Jimquisition: Defending Call of Duty

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . . . 19 NEXT
 

BlacklightVirus:
"Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is a game which defined what a modern multiplayer shooter could be".

Wrong, that would be Team Fortress 2.

Jim is doing a great job of embarrassing himself. He didn't acknowledge any od the main reasons people tend to dislike COD.

Boring environments.
No innovative mechanics.
No teamwork

etc...

Look at any professional or even just a Gamebattles game. There is your teamwork.

As for TF2 being what defined what a MP shooter could be, I have to disagree with you. I don't think CoD has either but TF2 certainly hasn't. Sure it may be a great game but it isn't amazing, it is far from what could be the best. The best game would have to appeal the everybody, both CoD and TF2 cannot do this. Honestly, if every game tried to be like TF2, I couldn't play shooters as they would get boring, just as CoD clones are becoming boring.

KafkaOffTheBeach:
"Those artsy types who need a story with a message"
What a quote.

I just watch these videos because I am a filthy masochist.

I DON'T GET IT! Call of Duty, for the most part, has HAD a message! Not particularly deep, but sentiments like "history is written by the victor" aren't exactly stupid. I dare say Call of Duty 4 has the most subtle yet brilliant anti-nuke statement in the whole of modern multimedia!

Problem with this video is that it assumes people assume. People who hate Call of Duty don't so much hate it because it's popular, but because it's sub-par and popular. True, there does exist a crowd of "elitist douchebags" and a fair few have no point, but a lot of just normal people who crave quality experiences get the short end of the stick here because it's assumed people who hate CoD are "arsty".

I do like Jim. But he really needs to be... less like Michael Moore.

ALX-00:

BlacklightVirus:
"Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is a game which defined what a modern multiplayer shooter could be".

Wrong, that would be Team Fortress 2.

Jim is doing a great job of embarrassing himself. He didn't acknowledge any od the main reasons people tend to dislike COD.

Boring environments.
No innovative mechanics.
No teamwork

etc...

Look at any professional or even just a Gamebattles game. There is your teamwork.

As for TF2 being what defined what a MP shooter could be, I have to disagree with you. I don't think CoD has either but TF2 certainly hasn't. Sure it may be a great game but it isn't amazing, it is far from what could be the best. The best game would have to appeal the everybody, both CoD and TF2 cannot do this. Honestly, if every game tried to be like TF2, I couldn't play shooters as they would get boring, just as CoD clones are becoming boring.

I love TF2, but I agree. The original Team Fortress was more innovative on release than TF2 was, though TF2 certainly made it a hell of a lot more accessible, I'll give you that.

If this defense applied to Call of Duty can also be applied to Halo, then I agree and understand the way you must feel about this whole thing, Jim.

That said, while I agree with you this one time... I'm still not quite ready to forgive you for some of the stuff you've said towards women in your articles. Just putting it out there.

You won me over Jim Im liking the show.

Hey there!

I will take this controversial topic as the opportunity for my first post. I ain't the biggest fan of Call of Duty though I enjoyed CoD1-6 (up to MW2), but refused to buy BlOps. Why? Because as a collector and pc gamer I felt kind of betrayed due to there being no CE for the PC. Additionally the overpriced map pack and the decreasing length of single player campaign are other factors that deter me from investing my precious money in overpriced addons (come on, a few new maps, a 4 hour campaign and a few new weapons, that's not more than an addon in volume - and then you also have to buy a once again overpriced map-pack to even play the old maps...).

I don't say CoD is bad or anything, I thoroughly enjoyed things like the sniper part in MW1 and won't forget it any time soon, but the pricing, the release politics, the no dedicated server MW2 fuck up and similar problems that don't necessarily make the series terribad, impact my decision to stay away and rather buy BF3 than MW3.

greetz
Chris

GundamSentinel:
While not very subtly put, I completely agree with what he's saying. People will always be hating on what's popular, because that's what the 'cool kids' do, but a bit of sense seldom goes amiss.

Do people REALLY hate something because it's popular for that reason alone? Can you point out 3 popular things that people hate purely out of that aspect?

Also, is there that much hate against CoD? With the first Modern Warfare I was under the impression that everyone loved it considering the praise, when I played it I also loved it. MW2 didn't reach out to me quite like the first did, but it was still a thrill.
It dosen't really make any sense.

Wow Jim you literally hit every point I'd like to make whenever I see a "COD is for dummies thread"

Well done.

