What exactly is so special about the CD: Black Ops multiplayer?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3
 

I personally play it to be competitive, but it is very fun. After playing the mess that was MW2, Black Ops is a lot more balanced and a bit more dependent on skill (A bit, not quite there yet). It's a very simple formula that makes it succeed, and complexity is not necessarily always a good thing. It's like saying why people enjoy TF2 when you clearly do the same things over and over again.

On another note, it frustrates me a shitload to see that people consider themselves "superior" above people that like playing Call of Duty. It makes you no better than those "swearing 13-year olds" or " mindless idiot sheep" that you hate so much. The hypocrisy is just astounding.

CoD has a single player mode? Hunh. Might have to look for that some time. As for why I like it, it is one of the more "fun" FPS's out right now. I've played probably almost every FPS since Wolfenstien 3D, and it has always been one of my favorite types of games. I still remember spending hours playing multiplayer Duke Nukem 3D. As for the "best" FPS's ever, I'm still a fan of Planetside (pre SOE destroying it) and the Rainbow Six series. If other people still played R6:V2, I would be all over that. But people move on. And CoD:BO is a very solid, mostly balanced pseudo-realistic shooter. If you want something "different", than something that is number (what, 5, 6?) in a series of hugely popular games probably isn't what you want. Genesis A.D. is in open beta now, its a slightly different style of FPS. If Huxley ever comes out (which is looking less and less likely since A.P.B. failed) then there will finally be something equal to Planetside to play.

The shitty spawn points.

Taking COD duties lvl up system and controls and guns and use it on battlefields maps and objectives and vehicles and and and and thats all.

dsmops2003:
They are trying to sell themselves on the fact that the game was worth the 60 dollars they wasted on it. Have you ever had to sell yourself on something that in the back of your mind you know wasn't the best decision but you had to live with it, so you told yourself it was the right choice?

Palademon:
Because it's overly popular and all the people who play it and nothing else have nothing to compare to.

There is also the off chance that a team of hundreds of people with decades of experience and millions of dollars are able to create a good game.

It almost seems to me like you're justifying not buying it. Because a franchise with what, ten games? Twelve? At this point, people would know if they like it. They'd have other games as a reference, and they'd think to themselves "Gee, I've liked all the CoD games, I'm gonna go buy the new one. I mean Bad Company is fun, and plenty of other people like it, but I like the feel of CoD more." As much as it makes you look edgy to say it, the average person is not a complete and total moron, and they don't tend to throw sixty dollars at just anything, especially not in a recession.

Why can no one except that people have different taste? I mean, fuck.

Anyway, the CoD series isn't known for innovation. Far from it. The point of CoD is polish. They take a lot of the popular trends, and put in the polish that only millions of dollars and hundreds of people can manage.

People know they aren't getting anything innovative, but it will be fun. There will be memorable set pieces, addictive multiplayer, and something to bond with friends over. Rather than buying a dozen FPSs, each with their own little gimmick, you can buy that years CoD, which takes the best of the new ideas and perfects them.

The multiplayer's not bad, it's fluid and very functional and if you have a good run it's great fun. It all depends on your tastes really.

Greyfox105:
It seems that you are unable to enjoy any games, judging by all the threads you make about them not being so good. Ever considered knitting instead? If no game can keep you occupied, maybe making a scarf or some socks can.
And now, "On Topic": I can't say much about the multiplayer, as the match finding system is worse that that of Modern Warfare 2. While searching, I have never found a single match.
But while in a party with my best friend, which can get me into games somehow when I can't alone, the muliplayer does seem more interesting than the last few games, and the customisation is quite nice too.

this. im very curious OP, what games do you play? you buy games then make threads about them on how boring and average or below average they are, but you never give concrete examples or compare to your core ideas and likes of certain games.

haters gonna hate

dsmops2003:
They are trying to sell themselves on the fact that the game was worth the 60 dollars they wasted on it. Have you ever had to sell yourself on something that in the back of your mind you know wasn't the best decision but you had to live with it, so you told yourself it was the right choice?

It was worth it! It had the full version of ZORK!

<<

Luckily, I only borrowed it from my flatemate, and he paid all the money for the cool remote control car, which does kick ass.

Personally, I couldn't get into the multiplayer for Black Ops. It just seemed off. The guns don't feel right, the RC car is ridiculous, the spawn points are still shitty...it's an improvement over MW2, no doubt, with singleplayer being actually good, but the multiplayer just doesn't seem fun to me. I had much more fun with Reach, Bad Company 2, even Medal of Honor.

