on feature to make the player think they're getting their money's worth in "replayability" That would be like me buying a SRPG because I like the fact that you can name your characters... War simulators haven't been fun since... people started making them. They force feed you some bullshitty "What if!" storyline, then match you up with quirky sidekick after quirky sidekick, only to have them keeled off one after the other like you're playing some kind of future-psychiatrist-patient simulator. And what's worse in CoD is the fact that you HAVE to replay the damn levels over and over to get anywhere in multiplayer which is why 90% of the people who bought it, bought it to begin with!
In short, CoD is a cash cow, and will always be a cash cow, just like Halo is. You're gonna keep seeing the same game over and over rebranded with stupid new features that alter gameplay nigh but how quickly you reload your gun. People eat crap like that up though, so yeah.
QTF although many franchises fit that description besides Halo and CoD... but of course, money talks... but oh well...
As for CoD Black Ops... Let's see my track record for the series...
3? Didn't play. 4? Played Multiplayer a bit, that's it. 5? Nope. ModernWarfare 2? Nope... you see the recurring pattern that will follow...
plus I'm not a huge FPS guy either...
-
Apparently it's got quite a few lag issues on PC too.
Yeah, I think I'll stick with battlefield and CSS.
-
I find Black Ops to be better than the others for sure but CoD4 did have awesome multiplayer. That's just me though. Besides, it doesn't hurt to give games a chance.
-
My two cents:
Almost every "big-name" magazine or website for the purpose of reviewing games(such as IGN for an example) has given the game a great review. Almost every player has given the game a "O.K." review for it.
I do think someone is dipping in Activision's pockets.
/conspiracy
Guess what? (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/11/call-of-duty-black-ops-review-event-press-gifts-detailed.ars)
-
Ok, I just played black ops with my friend and it's pretty awesome. It's still not as good as rainbow six, but it was surprisingly fun
-
My two cents:
Almost every "big-name" magazine or website for the purpose of reviewing games(such as IGN for an example) has given the game a great review. Almost every player has given the game a "O.K." review for it.
I do think someone is dipping in Activision's pockets.
/conspiracy
Guess what? (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/11/call-of-duty-black-ops-review-event-press-gifts-detailed.ars)
...and people have been calling me a moron for having videogame conspiracies dealing with dirty-dealing such as this.
Hmm. Who would have thought that Activision REALLY is the dark !@#$% company I always thought they were?
Needless to say, if I want FPS with multiplayer, I stick to my butchered CS:S and maybe get the next Battlefield game as I haven't gotten one since 2142 (which I enjoyed tight butthole).
-
Video game companies pay magazines that review games for advertisement pages... Do you think a VG magazine is gonna talk trash on a game that a company paid them X amount to have featured on 1 page and risk them never advertising with them again?
Example: Prior to release, Rare pays EGM $5,000 to feature a Banjo KaBastardization ad page with release date, etc in 1 issue. The following month, the game releases, and EGM does a review. Do you think they're going to say "Man, Rare jabbed my childhood's eyes out with blocky graphics and sodomized the empty sockets 0/10!" NOPE! Because if they did, then Rare isn't gonna pay them to feature their next game.
-
Video game companies pay magazines that review games for advertisement pages... Do you think a VG magazine is gonna talk trash on a game that a company paid them X amount to have featured on 1 page and risk them never advertising with them again?
Still doesn't dismiss the fact there it is wrong.
You aren't giving your "less intelligent" readers a proper review. It's the same as a bribe in court. Pay someone to say change the story just a bit, except they get virtually no consequences.
I think it is appalling and one of the many reasons I try to not even look at game reviews until I have already played the game myself, listened to close friends that bought the game first, or just really want to see the commercial review before I buy it.
Ziff Davis Media doesn't get my money anymore and haven't for 5 years. Cookie if you know what that is without using the internet to find out.
Oh and the fact that the average gamer refuses to acknowledge even what you have said, DJ, is also what pisses me off. To the average gamer, seems like game companies can do no wrong. :(
-
Video game companies pay magazines that review games for advertisement pages... Do you think a VG magazine is gonna talk trash on a game that a company paid them X amount to have featured on 1 page and risk them never advertising with them again?
Still doesn't dismiss the fact there it is wrong.
You aren't giving your "less intelligent" readers a proper review. It's the same as a bribe in court. Pay someone to say change the story just a bit, except they get virtually no consequences.
