This is the first Call of Duty trailer that has piqued my interest in a long time, so I'll be watching this one and seeing where it goes - and quite a few friends seem to be saying the same.
I'm a bit baffled by the floaty-long jumping characters seem to be doing - even with some kind of super exoskeleton you still generally have to answer to gravity!
I did surprise me tho that they are going the titanfall route as hard now.
If I read that out correctly, then the most important of the new features will make
it like titanfall without mechs in terms of infantry combat. (which I think is great for me personally) but thats a big in your face throwback to EA
I was going to get this anyway since a friend of mine worked on it, even though COD isn't usually my cup of tea. But that trailer actually looked really rad! I'm excited to give it a go when it comes out
The exosuits are extrapolations of real tech that's been in developement since about 2009. (Edit) similar exosuits appeared in Stalker shadow of chernobyl, so I'd guess ther are other examples of exosuit research out there.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kat8I5UM_Vs"]Lockheed Martin HULC Exoskeleton - YouTube[/ame]
this is my first time having work broadcast on such a large platform. exciting
i've met a lot of talented artists on this project and i'm glad that our work comes through so well in the trailer. more than a few of us are posters on PC, i think.
The art is incredible, I found myself saying "Wow! That's crazy!" several times throughout the gameplay demo. A lot of people seem to hate the futuristic setting but I like the direction it's going in. Everybody involved did a great job.
Each Call of Duty game represents so well the modern game industry.
- Art evolves
- Design regresses
COD evolves its design as much as they possibly can, given the boundaries of a fast paced FPS. Theres just no substance in such claims as yours, and its just an insult to some very competent designers working hard at those studios.
This thing started as fanboy rant and it just nonsense. Also if you compare it to Counterstrike or BF4 per example, the prime fanboy war competition, those change a lot less with each cycle, but people claim COD is not innovating. Battlefield BC2, Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4 are basically the exact same game with the same setting and minor changes, and hardline brining in a slightly different setting is the biggest change in recent years.
Even weapons, the setting/thematic, the time and even the interface stay the same. Still its something more or less new, and just what a fps player wants.
If you play those games, the change the COD devs per example do have a big impact on gameplay, and they matter a lot. They always bring all new equipment, new weapons, new unlock and class systems and a lot more, and the changes are huge to the people caring.
If you do not care, the red car is just gonna be another red car, but then dont claim you have a strong opinion on that. Maybe they got a insane new V16 engine and some of the finest things ever build in a vehicule, but if you dont care its just another red car just like all sportscars before. They drive, and they don't suddenly start to fly, so theyre not innovative.
If you expect COD to change the core gameplay to something else, like a slow paced squad game, or another unreal, thats not gonna happen and is just delusional and is based on bad logic or bad understanding of game design. Pretty much everything else is being changed by them but the core game, and claiming such a thing is just bare nonsense.
The difference is in the details, in the core gameplay. There is a big difference between Bad Company 2 and BF3. BC2 actually took a decent amount of skills while BF3 was brainless just like CoD. Soldier of Fortune 2 MP actually did a better job at providing a challenging, skill-based fast-paced military shooter while CoD still features a broken gameplay formula. The ADS (aim down sight), too accurate weapons in full fire and too high DPS are the problems. Whatever we add around that broken core is just superficial. Titanfall has the exact same flaws and I had a discussion about this with some of the devs at Respawn Entertainment on their own forums, but they literally ignored the issues. Bottom line, those games were designed as dumbed down shooter games in order to appeal to the majority of casual players aka non-gamers.
When a competitive FPS game is poorly designed, it nullifies the gap between beginners and advanced players and that's precisely what CoD does best. That doesn't even come from my mouth, the CoD devs said it themselves.
As we are now in 2014, I thought that was common knowledge already. CoD is broken on purpose. And due to the current state of the video games industry or game design department, I'll let you guess why I left that department to become a 3D artist. :poly121:
Also one thing that is true for every game in existence:
Difficulty is measured on your enemy skill. No matter how easy the weapons are, the enemy will have those aswell, and it will make it harder for you to shine again.
