The Top Ten COD game lists....a few things I have noticed

I have been watching a few different videos and reading the responses along with reading a few different articles on the subject of the top ten CODs games.

1. The first thing I noticed is that nearly everyone has MW2 very high on their list. It was possibly the smoothest game in the series. It had very good maps, fun weapons, introduced additional rewards beyond 3-5-7....It also had a fun SP. Really all they
   needed to do was remove a few things (OMA, noobtubes, dangerclose, deathstreaks and commando). Beyond that the actual multiplayer game play was about as good as it gets. SMGs were fun, ARs were fun, sniping was fun, shotguns were fun, pistols were fun, knife
   only was fun (without commando). I wish the series would have built off of mw2.
   
2. Many people are ready to go back to WWll. There is so much goodness in WWll shooters...the only problem people had was that the market was flooded with them 6-10 years ago. It's time to go back.
   
3. This may have something to do with #2, but many people do not like futuristic in the COD franchise. People came to COD because it was "Realistic"....and I don't mean simulation realistic. If people wanted a ground based futuristic shooter they would have
   stuck with halo. I also think it would be suicide to have the next COD try to go toe to toe with titanfall as a futuristic shooter.
   
4. Call of Duty 4 rightfully sits near the top of anyone of age list....beyond that it was a crapshoot. Some people love blops 1/2...some hated them. Some people love mw3/ghosts, some hated them. COD 1 & 2 were automatically pretty low on most lists because
   many people haven't actually played them or didn't get to play them when they were populated and cutting edge.
   
5. Most people who have played all of the CODs have been pretty let down with all the recent cods (mw3 and beyond...blops1 and beyond for me). I would venture to guess that a part of this is a mixture of people getting a little burned out on a great series.
   The 2nd reason people haven't enjoyed the latest installments is the direction the community has headed. Sure there has always been squeakers, campers, quick scopers and such...but more and more it seems like the problem minority is becoming the majority.
   Back in COD 4 a large majority of people played for the sake of having fun. They would dive on B flag and get blown up 25 straight times...and still have a blast. K/D didn't matter...You couldn't even see peoples K/Ds in the lobby. It was all about running
   around and having a good time. Now most lobbies have 3-4 people who are pleased to go 11-3 while being 3 capped in domination. (I can't wait to see which developer removes lobby KDs).
   

Do you guys have any general feelings about the series?

• How it started?
• Where it is heading?
• What you would like to see change, stay the same or revert back to the older CODs?
  

:)

 

Top ten 360 games

These are the top ten selling xbox 360 games.

1. Kinect Adventures
2. CoD:MW3
3. CoD: BO
4. CoD:MW2
5. CoD:BO2
6. Halo 3
7. GTA IV
8. Halo: Reach
9. CoD 4: MW
10. Halo 4

 

Top 10 best fully auto **** rifles in cod history

[quote user="ChainSmokingBob"]

Interesting list...

.

... the M4, AK47 and FAD from MW3 are missing, assuming you've got the talent to use more than the ACR.

[/quote]

Top ten best...not top ten favorite. I would have some wonky weapons on my top ten favorites.

 

I believe CoD will keep going in the direction its going. Afterall, its CoD. Id love a WWII shooter built around gunfights, but CoD has become a "crapshoot" meaning there is a TON of randomness in the game, ie, perks, equiptment, SSRs, weapons, etc. Make
the game about gunfights, IMHO.

 

mw2 is very high on my list it was my first on line multi player cod game

i personally think there is mileage in the cold war or korean or vietnam wars

 

OP, great post. This is the type of things I like to see and read on the forums. I like BLOPS but COD4 and WAW were by far my favorite games, for the following reasons. The game play was as you said FUN and enjoyable. They had a certain feel about them,
not complicated to set up your classes. If you wanted to run and gun or sit back and snipe(camp) you could do that. The maps were fantastic for all styles of game play, they had open spaces to run and places to hide. The newer games are so compartmentalized
and the play is so fast. IMO the newer games do not allow you to stop and think for a moment without getting shot. COD4/WAW is IMO the gold standard for the COD series. I started to loose interest when I saw a perk called "bling". I have Ghosts but it is my
least favorite game. A new WW2 game would be awesome, and I'm pretty sure they didn't have a perk called bling back then.

 

WaW is probably my favorite cod. I was a bit late for cod4 and only played it briefly before WaW came out ... so I really didnt know what I was doing. If I had played it since its release, who knows, maybe it would have been. But anyhow, as much as
I liked WaW, I dont think I could have enjoyed the same formula year after year. What I like about cod is that its always the same, yet just different enough to keep it interesting. It would be pretty difficult to keep that difference from one release to the
next while sticking to a barebones , set weapons, 3 ksrs kind of thing.





Two things I think are needed to keep it going .....1, diversity .... and 2, bs. Yes, bs, and I'll get to that in a minute.