I think it is appalling and one of the many reasons I try to not even look at game reviews until I have already played the game myself, listened to close friends that bought the game first, or just really want to see the commercial review before I buy it.
Ziff Davis Media doesn't get my money anymore and haven't for 5 years. Cookie if you know what that is without using the internet to find out.
Oh and the fact that the average gamer refuses to acknowledge even what you have said, DJ, is also what pisses me off. To the average gamer, seems like game companies can do no wrong. :(
Not everyone does it though, Final Fantasy 14 got horrible reviews from pretty much every gaming website that ever existed. If square is paying people off, they're apparently doing it wrong.
-
Video game companies pay magazines that review games for advertisement pages... Do you think a VG magazine is gonna talk trash on a game that a company paid them X amount to have featured on 1 page and risk them never advertising with them again?
Still doesn't dismiss the fact there it is wrong.
You aren't giving your "less intelligent" readers a proper review. It's the same as a bribe in court. Pay someone to say change the story just a bit, except they get virtually no consequences.
I think it is appalling and one of the many reasons I try to not even look at game reviews until I have already played the game myself, listened to close friends that bought the game first, or just really want to see the commercial review before I buy it.
Ziff Davis Media doesn't get my money anymore and haven't for 5 years. Cookie if you know what that is without using the internet to find out.
Oh and the fact that the average gamer refuses to acknowledge even what you have said, DJ, is also what pisses me off. To the average gamer, seems like game companies can do no wrong. :(
Not everyone does it though, Final Fantasy 14 got horrible reviews from pretty much every gaming website that ever existed. If square is paying people off, they're apparently doing it wrong.
Or there are games that even money can't make it better :P
-
This kind of made me interested in this game: XD
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/top-10-screwattack/707296 (http://www.gametrailers.com/video/top-10-screwattack/707296)
At first I thought it was a modern day shooter, which I hate. But I only just found out it's set during the Cold War.
For me, WW2 shooters hadn't gotten old yet so I still like those more, I played CoD World at War. I'm still waiting for one from the German/Japanese perspective :-\
-
Graphics in that video look much worse than Modern Warfare 2...
-
Co-Worker calls me at home just to tell me this:
Bro, Black Ops is actually a really awesome game!
The graphics are WAY better than Modern Warfare 2. The multiplayer is just sick, bro.
<Insert the my comments about pay-offs, actual player reviews, etc>
Oh, bro, only the people who can't quick-scope are the ones complaining about the game.
"This game takes real skill now unlike MW2" <---quote from co-worker
<Insert my comment about saying I'm not stupid enough to drop $60 on !@#$%>
It's not that bad, bro.
<Insert my comment about that I am content with MW2, SC2, and WoW>
You should get the game, bro.
<Insert my comment about not wasting money>
--------------------------------------------------------------
Can't make that up. That is a typical fanboy right there. I once read his college homework where he had to describe a videogame in detail. He rips all over Halo, insisting that Modern Warfare and MW2 are superior in every aspect of an fps game. Do I think his opinion of any CoD game may be slightly scued?
Morons like that is what, IMO, is killing our industry.
Sure, I am a Square fan-boy,but the last title I actually dropped money for on a brand-new copy was FFXIII and it was a piece of !@#$%.
I am officially placing CoD nerds(yes, they are nerds. I don't give a !@#$% how much of a "social life" they have, how many women they supposedly have sex with, nor how much they work out- they are still nerds for CoD. They don't shut up about it.)on the exact same list as Madden and NBA Live nerds.
Keep paying $60 every year for new skins, boys.
Also, I don't hate CoD. I enjoyed MW2...but I didn't pay for it. It was a gift to me for Christmas last year.
The fan boys are just obnoxious. The only time you can catch me like that is with GUNDAM. XD
tl;dr
CoD fanboys are retarded.
-
Dang, TFS, you seem to hate Black Ops as much as i hate Gauntlet: Seven Sorrows.
Also w00t w00t FFXIII
-
I don't care yo, I'm in the mood for a new shooter. 360 broke so I'll get it on the PC and use a 360 control which I'm more comfortable with. That'll tide me over for a while until I want an RPG and I'll get New Vegas.
-
I don't care yo, I'm in the mood for a newrehashed shooter with new skins. 360 broke so I'll get it on the PC and use a 360 control which I'm more comfortable with. That'll tide me over for a while until I want an RPG and I'll get New Vegas.
Fixed.