So with your logic, Instagib(UT) is the easiest and most thumbed down you can play ?
BC2 took a decent amount of skills while BF3 was thumbed down ? How does this even make sense ?
Stop claiming things are broken because they are not to your personal preference. ADS is a clear evolution of the core gameplay, and only adds more depth and there is not a single downside I see in it. You say you want more skill based gameplay and then you dislike things that make it more skill based ? You prefer spraying over people that are just about in the middle of your screen over actual aiming ?
High dps and low dps are very balanced against each other.
High dps makes it easier to kill, but harder to survive. Low dps makes it very easy to survive but hard to kill obviously. People go more for high dps because low dps is often very frustrating, and the balance between normal weapons and sniper rifles have to make either snipers broken or useless. Also high dps is more realistic and it feels intrinsically wrong with low dps, leading to frustration.
And there are many more factors than simply how weapons perform, differentiating between a good and a bad player.
Also your whole point saying the games are stagnant is because they dont have a damage model you like ? That does not have anything to do with your original claim.
I dont know why you disliked titanfall, but I can tell you that the reason it is not booming are none of these you list. Its a good game nevertheless and many are enjoying it however.
I pretty much agree. I would rather play something fun and easy to get into like titanfall or bf/COD that something that takes "skill" to learn to play through hours of playing it. I used to be hardcore into counter strike when I was in highschool and was proud of being good, but looking back I consider it pretty pathetic I wasted so much time playing that game to learn some "skill" instead of socializing and enjoying life.
nowdays I don't have the time to put into games to sit there and try to get good for some meaningless sense of self achievement at beating other people online. I would rather just jump online, shoot some stuff, see some cool explosions and have a fun time with friends. I think that is also a large chunk of gamers in general who buy and play games as a hobby and just want to have fun. Probably part of the reason COD is so successful is all the bros who are not normally hardcore gamers, can hop on and rock it.
Anyways, back on topic, this game actually looks really cool, AI is meh but whatever, its always just a shooting gallery anyways. I am more interested in the art design and cool scifi tech they are showing. looks badass, and I havent been a big COD fan since MW2.
Speaking of CGI cutscenes, I am surprised to see no clear mention of what is CGI and what is in-game footage anywhere in that trailer. But I guess that's the way things are ...
The difference is in the details, in the core gameplay. There is a big difference between Bad Company 2 and BF3. BC2 actually took a decent amount of skills while BF3 was brainless just like CoD. Soldier of Fortune 2 MP actually did a better job at providing a challenging, skill-based fast-paced military shooter while CoD still features a broken gameplay formula. The ADS (aim down sight), too accurate weapons in full fire and too high DPS are the problems. Whatever we add around that broken core is just superficial. Titanfall has the exact same flaws and I had a discussion about this with some of the devs at Respawn Entertainment on their own forums, but they literally ignored the issues. Bottom line, those games were designed as dumbed down shooter games in order to appeal to the majority of casual players aka non-gamers.
When a competitive FPS game is poorly designed, it nullifies the gap between beginners and advanced players and that's precisely what CoD does best. That doesn't even come from my mouth, the CoD devs said it themselves.
As we are now in 2014, I thought that was common knowledge already. CoD is broken on purpose. And due to the current state of the video games industry or game design department, I'll let you guess why I left that department to become a 3D artist. :poly121:
There's no point in throwing out support when your founding argument ("accessibility is poor design") is based on a completely subjective claim. it's rather close minded of you to present "I don't like this design" as "this design is broken" - a ceiling cap isn't "broken on purpose" because it's not broken at all; it was an entirely conscious decision based on the attractions of a (not dedicated, not "hardcore") audience.
some people don't enjoy getting a game late in its cycle only to be pubstomped over and over again because they can't dedicate the time to learn the metagame. Some people just enjoy the 'brainless' fun of call of duty or battlefield. And you know what? that's totally okay.
on topic: exosuits are cool and so this game is cool.