Besides not finding it fun (I prefer my shooters and whatnot to have fast-moving characters), the only criticism I stand by is FULL PRICE FOR EACH ONE? Guessing that all you showed us is from CoD:MW1, that means each of them plays practically the same (with a new weapon or two, like that remote-controlled toy car bomb thing). But whatever. Call of Duty's aiming at rich folk, apparently.

loving the attitude(s)

I made it about 30seconds through the clip :(

I don't hate Call of Duty (except MW2), but I thoroughly enjoyed every other COD I've played. The only problem I have with the Cod franchise is that its gotten so big and successful that it causes publishers to change parts of their series that made them unique to make it more user friendly and overall more like cod. Case and point, killzone 2 and 3. Killzone 2 was a very good shooter with a distinctive feel to it, and I've clocked quite a bit of hours into it. Killzone 3 is also a very good shooter, but its become a lot more "newb friendly" (I don't mean that in a derogatory way) and as such has alienated the more dedicated killzone 2 portion of its fanbase. I'ld have preferred if they would have stuck with a more kz2 feel, but I understand the pressure from the developers to emulate the biggest cash cow out there.

teebeeohh:
you want a good reason why cod sucks?
not only has everyone else copied the game

Stop right there.

Why is other people copying the game a reason for CoD sucking? That makes no sense. In fact, it really goes to show the opposite of what you want: nobody would try to copy a game that sucked, because people would have played the original and said "that sucks!". Nobody's copied E.T., Daikatana, or Big Rigs Over the Road Racing.

Jim is just as bad as MovieBob when it comes to tact.
Or humor.

----------
I played Modern Warfare 2 on the Xbox 360.
I didn't enjoy it, but not everybody enjoys competitive reflex-based finger FPS's.

I found the game to be unbalanced with all the perks, and yes I know that's covered in his video. Let me explain. Putting new players at a disadvantage simply because they bought the game later than everybody else isn't fair. It's dumb. Also, kill streaks tick me off. The game punishes players who aren't doing well with helping the winning team do further damage. And before you go mentioning loss streaks, they never really helped me out.

I'm sure if the game had a server browser where I could have found a group of friendly people to play with, I would have had a much more enjoyable time.
However, it does not and I got fed up with being mocked on every server I went to. There may be friendly people who play CoD, but wherever they were, they weren't on the servers I played on.

So there, that's why I don't like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.
I can't say anything about COD4 or Blops.

Okay... a very interesting and even convinging argument, but you did come across as something of a hypocrite by reducing those opposing your views to little more than a one-dimensional stereotype, precisely the thing you accused those same people of doing to players of the COD games.

In addition, the "thanking god for jim" running gag is going to get real old real quick, tongue-in-cheek though it may be, such massive unabashed arrogance does not make you look any more credible.

COD 4, W@W and MW2 had very fun campaigns that I enjoyed, however, I cannot agree that Black Ops did also.

Black Ops felt way too slow with all the cutscenes and constant flashbacks and the campaign just wasn't as memeorable as the other next-gen COD's.

Is Jim the new Bob Chipman? How is this different from The Big Picture? I mean, he just did his own Game Anti-thinker thing in the video, what with that stupid strawman argument about games and art.

Yeah, continue to leap to the defense of giant, multibillion-dollar franchises that don't give a crap about you.

Nobody minds that Jim likes CoD, but now he's just stating his opinion as fact while claiming the opinions of others as incorrect. There's a difference between having an opinion and being a jerk about it, but then reasonable discussion doesn't draw in viewers does it.

OH WAIT EXTRA CREDITS.

And there are plenty of "artsy" games that having nothing to do with dark messages (or any messages) about humanity.

Finally, the acting and humor portions of the video were abysmally bad.

Note: I like CoD 4. Raging against the petulant anti-fanboys that make up a small minority of people who have problems with the CoD franchise would be like raging about CoD because of the small minority of swearing teenagers who play CoD. WHICH IS WHAT YOU LAMBASTED OTHERS FOR DOING, JIM.

Commenters have already covered the balance issues (something of concern with all multiplayer activities) inherent in a playtime-based perk system, right?

That was my only gripe with this episode. Overall, better than his previous ones, in my opinion.

BlacklightVirus:
"Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is a game which defined what a modern multiplayer shooter could be".

Wrong, that would be Team Fortress 2.

Jim is doing a great job of embarrassing himself. He didn't acknowledge any od the main reasons people tend to dislike COD.

Boring environments.
No innovative mechanics.
No teamwork

etc...