-
I don't care yo, I'm in the mood for a newrehashed shooter with new skins. 360 broke so I'll get it on the PC and use a 360 control which I'm more comfortable with. That'll tide me over for a while until I want an RPG and I'll get New Vegas.
Fixed.
Dude you're being a whiny little brat. So it's not the most original game. Modified, improved engine is fine with me. I'm in love with media about the Cold War, I find it fascinating so the plot won't bore me either. Get over yourself
-
I don't care yo, I'm in the mood for a newrehashed shooter with new skins. 360 broke so I'll get it on the PC and use a 360 control which I'm more comfortable with. That'll tide me over for a while until I want an RPG and I'll get New Vegas.
Fixed.
Dude you're being a whiny little brat. So it's not the most original game. Modified, improved engine is fine with me. I'm in love with media about the Cold War, I find it fascinating so the plot won't bore me either. Get over yourself
SO, now I am a brat because I don't agree with you that Black Ops is a good game?
Forum has officially hit the !@#$%...
I guess it's wrong to state your opinion around here.
Now I can see why some members don't ever come back.
-
No I'm just saying you're assuming it's an awful game judged on the nature of the series rather than having tried it and experiencing it. I was more calling you a brat for saying you "fixed" my quote by throwing your opinion into my words. It's a video game, thus not that big of a deal.
-
No I'm just saying you're assuming it's an awful game judged on the nature of the series rather than having tried it and experiencing it. I was more calling you a brat for saying you "fixed" my quote by throwing your opinion into my words. It's a video game, thus not that big of a deal.
I am not judging based upon nature of the series like you say. I am judging based upon multitude of videos and actual real player reviews(not one liners, actual detailed paragraphs) oh and real life conversation with people that have already bought and played the game.
I wish it wasn't a rehash. But pretending it is something it's not, well... If you want to do that with $60, go for it.
/my opinion on Black Ops
Enjoy your game.
-
I don't care yo, I'm in the mood for a new shooter. 360 broke so I'll get it on the PC and use a 360 control which I'm more comfortable with. That'll tide me over for a while until I want an RPG and I'll get New Vegas.
Wait, I know why you're going to play it with a 360 controller, but if you plan on playing against PC players who use keyboards and mice you're practically asking to die.
-
I don't care yo, I'm in the mood for a new shooter. 360 broke so I'll get it on the PC and use a 360 control which I'm more comfortable with. That'll tide me over for a while until I want an RPG and I'll get New Vegas.
Wait, I know why you're going to play it with a 360 controller, but if you plan on playing against PC players who use keyboards and mice you're practically asking to die.
Obviously if I'm getting the PC version I'll be playing PC players who use keyboards and mice. I'm pretty confident if I tweak the controller settings I should be able to have quick enough reaction times to be well suited against them.
-
Meh. Never liked this series. At the hotel I work at we have a 360 for the military to play and we have CoD 4 and they seem to like it pretty well though. I don't even like it visually :\ *shrugs* To each their own though. Cold War era is pretty cool so I'll give it that.
-
Yeah that's what I'm looking forward to most is the change of settings. I'm quite tired of WW2 and modern day shooters. But the only way I'd get the next Call of Duty is if it was World War 1.
-
Damn you humanity for not giving us more interesting wars!!! :-X
-
Maybe someone should write a little fiction. ('ε')
-
Black Ops is a lot more enjoyable than Modern Warfare 2 in my opinion. I find that I can actually get kills without getting nubtubbed, spawn killed or get hit every single plane possible. The killstreak awards are a lot better for sure and they aren't as cheap, unless you consider Hardline with multiple RC cars cheap but I find controlling an RC car a lot more enjoyable than controlling a Predator Missile anyday. The Nazi Zombies maps from World at War look visually better and feel better too. It's nice using an MP40 again.
-
CoD kinda sucks only because it's just another crappy FPS whrer the only skill is sitting and playing it for hours and hours... it doesn't take any thinking :-\
Define doesn't take any thinking? If you play any game that is even relatively balanced, against human players you should have to think. If you aren't thinking that's prolly why you're losing. You don't have to sit there playing it for hours and hours to get good necessarily. Building reaction time is definitely strategically advantageous but it is possible, especially if you have a team, to win through strategy. I mean I have managed to beat people with wall hacks (ergo the ultimate in reaction times) simply because they were not good at actually playing the game. Just because you can't take hours to think about every move you make doesn't mean there is no strategy, it just means you have to think quicker. Also, I'd say COD is actually far less about sitting and playing for hours in terms of getting "good" then pretty much any level up based RPG where you're simply grinding for hours so you can be "good" at the game. Any game worth its salt should actually require at least some play time before you can win at it.