Accessibility is great, but to dumb down a game just isn't the right way to do it, that's just poor design, because you are losing the core fan base of the genre, when you could use other methods and please all 3 (new comers, advanced and veterans). There is nothing subjective about that.
you're going to have to elaborate on this point - besides making losing fun, how do you propose making sure that less skilled people (different from newcomers. some people are just never going to climb that skill ladder) have just as much fun as the more skilled tiers? The only way I could think of is to give a perfect matchmaking system, and even that fails later in a game's cycle where the dedicated newcomers climb the skill ladder and the non-dedicated newcomers just leave, so all that's left is a pile of very skilled people (ex: buying any call of duty game right now is bound to match you (level 1) against people who are exclusively lvl 50+. It doesn't really matter in this case because low skill ceiling, though)
"accessible skill-based shooter" is sounding like a bit of an oxymoron to me is all
I feel like a lot of cutscenes in pretty much every game could use a bit of "eye noise" where the eyes move very slightly and very frequently, it's so easy to do and would help so much crossing the uncanny valley.
forget those minor things, this could be the best COD since years. They did a great job scanning people for all the characters. Other studios use scan data and their character models are meh... so uncanny. This feels more realistic, although of course, it has its flaws like all things in this world.
I just hope to play a nice campaign without too many scripted sequences.
I really love the environment design, there's beautiful work being done in every art department for sure. I just hope the PC version isn't completely broken like Ghosts!
Looks fun totally ready for more COD to be honest.
I feel sorry for anyone working retail on release though having to explain to people why they can't get the game a day early because they didn't pre-order lol.
Looks like a lot of fun, although I can't help but think many of the new game mechanics would be better if you could actually survive more than a few shots. I love the new vertical map design and the game is still as fast paced as ever.
Replies
I'm a bit baffled by the floaty-long jumping characters seem to be doing - even with some kind of super exoskeleton you still generally have to answer to gravity!
Nanobots for sure bro. Otherwise those poor G force leg snaps.
I did surprise me tho that they are going the titanfall route as hard now.
If I read that out correctly, then the most important of the new features will make
it like titanfall without mechs in terms of infantry combat. (which I think is great for me personally) but thats a big in your face throwback to EA
maybe if they did another ww2 cod.
BTW, too much tech and meh, the weapons are still the same? where are those cool crysis weapons?
[ame="
Congrats man!
Teh guns looks AMAZEBalls!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sRUZ9p4oYQ&list=PLZeek85Kuka1T-vZOg1S57FREml5BWF0a&index=5
why doesnt youtube embedding work ever
Take the s off of https.
[ame="
Looks slick by the way!
COD evolves its design as much as they possibly can, given the boundaries of a fast paced FPS. Theres just no substance in such claims as yours, and its just an insult to some very competent designers working hard at those studios.
This thing started as fanboy rant and it just nonsense. Also if you compare it to Counterstrike or BF4 per example, the prime fanboy war competition, those change a lot less with each cycle, but people claim COD is not innovating. Battlefield BC2, Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4 are basically the exact same game with the same setting and minor changes, and hardline brining in a slightly different setting is the biggest change in recent years.
Even weapons, the setting/thematic, the time and even the interface stay the same. Still its something more or less new, and just what a fps player wants.
If you play those games, the change the COD devs per example do have a big impact on gameplay, and they matter a lot. They always bring all new equipment, new weapons, new unlock and class systems and a lot more, and the changes are huge to the people caring.
If you do not care, the red car is just gonna be another red car, but then dont claim you have a strong opinion on that. Maybe they got a insane new V16 engine and some of the finest things ever build in a vehicule, but if you dont care its just another red car just like all sportscars before. They drive, and they don't suddenly start to fly, so theyre not innovative.