CoD invented perks. Perks are, whether you like it or not, one of the most popular MP shooter mechanics.

I don't really like or dislike CoD. I considered it worth my time to buy MW2 and play it a fair bit, and I enjoyed myself while I did, but it quickly got old for me, and I traded it in. It's good, but not great, based on what I thought of MW2.

My arguement?
Call of Duty is fun, we've just had too many in over 5 years.
Everytime a new Call of duty comes out, I see the exact same game, full price, with a few brush ups. Call of duty Multiplayer is incredibly fun, but when you've played the same game over 4-5 games, you can understand the frustration when someone says "OH MAI GODZ, NEW CALL OF DUTY".
And no, they aren't talking about the campaign.

The only good thing's I see personally coming out of the franchise is:
Company makes money
People get some add ons to their game.
For those who play the campaign (like me) will actually get something close enough to the amount we paid.

What's bringing it down?:
It's the same game.
They aren't trying to make new, or better games, they are sticking to what they know.
They are finding ways to make the most money out of it (rather than the bext experience)
It's like pokie machine, they aren't fun, they're addictive. you confuse yourself with the pretty lights for fun and addiction.

Call of duty has to die. Or other developers need to ignore it, and do their own thing.

I loved your portrayal of the 'games must all be art man' "people" that pollute the industry, but feel I must disagree with you on problems with cod, especially the player base. I don't think I've actually played a cod game that didn't have at least one screaming child, even worse than them though are what I like to call the 'idiot Americans' who are so patriotic and need to tell everyone how inferior their country is [despite the fact that I for one don't give two shits about national pride, it's all luck anyway]. To balance this out, you also get the utterly stupid English guys, but being English myself I tend to get ignored while they troll some Americans about 9/11.

My second point is balance. Cod games [especially MW2] are horrendously unbalanced, at least in old school games everyone [once they know where all the guns are] has a fair chance of getting the powerful guns, but in cod you have the ability to start off with it [m16s I'm looking at you pricks].

Thirdly, the etiquette of play. People are so concerned with getting uber kill streaks [I don't understand the appeal to be honest, maybe for every nuke you get the game sucks you off] but they will eschew playing and supporting their team mates to sit in a corner for the entire game capping anybody who has the misfortune not to check for them. Also there's the general attitude to the objective based games, one game of sabotage I played on MW2, the first words one of my team mates said were "Ok guys, let's not plant the bomb too soon, we need to rack up our K/D" Que me and my friends blasting him about how much of an idiot he is, and that if he wants K/D he should do fucking Team Deathmatch.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy call of duty and really like the campaigns and just LOVE zombies, but it's nowhere near perfect, and there are far superior shooters out there.

The reason there is so much hate for Angry Birds is because people wouldn't shut up about it. Kotaku couldn't go a day without 10 Angry Birds articles. Getting something so average rubbed in your face every single day makes you grow to hate it.

If it was something new or original, people wouldn't be so mad about it. But Angry Birds is just a flash game I've played 100 times before.

BlacklightVirus:
"Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is a game which defined what a modern multiplayer shooter could be".

Wrong, that would be Team Fortress 2.

Jim is doing a great job of embarrassing himself. He didn't acknowledge any od the main reasons people tend to dislike COD.

Boring environments.
No innovative mechanics.
No teamwork

So people dislike a game for not being the sort of game that it is? Can I dislike Team Fortress 1 and 2 for being team-reliant and not allowing me to play solo? That's not a legitimate complaint.

Yeah I dislike Call of Duty because it's not a 3rd person action game where I can run along the walls and cut people with a sword.

I am glad I kept on watching this. It's not the best series ever, but it really improved each episode. I would even call this good.

There are two basic types of games: ones based around narrative (most RPGs, for instance) and ones based around challenge (Tetris as a prime example). CoD is a challenge game, and as with most games in this category, problems arise when you try to look at it's narrative. Certainly there are games that dip into both (Valve is fantastic at doing this), but generally games seem to rely on one or the other to prop themselves up.

The thing is, though, as a game where the primary enjoyment comes from overcoming a challenge doesn't really NEED any sort of narrative - most early NES titles had at best arbitrary stories, but that doesn't make them any less fun. To use a more recent example, Marvel vs. Capcom 2 has next to no justification for existing, yet it was (and still is) one of the most beloved titles on the PS2.