The diversity is all the different weapons, different perks, tactics etc. This is where I think ghosts took a turn for the better. Imo blops 2 was the worst cod I played. I had fun .... but it seemed as though the devs wanted to call the shots about tactics.
It was designed specifically for fast paced rng type gameplay. Thats all well and good, I like fast paced rng type gameplay. But I dont want it all the time and I certainly dont want anything shoved down my throat. Ghosts I think gives equal opportunity for
all tactics , as did WaW, mw2 and bo. Mw3 wasnt bad but also seemed to cater strongly to one tactic. Less might be good, as in the case with WaW and cod4 , but not over and over. Give me a bit of change and the option to choose my own style nad I can make
the game what I want it to be. It doesnt matter if the enemy wanst to do what I dont like. Its not their job. Give me options to counter whatever and its all good.





The bs part ........ I typed a long response to a vid posted the other day and when I hit the button It turned out the thread had gotten deleted. i dont know why .... there was a bit of foul language but idk if thats why or not. What I do know is that it
was a great topic for discussion and a shame that it was deleted.



The vid was about why the devs hate high k/d players. I dont agree with any of what the guy said. but he did a nice job at putting forth his argument. The issue I had with it was he talked about all the bs put in the game to keep it noob friendly and
to keep people from getting discouraged. To that extent, i somewhat agree. Sure its nice for a crappy player to get a "random" kill in some bs fashion against the better players from time to time. But personally, I think the bs stuff .... death streaks, care
packages, oma noob tubes, dogs etc is even more important to the veteran players. I'm sure i'm not going to get much agreement on this .... of course "good" players hate death streaks. "Good" players hate getting killed by a "bad" player in any way at all
really..... but its necessary.



What makes doing well and winning so fun? Answer - the alternative. You cant fully appreciate winning unless you've had a taste of losing. You cant keep appreciating being good and winning frequently without a little reminder from time to time what
its like to get your *ss beat. Better players can fulfill that need , but there's a problem with that. Egos certainly dont take kindly to the possibility that there are enough players better than them to keep the game challenging. On the other hand, let them
die/lose in ways that they can shuck the blame away from their own selves and bingo!! You have a challenging game that still feeds the egos.



Better players are always going to be better players. You arent likely to get that x streak if there are better players in the room ..... and if it was too easy to get that x streak, then where woiuld be the enjoyment in getting it?. But if its random
bs that stops your streak, you try over and over because sooner or later things are going to fall right and you'll get that achievement that you worked so hard for and truely deserve.



Soooo ..... the random bs is good for the noobs, and good for the egos ..... and it works good for people like me too. I'm a fairly crappy player, but I want a challenge. Losing isnt likely to send me running as much as constantly winning would ( and
I've had my taste of that too so I'm not clueless aboout what winng frequently is like ) But think about the most memorable times you've had playing cod. Its not the easy kills against like minded players that stand out. Its the "almosts" that were stopped
by bs. Its the tactics people hate like camping , the getting killed by a guy scooting around on his butt with a pistol, getting blown up on by a dmh user, ..... or maybe they werent stopped at all, but they so easily could have that it makes that achievemnent
feel so much better.



People hate the bs ..... just like an alcoholic hates his bourbon, or a drug addict hates crack Hate it ..... but its what fuels the long gaming sessions, it spurs the friendly or not so friendly bamnter that goes on in chat, its what provides the topics
in the discussion forums ..... its what makes people buy that next release because the devs just might get their act together and get it right for once..

 

^^Nice response. I understand, this time, LOL. Anyways, its CoD and the randomness and repetitive gameplay is CoD, and thats not going to change.

 

TLDR TOG...j/k I agree with the ego part a bit. I've been playing BO2 more often now on Dom with some new friends and what you said has come to life. Sometimes its frustrating to be spawn camped on Nuketown or have one guy hold down B with a LMG but when
you read his stats you see he has a 1.00 K/D. It makes you try again and when you win you know that you beat his style of play by changing yours.

-

As for top games, I again agree with OP. I went back to MW2 after a long hiatus and found that it was fun but all the QS, OMA DC tubes and Commando was bleck. I didn't play COD4 much either or WaW. I started my first MP in BO1, like actually prestiging and
whatnot.

 

for those of you who didnt play cod 4 you missed out big time, 7 years on and its still my most played cod and people who say to others they are bored with cod because theyve been playing it 10 years or so, that isnt the case..its just got worse over the
years hence the reason why im still playing cod 4 and waw after all these years.

 

I dunno. If anything, IW has not made that "jump" as they did from COD2 to MW. So since Nov. 2006, there just hasn't been anything groundbreaking. Aside from the era changes, there has been no real exploration in terms of real change. I know vehicles could
be explored as it was in COD3, but I'm not sure how much ppl would like that. COD3 had a love it/hate it response. There was no in-between.