A friend told me this:

"It's mw2 with new weapons and some new unnecesary bullshit"

And he's a COD fanboy...but he isn't stupid

I prefer CoD2, none of that ranking crap, only a few WW2 guns and your skill. Even if the PPSH is RIDICOULOUSLY overpowered xD

You want a hard multiplayer experience that will challenge you play either Wolfenstein Enemy Tettitory or Quake Wars enemy Territory.

DugMachine:
C4 RC car... nuff said :)

So why isn't everyone playing Frontlines: Fuel of War?

Cabamacadaf:

DugMachine:
C4 RC car... nuff said :)

So why isn't everyone playing Frontlines: Fuel of War?

Because no one else is. Even though it was a fun little game, I loved the remote controls with guns. ^.^

Palademon:
Because it's overly popular and all the people who play it and nothing else have nothing to compare to.

Well that's blatantly and objectively wrong.

On Topic:
I enjoy the Black Ops multiplayer because it's polished, smooth, fast multiplayer. Lag is low, frame-rates are high, gun selection and customization options are fun and great, wager matches are cool, and it's an utter blast to play with friends.

Does it reinvent the wheel? No.
But who cares? It's fun.

My favorite games are massive, immersive, single-player RPGs. But every now and then you just gotta blow some shit up with some friends,

That's why I play CoD.

I prefer MW2 personally. it's too bad IW died, MW2 could have been so much more. Blackops is unplayable with those framerate issues on the PC. :s

The_awesome_one:
A friend told me this:

"It's mw2 with new weapons and some new unnecesary bullshit"

And he's a COD fanboy...but he isn't stupid

Your friend fails to mention how Black Ops toned down kill streaks and basically eliminated the overpowered weapons and bullshit perk combos that ran rampant in MW2 multiplayer. What he meant to say was "It's CoD:MW2 with new non-overpowered weapons and some new totally necessary balance."

dastardly:
-Snip-

'C' was my reaction to buying MW2' hardened edition, as at the time it seemed pretty good. That changed to an 'A' when I realised it was overhyped, unbalanced shite. =/

Ironic Pirate:

dsmops2003:
They are trying to sell themselves on the fact that the game was worth the 60 dollars they wasted on it. Have you ever had to sell yourself on something that in the back of your mind you know wasn't the best decision but you had to live with it, so you told yourself it was the right choice?

Palademon:
Because it's overly popular and all the people who play it and nothing else have nothing to compare to.

There is also the off chance that a team of hundreds of people with decades of experience and millions of dollars are able to create a good game.

It almost seems to me like you're justifying not buying it. Because a franchise with what, ten games? Twelve? At this point, people would know if they like it. They'd have other games as a reference, and they'd think to themselves "Gee, I've liked all the CoD games, I'm gonna go buy the new one. I mean Bad Company is fun, and plenty of other people like it, but I like the feel of CoD more." As much as it makes you look edgy to say it, the average person is not a complete and total moron, and they don't tend to throw sixty dollars at just anything, especially not in a recession.

Why can no one except that people have different taste? I mean, fuck.

Anyway, the CoD series isn't known for innovation. Far from it. The point of CoD is polish. They take a lot of the popular trends, and put in the polish that only millions of dollars and hundreds of people can manage.

People know they aren't getting anything innovative, but it will be fun. There will be memorable set pieces, addictive multiplayer, and something to bond with friends over. Rather than buying a dozen FPSs, each with their own little gimmick, you can buy that years CoD, which takes the best of the new ideas and perfects them.

Good post! :D

Im a harcore gamer dude, been playing for aslong as i can remember, i love RPGs and advernture games mostly, but something about the COD series makes me drool, i just love it and i cant get enough of it, i always try to act like i dont care for it, but i do and its a guilty pleaseure, becuase i pride myself on being a gamer, not sure why but there you go, and i find that playing this game makes me a casual, and not that even means anything, but it makes me feel like my opinion doesnt count. but what can i say, i love it.

i like how whenever someone doesnt like something but other people like it when they "Quote" those said people they always have to put dumb stuff like ZOMG TEH SO MAZING GAME

I should add that after hours of playing BlackOps that it has all the flaws of CoD4:MW. Extremely bad respawns, god awful killstreaks (the auto-turret, aimbot choppers are back).