The issue that the Call of Duty franchise is that it tries with the utmost sincerity to maintain a cohesive storyline with defined characters and story elements, when it would be much better served by an approach more akin to, say, the Swat series: a collection of generally unrelated missions with clearly defined objectives, allies, and opponents. I know that I can't speak for everyone, but by about the third time that Modern Warfare 2 tried to trick me into thinking I was going to die, I completely stopped worrying about the welfare of whoever I was playing and the people around me, which utterly sunk a later moment where the game actually DOES kill you.

Similarly, in Black Ops, I quickly became frustrated with the long, uneventful sequences that contained no gameplay, no decision making on the part of the player, and exposition that couldn't be barked out in ten seconds over a radio. The thing about this, though, is that Bioshock did the exact same thing several times (the descent to Rapture could be a cutscene, as could meeting your first Big Daddy, and the initial encounter with Andrew Ryan) without feeling out of place at all. Why? Because, from the beginning, Bioshock sets itself up not as a series of challenges, but as an exploration of a strange and marvelous new world. It isn't centered primarily around overcoming its obstacles, so segments where there simply are no obstacles aren't an issue.

Even beyond this, though, the stories presented by the games behave as though they want to be taken seriously while being utterly ludicrous. To use another related example, the story in Crysis 2, from the start, throws a monkey wrench so large into the modern-setting-military-shooter formula that you really have no way to say "You know, this particular plot point doesn't make much sense" because you've been killing squid-headed aliens while wearing a high-tech suit that can turn invisible. The game, at no point, puts on airs of being realistic. Possibly due to it's roots, Call of Duty does - and for the first few games, that's fine. We can't dispute them because they're based on events that actually occurred. Once you try to cross a series grounded in reality from a historical setting into a speculative future setting, though, you begin running into problems - and in a bit of irony, it's the brand recognition that's responsible for this.

If MW2 had been set in a clearly farcical setting, it's single player campaign would be fantastic. The unreasonable nature of it would have been explained away perfectly if the game had only stated at the start, "We know this isn't a realistic portrayal of anything, but it is very cool, and that's all we really want to do."

I feel that too often Jim strays into the realm of broad sweeping statements that have very little to back them up, i.e. the statement that Black Ops has a well paced narrative, but I agree with the overall message regarding their merit. However, I think you could have said a bit more about the multi player

I gotta say, this is the first time I've watched Jimquisition and I thought you made some great points.

Onto the other videos I suppose...

OniaPL:
Don't know why I'm still awake but this was a pleasant surprise.

And also nice to see someone defend this franchise for a while. Black Ops was my first COD- game and I clocked a total of 150 hours. It was a simply good game.

And I'm not a hardcore online shooter fan.

Black Ops was your first CoD game? I feel bad for you, conidering how much better CoD4 and MW2 were. You missed out. I recommend picking them up.

I think COD:MW was a great game, But I never went so far as to buy the other two. I play them a lot at friends places but there is no way I could justify 130 dollars for what looks and feels like an expansion. Oh and top work on ripping on the games must be art crowd.

Heh love seeing sarcasm and satire being used to their full when they can.

Though on the downside when I bring these two things up I always get the feeling someone will think that this post itself is being that. XD

Ah well, great work and gald to see a new video as always.

I did not find this funny, informative or entertaining.
Way to make a whole bunch of points everyone is already aware of in the most condescending way possible, really good work.
Everything went downhill after CoD4 except for the budget, I'd rather see someone go in depth and explain that rather than have someone harp on about how much they hate the minority of folks that hate it for less than valid reasons.
/whine

darkcommanderq:
The reason COD is annoying is because games like battlefield present warfair so much better.
Reasons why COD is bad

1: RANDOM SPAWNING, this has to be the single biggest problem in FPS games set in a historic / present day theme. Soldiers on the battlefield do not pop up out of thin air. they are deployed, garrisoned, in other words they start at arbitrary point A, and other soldiers start at arbitrary point B. What im getting at is all modern conflicts are team based and deploy troops to locations.

So I have a question, in an amphibious invasion, when a soldier who made a beach landing is subsequently killed on the island, should a replacement troop realistically:

A - deploy once again from the ship
B - deploy from the captured flag point on the island.

Point being a game with random spawn points is no less and no more realistic than other games of a similar nature. It's all arbitrary. What random spawn points do DO is help alleviate spawn camping. I remember playing Unreal Tournament Face to Face map and having people getting slaughtered by the dozens at the spawn points because there were 3-4 snipers scoping them.