If you expect COD to change the core gameplay to something else, like a slow paced squad game, or another unreal, thats not gonna happen and is just delusional and is based on bad logic or bad understanding of game design. Pretty much everything else is being changed by them but the core game, and claiming such a thing is just bare nonsense.
Also one thing that is true for every game in existence:
Difficulty is measured on your enemy skill. No matter how easy the weapons are, the enemy will have those aswell, and it will make it harder for you to shine again.
So with your logic, Instagib(UT) is the easiest and most thumbed down you can play ?
BC2 took a decent amount of skills while BF3 was thumbed down ? How does this even make sense ?
Stop claiming things are broken because they are not to your personal preference. ADS is a clear evolution of the core gameplay, and only adds more depth and there is not a single downside I see in it. You say you want more skill based gameplay and then you dislike things that make it more skill based ? You prefer spraying over people that are just about in the middle of your screen over actual aiming ?
High dps and low dps are very balanced against each other.
High dps makes it easier to kill, but harder to survive. Low dps makes it very easy to survive but hard to kill obviously. People go more for high dps because low dps is often very frustrating, and the balance between normal weapons and sniper rifles have to make either snipers broken or useless. Also high dps is more realistic and it feels intrinsically wrong with low dps, leading to frustration.
And there are many more factors than simply how weapons perform, differentiating between a good and a bad player.
Also your whole point saying the games are stagnant is because they dont have a damage model you like ? That does not have anything to do with your original claim.
I dont know why you disliked titanfall, but I can tell you that the reason it is not booming are none of these you list. Its a good game nevertheless and many are enjoying it however.
nowdays I don't have the time to put into games to sit there and try to get good for some meaningless sense of self achievement at beating other people online. I would rather just jump online, shoot some stuff, see some cool explosions and have a fun time with friends. I think that is also a large chunk of gamers in general who buy and play games as a hobby and just want to have fun. Probably part of the reason COD is so successful is all the bros who are not normally hardcore gamers, can hop on and rock it.
Anyways, back on topic, this game actually looks really cool, AI is meh but whatever, its always just a shooting gallery anyways. I am more interested in the art design and cool scifi tech they are showing. looks badass, and I havent been a big COD fan since MW2.
[ame="
Wow, looks good! I have the feel that this game will bring some fresh air to the series. The in game visuals also are stellars.
Who is doing the cutscenes like the one at the beginning or the one at 1:42?
I mean ...it's CGI, right?
There's no point in throwing out support when your founding argument ("accessibility is poor design") is based on a completely subjective claim. it's rather close minded of you to present "I don't like this design" as "this design is broken" - a ceiling cap isn't "broken on purpose" because it's not broken at all; it was an entirely conscious decision based on the attractions of a (not dedicated, not "hardcore") audience.
some people don't enjoy getting a game late in its cycle only to be pubstomped over and over again because they can't dedicate the time to learn the metagame. Some people just enjoy the 'brainless' fun of call of duty or battlefield. And you know what? that's totally okay.
on topic: exosuits are cool and so this game is cool.
you're going to have to elaborate on this point - besides making losing fun, how do you propose making sure that less skilled people (different from newcomers. some people are just never going to climb that skill ladder) have just as much fun as the more skilled tiers? The only way I could think of is to give a perfect matchmaking system, and even that fails later in a game's cycle where the dedicated newcomers climb the skill ladder and the non-dedicated newcomers just leave, so all that's left is a pile of very skilled people (ex: buying any call of duty game right now is bound to match you (level 1) against people who are exclusively lvl 50+. It doesn't really matter in this case because low skill ceiling, though)
"accessible skill-based shooter" is sounding like a bit of an oxymoron to me is all
Dat Spacey tho, so good!
I just hope to play a nice campaign without too many scripted sequences.
[ame="
I feel sorry for anyone working retail on release though having to explain to people why they can't get the game a day early because they didn't pre-order lol.
[ame="