I read the article even though I was tempted to post tl;dr
Because its called for.

Lets all be honest here for a second. Call of Duty DID NOT destroy the videogame world.
Games don't kill people, people kill people.

But seriously, read this:


I think I might be reading this wrong, but I'm a problem for wanting to play Black Ops?
Not sure how that works out.

Also, this article groups too many people into one or more categories. I have a serious problem with the words 'all', 'every' and 'everyone' when used to form an opinion.
There are many games this person has failed to list, and they are far from what Call of Duty is/was like. TF2 was an amazing team FPS. It was ruined by unlocks is all.
And that had nothing to do with Call of Duty. Its all about developers, who are 'people' as well least we forget. Bad decisions can/will hurt companies.

The only thing that carries over is 'trend'. Once the trend is gone, shelved, or thrown away, we won't have to worry about it anymore.




- :flame:

.... I'm not sure how to digest this editorial. Its message is clear, but its tone is so strong that I wonder if it's trying to be sarcastic.

At any rate, I would avoid any further debate on CoD, even if it's civil. It's just a powder keg.

COD4 was a fantastic game, I loved it, but it was all downhill from there.

My two main problems with cod are the people who play- Kids who just scream, try to get the cheapest kills
Quickscope, camp, ect.

And the other one is as if the developers try to put as few new things in as possible.

It's a good way to make money if they have 10 good ideas but the spread it out into 5 different games.

Basically it has all of the unattractive features brink doesnt have and lacks all the innovation and great things brink possesses.

Cod used to be great but in my opinion it outlasted its welecome.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with you. Sure, if MW3 ends up being terrible they might lose enough sales to not break any world records on MW4/BlOps: The Sequel, but I'm sure many people would still buy into the games simply because of the extreme amount of hype surrounding the franchise as a whole. In addition, individuals tend to conform to the standards of society, even in cases where the individual doesn't necessarily agree with what they are conforming to - and right now, society says buy Call of Duty. As a result, many Call of Duty buyers will begin to fiercely defend their purchase in an effort to quell their own buyer's remorse (because honestly, that's one of the big reasons behind fanboyism) and actually attempt to force themselves to believe it is still the superior franchise.

In the end, Activision might not make enough off Call of Duty titles to buy everyone in the world their own Lamborghini like they have been, but they'll certainly make enough to keep the franchise afloat.

EDIT: Also, I spotted the difference in the pictures in the article - the one on the bottom-right says Crysis 2 in the top-right corner!

And yet sports franchises continue on strong because people are after something to fill their needs as gamers.

Find the features that CoD is the only franchise to bring to the table together and you find the weakness.

I enjoyed all the cod single player campaigns very throughly,the appeal of Cod came initially from the saving private Ryan movie style and its immersible atmosphere.(epic frame rate 60+ FPS since cod2) The beast that started the current MP deathbox sham that is CODMPO was call of duty 4 and its persistent multi player. The carrot on a stick that makes repetition seem fun and engaging that would carry across your entire career of that title. Fast forward 4 years and now its just a bother,a boring grind that makes you want to play less and less and until your at the counter checking to see how much in-store credit the game is worth. Persistent multi player is only tool of the mediocre shooter and games are wising up after every yearly release,it seems that now cod comes as much as Christmastime and with a fraction of the joy. I would wager we will stop chasing that cod carrot and its almost abusive use of the persistent game play and prestige modes. I still love leveling up and unlocking things but I wont chase a moldy 4 year out carrot anymore.

P.S :turtle: power. Good luck brink its time to innovate! :yes:

BF3 will no doubt be good, and I'm also looking forward to Brink as well. BF3 will satisfy my realistic war shooter while brink will satisfy my sci-fi shooter. I don't think I'll ever buy another CoD after wasting $60 on Blops.

This is a good honest post and is true of any hard core gamer no matter what game you may be a fan of. People that enjoy a certain game do not want to see the sequel stray far from it's original core beliefs and game feel. We all have seen many sequel's be ripped apart because it was nothing like the 'great original game'.

So the game developers say why should we take that risk? When we know this model of game play is working for us and why not beat this dead horse until they tell us they don't want it anymore. From what I see the consumer is telling cod franchise to do is build it again. Which guess what they are going to do and guess how it will look and play?

Don't blame the developer if I had the ability to make a bizzilion dollars doing the same thing over and over sign me up.

I did not like black ops at all but to be fair you probably know that each COD switches between developers every other year so black ops (awful) and Wow (in my opinion worse than black ops) were tre-arch debauchery while COD 4 and MW2 were infinity ward and neither I disliked so keep an open mind about the new COD (bc its not tre-arch). Just my two sense.
PS Brink should be awesome.

I personally love cod4 its still my favorite mp game (yes theres still ppl that play it, even enough to play hardcoe mode). i jus found that they ruined the fanchise by addin too many cheap ways of gettin kills, specially mw2. i have yet to play ops but from what ive seen barebones would be the only mode i would play (if i understand it right that theres no killstreak rewards) since i hate killstreak rewards that win the game for u instead of jus helping.

if they make bf3 like bf2/bf2142 with updated gfx then it will be unique still. decent squads setup, commanders and 64 man servers! the bf games are the only ones where you feel like you are in a battle rather than a small skirmish.

As a person who has played Call of Duty since the fourth series, I see why many flock to it. It's a game that anyone can pick up and with the right tactic (dirty or otherwise) they can go Rambo and win. I give Treyarch credit for one thing and that is that they tried to keep the game from being a 'Rambo fest' but their own issues leave Black Ops not as great as it could of been. Four games has based since COD4 and that crowd is hoping that after MW2's problems, Infinity Ward will be able to make a solid balanced shooter even with their new staff.

Now where does Brink fit in? In my opinion, as people pointed out that COD has created a freeze in innovation by coming up with a winning source among people that rewarded your kills and gave you perks for your custom class. As such, we seen clones or we see shooters take a step back instead in their game, hoping haters of COD will go to them. Brink however is taking steps forward and has a chance to break this freeze while giving us a new outlook on shooters without being over the top. I knew just by watching one video of Brink that I had to get this game because it would bring to the table something fun and something new, a combination that is rare these days. Sure Battlefield 2: Bad Company had teamwork but did have balance issues that left maps feeling one sided or dirty tactics rain supreme. (AKA C4 on a UAV)

We will see if Brink changes shooters as we know it but at the very least, it will be a blast to play.