Because if this is a war and the point is to be realistic then everyone should spawn from the same place every time and have to walk across the damn map to get to where their going. That then creates a NEW problem. That being, in a team assault on an enemy base, the enemy base will get reinforcements faster than the assaulting force which means the odds are against the assault suceeding. There are problems with each way of doing things. COD or whatever other game is simply choosing a method and weighing the cons and pros to achieve the most amount of fun for their targetted demographic.

2: MAP SIZE, maps in FPSs on the 360 are small, and I understand that this is due to limitations of the 360 itself. When you have a small map, the problems that arise are location specific camping. this is clever the 1st few times some one does it, and its true that in modern situations soldiers try to gain the advantage with terrain. The problem is that some of the choke points on COD sized maps make it futile to push though, when in a larger map you could put pressure else where to force the campers to move. This ties into problem 3...p.

Choke points are irrelevant with random spawn points, no?

3: DEATH MATCH, this is not so much a problem with COH as it is with FPS in general. Death match, while fun, is a rather pointless mode. It alright in Halo, and less realistic shooters because they are not grounded in reality. The problem in death match with the COD is that it makes no damn sense.

This is a reason why you don't like a game, this is not a reason why the game is bad.
I think Counter strike and Team Fortress are both piles of crap that I never want to play because I prefer Death Match to this team-based garbage. Doesn't make it a bad game, just makes it a game I don't enjoy.

Also you miss the complete obvious. If the point of a playing a game is to have fun, and if Deathmatch is fun, then the Deathmatch mode is not pointless because it enables people to HAVE FUN.

Jim since I know you at least sorta' keep up with the escapist can I just ask what you think of Moviebobs Gameoverthinker piece "Worst Person Shooter?" and what you honestly think of it?

A friend here sent me some links to your earlier show and I just want to ask why the change? I know I've been critical but I think that's due to the much more harsh tone in this show and maybe the ever present homage to "V" which is a great work I grant you if only for the worlds longest yet coolest aliteration but still, the other stuff I have seen you do is just a lot more obvious about the joke and I think the reason I didn't get your humor at first is because I didn't get that the image was all humor.

Wow. Could this mean that the real Yahtzee could just possibly NOT hate nearly every game in existence?

Nah.

Sylocat:
*sigh* Is his solution to each complaint about his overacting just to overact even more? Is he deliberately trying to try way too hard to be funny? Is his intention to come off as desperate "ironically?"

Just like pretty much all "content" here, he is poached off another site. Guess Destructoid didn't want to part with any of their good staff.

Maybe it's just that he shares my opinion but this is an improvement for me Jim. This one was a statement against the established order of things that hasn't really been said enough. I like CoD as a nice action packed distraction from the normal types of games I play (RPGs & Story heavy games mainly).

Yeah, I tire of CoD at times too but ultimately it has a good enough story (for popcorn action) and the multi-player is quite enjoyable. I say that as a guy who rarely plays online and sticks strictly to the single player campaign most of the time. Think of that what you will.

Still think you might be going more over-the-top with the persona than you need to Jim, but this video shows you do have some good points to make and aren't afraid to voice them. Not a fan yet, but this brings me closer to being one.

TestSubject4:
I think COD:MW was a great game, But I never went so far as to buy the other two. I play them a lot at friends places but there is no way I could justify 130 dollars for what looks and feels like an expansion. Oh and top work on ripping on the games must be art crowd.

Pretty close to what I was going to comment. The original CoD: MW rocked my socks off. It was fast-paced, had a great story, and exponentially tightened up the gameplay the franchise needed, as well as sporting a fantastic multiplayer. Needless to say, it sold millions.

The only reason I'm starting to despise the franchise as a whole is due to its stagnation of the gaming market and industry. Since the games sell like hotcakes, it tells developers that this is the only type of game people will buy. Now, I love every other FPS just like the next person, but I draw the line as to how many I need to play. I know so many people irl who only play CoD and refuse to play anything else. They will only buy that game.

Because of this, the fact that there's a new release of a new CoD every year means that it will eat up everyone's attention (and money, for that matter) and force them away from new and original IPs released around the same time. Sure, some of them sell O.K., but the fact remains that the only way to get to a consumers heart is by releasing a rehash of the same formula we've played 4 years ago with a $60 price tag slapped on it instead of something brand-new.

It makes me sad to think where this will all take the game industry.

My personal problem with the game was the result of bugs and exploits in Modern Warfare 2. Because of such things, I often found myself frustrated far more often than I was having fun. Having now played 6 CoD games, I feel I have seen what they can do and I am simply not interested anymore.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . . . 19 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here