 

^^IW hasnt been the same since MW CoD4, just saying. They were there early in MW2, but nothing since, its a "new"/different company.

 

^^Lead devs Vince Zampella and Jason West sued (or countersued) Activision after MW2. They then created Respawn and were working on Titanfall ever since. Aside from those two leaving (and give or take a few other talents who followed ), IW remained intact
for MW3, but depending on who you ask, regressed from a final build quality perspective.

So yes, lol I'd love to see Respawn get contracted to make a COD, since that won't happen I guess we can just hope new talents at IW will come up with something.

 

[quote user="XDinoTheGreekX"]

I dunno. If anything, IW has not made that "jump" as they did from COD2 to MW. So since Nov. 2006, there just hasn't been anything groundbreaking. Aside from the era changes, there has been no real exploration in terms of real change. I know vehicles could
be explored as it was in COD3, but I'm not sure how much ppl would like that. COD3 had a love it/hate it response. There was no in-between.

[/quote]

I think the series has made many meaningful changes (for better or for worse). I will base this off of COD 4 as it was the last big change in the series.

1. Killstreaks: They have went several different routes and built upon the basic KSRs. They expanded on 3-5-7 to anything from a 2 point streak (with hardline) to a 25 kill streak that ended the game with a victory. They changed from a simple killstreak
   format to a variety of different reward systems. This includes kill streaks, point streaks and score streaks. On top of that they installed different options for different player styles/skill levels, including assault package, support package and specialist
   package.
2. Perks: They have made many changes in this format. They have introduced pro perks, pick ten systems and point based systems.
   
3. Customization: We use to get standard character models with a few standard camos and 2 unlockable camos.
   
4. Statistics: We had a few basic stats in cod 4, all of which were "private" stats. K/d, w/l, accuracy, trackable weapon stats up to 150 head shots. That was pretty much it. Now we have individual stat breakdowns of each weapon including weapon k/d, weapon
   accuracy, ect. We also have weekly, monthly, all time leaderboards for each individual game mode for your friends list, clan list, lobby and global.
   
5. Gamemodes: Every year they come out with something new. I.E. Search and rescue, kill confirmed, infected, war, barebones, drop zone, face off, gun game.
   
6. Game types: This is one of their opportunities to hit big. The game with in a game. They hit it big in world at war with the introduction of Nazi zombies. Treyarch has been able to build upon that each year in different ways. Transit, die rise, mob
   of the dead. IW has had a little more difficulty, but still try every year. Spec ops, survival, squads and extinction mode.
   
   

I think they have made the biggest changes they could make with out actually changing the winning formula. The real issue is that they stumbled upon a general engine/system that works. They haven't made drastic changes to the engine because drastically
changing the game could destroy the series and the engine works great as it is. I think we will see a better next gen product with a year under their belts...and I expect to be blown away in two years after treyarch had a proper 3 years to potentially develop
a "new" engine.

What I want from a Call of Duty multiplayer is a smoooooth, fast paced game with great hit detection. I feel like the hit detection and, for lack of a better term, "smoothness" has gone down hill since MW2. IMO MW2 and COD 4 to this day are the smoothest
games in the series, with little hit detection issues. I wonder if all these new additions have added too much information for the servers/engine to handle...or maybe they have just focused too much of their time on the bells and whistles and didn't fine
tune the engine/base. I think this is why they may be switching to a 3 year cycle. To produce a whole new single player campaign, DLC, co-op modes and multiplayer mode that all have great innovation and run perfectly is too much to ask from a development
team.

• Would cutting out the frizzle frazzle and going back to the basics help?
• Is there a huge change that can be made to the call of duty franchise that wouldn't turn it into a whole new game?
  
• Do we want a new call of duty experience with larger lobbies, bigger maps, vehicles, destruction and battlefield like game play?
  
• Should they put the COD franchise name on a game if they were planning on making a shooter with a completely different engine? Or if they were going to make a whole new game should they just start a whole new franchise?
  

(Side note: There were tanks in WAW also)

 

too many killstreaks and perks make for an unbalanced game, 3, 5 and 7 were the best, same for everyone and that makes for a more even playing field, they just dont seem to have any pride in their games now, its get it out asap and make as much money as
possible, i was on black ops 2 last night then went over to cod 4 and id say there was more people playing cod 4, also on ops 2 it said there were 113 thousand online in all playlists, when i counted the amount of players in each playlist there was about 60
thousand so not sure whats going on there, considering the millions that bought ghosts and theres on average around 150 thousand online if thats correct, thats a pretty poor showing...cod is going down hill fast and i will never ever buy a brand new cod game
again, i will always buy it used just to make a stand and get these developers back to basics and give us a cod we used to play and love.

wasnt the waw mp with tanks called dome

such a simple map but great at the same time.