Choppers and even the AC130 in MW2 (might be because the stingers were godly) didn't annoy me as much as the CoD4 chopper.

The Escapist, the holy land of elitism.

While I myself don't enjoy CoD, I can see why other people do. I guess the reason it's more popular is the fact that it's an established franchise that people can trust to deliver. In playing CoD, you know what you're going to get; a relatively underwhelming - but entirely irrelevent - single player campaign, and a multiplayer reaching cocaine-like levels of addiction (probably moreso). This is why people buy CoD (for the most part; I've heard both good and bad things about the campaign in Black Ops).

You also have to factor in the sheer size of the online community, meaning that you'll never really be stuck with no one to play against. This is what makes it such a successful game. So, there are a lot of people who buy it simply because it's CoD.

Technically speaking, it's got the formula for 'fun', addictive multiplayer down to a fine art (whether it's unbalanced or not). They don't really have to alter anything, because they know people will still buy it. And the additions they do make integrate well into this already proven formula. Supposedly, the Black Ops multiplayer is more balanced, but I wouldn't really know.

When it comes down to it, so what if it's just the same old-same old? It's what people are looking for in a CoD game, for the most part. Don't fix what isn't broken.

Well, I like it. It's not vastly more amazing than most (and definitely not more original), but it's just more polished. Granted I still prefer the old-school WW2 multiplayer of WaW, but Blops is a very easy-to-play and customizable multiplayer game which I'm pretty glad I bought.

EDIT:

Baby Tea:

Palademon:
Because it's overly popular and all the people who play it and nothing else have nothing to compare to.

Well that's blatantly and objectively wrong.

On Topic:
I enjoy the Black Ops multiplayer because it's polished, smooth, fast multiplayer. Lag is low, frame-rates are high, gun selection and customization options are fun and great, wager matches are cool, and it's an utter blast to play with friends.

Does it reinvent the wheel? No.
But who cares? It's fun.

There you go. That. /thread. Whatever. Nothing more needs to be said.

Hardcore_gamer:
but again nothing I had not already played a million times before in other games

Discuss.

BAM THERES YOUR ANSWER

Most people in the cod community dont play other games, just this, gears of war, halo and fifa. Therefore it are the best game in there eyes. The amount of times Ive been told that team fortress 2 is crap because it doesent have a level system.

As for the multiplayer, I find it very meh. Its a game where if your not doing good, its not fun. Games like tf(sorry for another reference) are fun even if your doing bad, but with cod its just die span die spawn. Also the maps are very dull in terms of tailoring to each mode, and its too easy for cheap tactics such as sneaking up behind a spawn to happen

I just wanted to say, I'm still playing Black Ops.... I got hooked on 1 map. Nuketown. Play that map exclusively.

VegetaPrinceofSaiyans:

The_awesome_one:
A friend told me this:

"It's mw2 with new weapons and some new unnecesary bullshit"

And he's a COD fanboy...but he isn't stupid

Your friend fails to mention how Black Ops toned down kill streaks and basically eliminated the overpowered weapons and bullshit perk combos that ran rampant in MW2 multiplayer. What he meant to say was "It's CoD:MW2 with new non-overpowered weapons and some new totally necessary balance."

See, I think they went too far. I found that all of the weapons felt exactly the same and it was boring because of it.
From all I could tell there was literally no difference between any of the SMG's apart from the Skorpion and AK. And I'm right! Look at the damage graph for the SMG's. Exactly the same for most of them! http://www.cod7blackops.com/weapons/sub-machine-guns/
And for all the pistols except the token revolver and the utterly overpowered CZ-75. http://www.cod7blackops.com/weapons/pistols/

I've got no problem with trying to balance things, but not at the cost of making all of the weapons so generic. (As an aside, MW3 has done the same thing with the pistols, though not quite as badly.)
Other games manage to introduce balance without resorting to that, why did Black-Ops need to?

And the killstreaks in Black Ops were way more overpowered than the ones in MW2. OK, MW2 had the nuke. But Black Ops had Chopper Gunner and Gunship, both of which were horribly overpowered given the number of kills needed. Gunship basically won you the game anyway, and needed half as many kills as the nuke in MW2.

What I do agree with you on though is the perk combos. Some of the MW2 ones were horribly broken. Commando-lightweight-marathon bastards using pistol/knife combos were an absolute plague, since I play sniper or at least long range rifleman.

Edit: Crap, thought this was a new thread because of the recent post. Sorry to go dredging, feel free to ignore!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked