By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - My Theory on why COD may always be popular

PureDante on 18 October 2010
evolution_1ne said:
fighter said:

Your theory is flawed at several levels :

 

If the game below average why does it get top critics and popularity ?

The fact "everyone" has it does create inertia for both the title itself and the franchise, but it doesn't explain how it got there.

There weren't many realistic & successful shooters before COD, and since COD4 the genre has become THE genre. How do you explain a below average game would develop a genre almost by itself ?


critics are fucking stupid, MW2 story made no fucking sense what so ever and was damn short, and the multiplayer is so fun/popular/and addictive because it's an effortless, skill less, meaningless, empty, hollow experience masked by challenges and tons of unnecessary bullshit to unlock, that even the most brain dead of gamers can be good at and feel a sense of accomplishment, why do you think every thing was put on a 10x multiplier for MW2... answer: brain dead gamers see 100 and go O_O oooo big numbers. COD multiplayer is literally fps for dummies, so now the casuals can say look I'm good, 

ok first fail is saying COD is realistic........ this is your first generation of gaming and you ARE an xbox owner for sure, ARMA is realistic, COD isn't even realistic in practice, even the mechanics(zero recoil, perks, teleporting knives) are casual, ohhh 2 bullet kills, yeah not meant for realism, it's meant because because noobs would suck if they actually had to lead their targets and hold a firing position.

second fail is saying cod 4 established the fps genre, are you joking, established it for who??? stupid new wave gamers who suck shit at shooters, and don't know a damn thing about them and honestly think cod 4 established the genre??? is so then I'm inclined to agree, but for someone who's been here since unreal and quake, and the realistic shooters of battlefield (not bad company) and counter strike, that's just f**king insult.

call of duty is below below average shooter, and a game that only noob to the genre and or people who have never ever ever ever ever played an fps before in their lives would find good, and this includes COD 4, but to it's credit, at least the story made sense.  and that's why it's so popular,  battlefield, and counterstrike and many other fps games weren't stupid enough to cultivate the massive idiot market the COD franchise is pioneering today.

 

edit: and to be completely honest, they have them, because as a true fps fan, we know there is no worse player than a Call of Duty fan playing ANY FPS NOT call of duty.

kfine, I understand what you're saying. But, mainstream&hardcore in mind, isn't the point of all video games to chill out after your daily chores, with friends or not, to have a fun experience and, regardless of your efforts in playing time, have a rural minded point of dedication towards an end-game goal? CoD does this, as MMOs do this. Prestige 10 Level 70, (pointless IMO), provide hours upon hours of gameplay, and give you a reason to not have a need to purchase more games (for the mainstream&hardcore who only buy 1-2 games a year). Isn't that what both parties want? A fully packaged game? With goals (yeah I know its bs that its the same goals every set of prestige)? That has expansions (DLC)? Fuck critics, but its hard to lower the review scores of the game if you look at it from this view point.

CoD4 certainly did not establish the fps genre, it established the next gen bar-minimum of entertainment. Achievements (goals/barracks), rewards (new weapons), and rankings to show whose the better player (or just been playing longer). So, its a pretty important landmark of a game (not to mention an insane refresh from cod3 to cod4).

Then again, whats a balanced shooter, in your opinion? 
Edit: derp, sorry I had to reply to you cause your sig had me drooling. haha



All of this, of course, is just my opinion.

Skyrim 100%'d. Dark Souls 100%'d. 
Dark Souls > Skyrim.
Halo 4 is the best damn FPS since Halo 3.
Proud pre-orderer of 2 PS4's and an Xbox One. 

Currently Playing: Dark Souls II, South Park
Playstation 4: MGS V GZ, Killzone: Shadow Fall, NBA 2k14.

Around the Network
BHR-3 on 18 October 2010

dont know why most dislike COD games

i too once disliked them but after playing cod4 just last yr i can see what the fuss is about im not a real fan of FPS mainly b/c they have failed to evolve its just a hand holding a gun on the screen and a jump feature it been like this for over 10yrs now wheres the diving and rolling, blind fire from cover you know all the cool moves you see the AI do

the SP campaigns are pretty good i was surprised after playing COD 4 for the 1st time there action packed but short there meant to be played at least twice to get all the trophys if you dont like the online the SP are not worth the 60$ though

i dont mind much that there short b/c it kinda makes me want to play it over again b/c it wont take much time from my life and i dont get bored with the none stop action like i do with other drawn out 12hr campaigns

dont agree with the theory that there popular b/c every ones playing em if im not having fun online idc how many are playing but i do feel that its hype draws in more people thats how i became a fan of COD last yr when MW2 came out i was like damn at the sales and reviews this is at least worth a try

i think there really popular b/c of the modern environments and realistic characters and enemies  people can immerse themselves easier than say a game like KZ Halo

dont get me wrong i dont love FPS or COD or that MW2 is a 10/10 game but they are deserving of most of what they have and MW2 is easily a 8.5-9/10 game just with the inclusion of spec ops and above average graphics alone



                                                             

                                                                      Play Me

chazy13 on 18 October 2010
mchaza said:

Sad as it may sound COD may remain popular until an extremely bad cod is released or something better and popular replaces it.

well what other way were you expecting it to go, every cod player isn't going to die in a strange accident on the exact same day lol



End of 2012 prediction:

xbox 360 : 73-75 million  playstation 3 : 72-74 million  wii : 104-105 million 

Most hyped for :

Bioshock: infinte, The Last Of Us, Alan Wake's American Nightmare and Agent

theprof00 on 18 October 2010

These are the reasons:
Heavily reward based. Gamers are like pigeons. Give them a reward for hitting a button and they'll do it over and over and over.

Massive multiplayer foundation plus very good matchmaking. It's rarre that you have to wait in a lobby. About 90-95% of being in the game is actually playing.

Everyone and their mom owns it. Play with your friends. Simple enough.

 

But yeah, the game is trash. One of the only games I ever bought and then sold within a week.



fighter on 18 October 2010
evolution_1ne said:
fighter said:

Your theory is flawed at several levels :

 

If the game below average why does it get top critics and popularity ?

The fact "everyone" has it does create inertia for both the title itself and the franchise, but it doesn't explain how it got there.

There weren't many realistic & successful shooters before COD, and since COD4 the genre has become THE genre. How do you explain a below average game would develop a genre almost by itself ?


critics are fucking stupid, MW2 story made no fucking sense what so ever and was damn short, and the multiplayer is so fun/popular/and addictive because it's an effortless, skill less, meaningless, empty, hollow experience masked by challenges and tons of unnecessary bullshit to unlock, that even the most brain dead of gamers can be good at and feel a sense of accomplishment, why do you think every thing was put on a 10x multiplier for MW2... answer: brain dead gamers see 100 and go O_O oooo big numbers. COD multiplayer is literally fps for dummies, so now the casuals can say look I'm good, 

Hey, I agree with you, the story is stupid. The point is it's still better than 90 % of realistic shooters out there. Wake your brain up and remember : reviews are comparison guides, not absolute judgements that would transcend time and space. 

ok first fail is saying COD is realistic........ this is your first generation of gaming and you ARE an xbox owner for sure, ARMA is realistic, COD isn't even realistic in practice, even the mechanics(zero recoil, perks, teleporting knives) are casual, ohhh 2 bullet kills, yeah not meant for realism, it's meant because because noobs would suck if they actually had to lead their targets and hold a firing position.

Snap out of it. Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Counter-Strike, etc. are labelled realistic as opposed to Halo / Haze / Killzone / Doom / Quake / Unreal Tournament / Tribes etc.

Again, you have the point of view of a fanatic thinking in absolutes when it's about re-la-ti-vi-ty. Have you tried punching yourself ? That's a realistic game right there.

second fail is saying cod 4 established the fps genre, are you joking, established it for who??? stupid new wave gamers who suck shit at shooters, and don't know a damn thing about them and honestly think cod 4 established the genre??? is so then I'm inclined to agree, but for someone who's been here since unreal and quake, and the realistic shooters of battlefield (not bad company) and counter strike, that's just f**king insult.

since facts insult you - allow me to add these :

- VgChartz is about sales

- Counter Strike (2000) : 4.2M

- Counter Strike Condition Zero (2004) : 2.9M

- Counter Strike Source (2006) : 2.1M

- Lol

- Call of Duty 4 : 13M

- Call of Duty 5 : 11M

- Call of Duty 6 : 20M

call of duty is below below average shooter, and a game that only noob to the genre and or people who have never ever ever ever ever played an fps before in their lives would find good, and this includes COD 4, but to it's credit, at least the story made sense.  and that's why it's so popular,  battlefield, and counterstrike and many other fps games weren't stupid enough to cultivate the massive idiot market the COD franchise is pioneering today.