On another note I don't really have a problem with them releasing COD games so fast. Again the dev cycle is not a single year, it is at least a two year cycle, probably more, as most companies have a bit of time in between when they are done with a development of their previous game. World at War was released in November of 2008 so do that math, it's been about two years since Treyarch last released a COD game. Not to mention MW2 as far as the PC market is concerned, was a total screw up. The lack of dedicated servers provided a laggy heck-ridden realm of filth :P so this latest offering for the PC market offer significant and worthwhile multipayer enhancement. Just because you have quantity doesn't necessarily mean that you lose quality; and given that a good deal of the people booing the game here say that they either never have played COD or stopped playing before the original modern warfare I would say you should at least give it a shot before writing it off as just another war shooter. Initially I was extremely hesitant to play, or believe I would like, COD:MW but I tried it at a rave... I mean friends house :p and I ended up enjoying a lot more then I thought I would. If you don't like it, then you don't like it (the first rule of tautology club is... :P) and I don't intend to force you to like but don't write it off as stupid because it's more popular then whatever game series you like. Remember going against the mainstream just because it is the mainstream is almost the same as conforming.
-
But the only way I'd get the next Call of Duty is if it was World War 1.
Call of Duty: Trench Warfare
-
But the only way I'd get the next Call of Duty is if it was World War 1.
Call of Duty: Trench Warfare
I wouldn't buy it though if it had that name though
-
But the only way I'd get the next Call of Duty is if it was World War 1.
Call of Duty: Trench Warfare
I wouldn't buy it though if it had that name though
But that's what it is :P The only thing you would do is run out a trench, get shot to death, run out of a trench, get shot to death, get gassed to death, and then you would get shot because your poorly produced rifle jammed and then fell apart :P Maybe Vimy Ridge might be interesting but other then that...
-
I know that's what World War 1 is lol. I was saying I wouldn't buy it because it's such a generic name for a video game it makes me gag even more than "Modern Warfare". I still would love to play a video game set in WW1 just for a nice change in scenery. I find trench warfare amazingly interesting though which may be impairing my judgment on whether or not a WW1 shooter would even be fun.
-
I loved the tv ad, I want to play it now ;_; I wish I had money to buy it.
-
Yeah so I got it for an early Hannukah present a few days ago. I got the 360 version even though mine broke... Been playing it on my step brothers 360 downstairs. It's pretty fun, though the engine certainly hasn't changed too much.
Campaign is pretty cool, and I'm at least glad there's a story other than the boring war ones they tell in every other game. The whole interrogation thing and flash backs to the levels is at least fresh :)
Haven't dug into the online much, in fact. Haven't been playing Black Ops that much since I also bought myself New Vegas. And for a Fallout nerd like myself, New Vegas has a lot of fan service. Just that it was made by the people who made Fallout 1 and 2, and set at the same time basically as Fallout 3, but in the same area that Fallout 2 left off (Mojave desert yo), so it's pretty much amazing despite the Fallout 3/New Vegas engine being very very buggy.
-
Gah, well after my spirited speech in defense of Call Of Duty, I must admit I'm not at all happy with the PC version of Black Ops, it is almost literally unplayable. I've had to hard restart my computer three times already. The story seems somewhat interesting and I would love to play, if only it would stop crashing. As well the multiplayer would fantastic if it wasn't full of constant lag and crashing. I thought the switch back to dedicated servers would actually in some way benefit the PC crowd... oh well, it'll get better next patch :P </battered housewife>
-
There is a neat little easter egg sort of thing I discovered. The main menu is still first person, with the player strapped to the chair where the interrogations happen in the campaign. On the TV screen are the menu options. If you hold LT and RT the player will try to struggle out of his binds holding his wrists to the chair. He breaks free and then you can walk around the room. If you go up to a computer you are given a full keyboard to type whatever you want. Typing DOA brings you to an awesome arcade game that seems to be more entertaining than the actual zombie mode. It's called Dead Ops :P
It's pretty awesome in case any of you haven't seen this yet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVjpvQAbUow
-
lol looks like a top down halo or something, my brother rented black ops, its not so bad, I like the improvements on the multi-player modes, not liking the RC car, blew me up around the corner one to many times lol. XD