- and now you're saying COD franchise is pioneering the genre

edit: and to be completely honest, they have them, because as a true fps fan, we know there is no worse player than a Call of Duty fan playing ANY FPS NOT call of duty.

- you seem more than a true fps fan, "caricatural archetype" would fit you better.





Around the Network
zgamer5 on 18 October 2010
chazy13 said:
mchaza said:

Sad as it may sound COD may remain popular until an extremely bad cod is released or something better and popular replaces it.

well what other way were you expecting it to go, every cod player isn't going to die in a strange accident on the exact same day lol


no but youd expect the general public to realise that cod is crap, but noo the more silly it gets the better, my friends are excited about that god damn electronic car, and the wager matches!!!!! the wager matches!!!!!! the idea isnt bad, but in cod, a game which requires no skill and which has mass camping. bad move by treyarch. and dont get me started on that crossbow and the "jump and land crouched" ability.



Being in 3rd place never felt so good

MARCUSDJACKSON on 18 October 2010

i don't know

its the name, but like GTA5. it will comeback to bite Activision.once again it will be Bungie that will make the COD killer.



 Zarx's unofficial The Witcher 3    

Official Playstation Vita Thread!

write reveiws, articles, share thoughts, and expand on discussion like never before on gamewise.co/brainwaves

evolution_1ne on 18 October 2010
fighter said:
evolution_1ne said:
fighter said:

Your theory is flawed at several levels :

 

If the game below average why does it get top critics and popularity ?

The fact "everyone" has it does create inertia for both the title itself and the franchise, but it doesn't explain how it got there.

There weren't many realistic & successful shooters before COD, and since COD4 the genre has become THE genre. How do you explain a below average game would develop a genre almost by itself ?


critics are fucking stupid, MW2 story made no fucking sense what so ever and was damn short, and the multiplayer is so fun/popular/and addictive because it's an effortless, skill less, meaningless, empty, hollow experience masked by challenges and tons of unnecessary bullshit to unlock, that even the most brain dead of gamers can be good at and feel a sense of accomplishment, why do you think every thing was put on a 10x multiplier for MW2... answer: brain dead gamers see 100 and go O_O oooo big numbers. COD multiplayer is literally fps for dummies, so now the casuals can say look I'm good, 

Hey, I agree with you, the story is stupid. The point is it's still better than 90 % of realistic shooters out there. Wake your brain up and remember : reviews are comparison guides, not absolute judgements that would transcend time and space. 

comparisons........ you serious?

ok first fail is saying COD is realistic........ this is your first generation of gaming and you ARE an xbox owner for sure, ARMA is realistic, COD isn't even realistic in practice, even the mechanics(zero recoil, perks, teleporting knives) are casual, ohhh 2 bullet kills, yeah not meant for realism, it's meant because because noobs would suck if they actually had to lead their targets and hold a firing position.

Snap out of it. Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Counter-Strike, etc. are labelled realistic as opposed to Halo / Haze / Killzone / Doom / Quake / Unreal Tournament / Tribes etc.

yeah realistic to people who are stupid....... lol modern maybe what your looking for...

Again, you have the point of view of a fanatic thinking in absolutes when it's about re-la-ti-vi-ty. Have you tried punching yourself ? That's a realistic game right there.

second fail is saying cod 4 established the fps genre, are you joking, established it for who??? stupid new wave gamers who suck shit at shooters, and don't know a damn thing about them and honestly think cod 4 established the genre??? is so then I'm inclined to agree, but for someone who's been here since unreal and quake, and the realistic shooters of battlefield (not bad company) and counter strike, that's just f**king insult.

since facts insult you - allow me to add these :

- VgChartz is about sales

- Counter Strike (2000) : 4.2M

- Counter Strike Condition Zero (2004) : 2.9M

- Counter Strike Source (2006) : 2.1M

- Lol

- Call of Duty 4 : 13M

- Call of Duty 5 : 11M

- Call of Duty 6 : 20M

lol again you misunderstand which isn't hard believe, if COD didn't exist FPS would still be here and was recognize long before cod 4 came around you have to be a *nevermind* 

call of duty is below below average shooter, and a game that only noob to the genre and or people who have never ever ever ever ever played an fps before in their lives would find good, and this includes COD 4, but to it's credit, at least the story made sense.  and that's why it's so popular,  battlefield, and counterstrike and many other fps games weren't stupid enough to cultivate the massive idiot market the COD franchise is pioneering today.

- and now you're saying COD franchise is pioneering the genre

yeah for idiots, re read dude

edit: and to be completely honest, they have them, because as a true fps fan, we know there is no worse player than a Call of Duty fan playing ANY FPS NOT call of duty.

- you seem more than a true fps fan, "caricatural archetype" would fit you better.

and you fit the people who suck at every shooter not COD amirite? and you use sales as an indication of quality.....for shame







evolution_1ne on 18 October 2010
PureDante said:
evolution_1ne said:
fighter said:

Your theory is flawed at several levels :

 

If the game below average why does it get top critics and popularity ?

The fact "everyone" has it does create inertia for both the title itself and the franchise, but it doesn't explain how it got there.

There weren't many realistic & successful shooters before COD, and since COD4 the genre has become THE genre. How do you explain a below average game would develop a genre almost by itself ?


critics are fucking stupid, MW2 story made no fucking sense what so ever and was damn short, and the multiplayer is so fun/popular/and addictive because it's an effortless, skill less, meaningless, empty, hollow experience masked by challenges and tons of unnecessary bullshit to unlock, that even the most brain dead of gamers can be good at and feel a sense of accomplishment, why do you think every thing was put on a 10x multiplier for MW2... answer: brain dead gamers see 100 and go O_O oooo big numbers. COD multiplayer is literally fps for dummies, so now the casuals can say look I'm good, 

ok first fail is saying COD is realistic........ this is your first generation of gaming and you ARE an xbox owner for sure, ARMA is realistic, COD isn't even realistic in practice, even the mechanics(zero recoil, perks, teleporting knives) are casual, ohhh 2 bullet kills, yeah not meant for realism, it's meant because because noobs would suck if they actually had to lead their targets and hold a firing position.

second fail is saying cod 4 established the fps genre, are you joking, established it for who??? stupid new wave gamers who suck shit at shooters, and don't know a damn thing about them and honestly think cod 4 established the genre??? is so then I'm inclined to agree, but for someone who's been here since unreal and quake, and the realistic shooters of battlefield (not bad company) and counter strike, that's just f**king insult.

call of duty is below below average shooter, and a game that only noob to the genre and or people who have never ever ever ever ever played an fps before in their lives would find good, and this includes COD 4, but to it's credit, at least the story made sense.  and that's why it's so popular,  battlefield, and counterstrike and many other fps games weren't stupid enough to cultivate the massive idiot market the COD franchise is pioneering today.

 

edit: and to be completely honest, they have them, because as a true fps fan, we know there is no worse player than a Call of Duty fan playing ANY FPS NOT call of duty.

kfine, I understand what you're saying. But, mainstream&hardcore in mind, isn't the point of all video games to chill out after your daily chores, with friends or not, to have a fun experience and, regardless of your efforts in playing time, have a rural minded point of dedication towards an end-game goal? CoD does this, as MMOs do this. Prestige 10 Level 70, (pointless IMO), provide hours upon hours of gameplay, and give you a reason to not have a need to purchase more games (for the mainstream&hardcore who only buy 1-2 games a year). Isn't that what both parties want? A fully packaged game? With goals (yeah I know its bs that its the same goals every set of prestige)? That has expansions (DLC)? Fuck critics, but its hard to lower the review scores of the game if you look at it from this view point.

CoD4 certainly did not establish the fps genre, it established the next gen bar-minimum of entertainment. Achievements (goals/barracks), rewards (new weapons), and rankings to show whose the better player (or just been playing longer). So, its a pretty important landmark of a game (not to mention an insane refresh from cod3 to cod4).

Then again, whats a balanced shooter, in your opinion? 
Edit: derp, sorry I had to reply to you cause your sig had me drooling. haha

grinding in MMO's is actually helpful and make you better at the game

prestige in COD is like those Tee-shirts that say "how to keep an idiot busy read the back of this shirt" and on the other side it says "how to keep a idiot busy read the front of this shirt"



Tuganuno on 18 October 2010

See here's the thing, a game that scores 94 points on metacritic can't be a bellow average game. If you say that "IN MY OPINION, I THINK..." then I'll agree with you because opinions are opinions, and these can't be wrong as long as they don't contradict facts.

The real problem is that you and most of the people look at extremely popular games and think.. "EW MAINSTREAM GAMES, NOOB TUBES , EWWW" It's a good game, personally I dislike the competitive mode but I can recognize that it's a fun game... sometimes. Spec Ops was fun in MW2, Zombies were awesome in WaW. The campaign, even tho it was short, it was fun and entertaining in both.