• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

[Game] Call of Duty: Black Ops

Whoa it's been a while since I saw you around here :eek:
 
Upvote 0
biggest marketing budget ever?

also:

Spoiler!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Merchandising must be something completely new to you.
 
Upvote 0
That's too general a statement i'd say, they have some very talented 2D and 3D artists, yes, i think most anyone would agree with that, but the writing that goes into thir SP campaigns, now that's debatable, as is some of the map design, AI scripting, and the work done with gameplay balance aswell.

A game consists of more than it's visual assets, and consensus does decline when we look at the other aspects of thease games..

AI is bad in a LOT of games. I'd say just about all of them. The only game that I ever thought was well done was Killzone 2's enemy AI (the squadmate AI was typical ****, for whatever reason). Too bad KZ2 felt like you were piloting a garbage truck :\ Hell I'd be damn surprised if the AI in HOS is done well, considering the lack of attention it got in Ostfront.

And you don't need AI for MP, anyway.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
AI is bad in a LOT of games. I'd say just about all of them. The only game that I ever thought was well done was Killzone 2's enemy AI (the squadmate AI was typical ****, for whatever reason). Too bad KZ2 felt like you were piloting a garbage truck :\ Hell I'd be damn surprised if the AI in HOS is done well, considering the lack of attention it got in Ostfront.

And you don't need AI for MP, anyway.

So the fact that AI also sucks in other games makes it somehow good?

2+2=5
 
Upvote 0
So the fact that AI also sucks in other games makes it somehow good?

2+2=5

You're singling out the CoD franchise, like its questionable AI is something new. Unless AI is absolutely awful, how much does it really matter how the AI performs if the gameplay is fun? Especially when the big selling point is MP. Fallout is a fun game to many in spite of crappy AI. CoD is a fun game to many with AI having zero impact in the multiplayer. I'd rather Treyarch left the AI alone and focused on making the MP balanced (which it seems they have done, and is probably the reason I'll be standing in line to pick up my preorder at midnight.)

I just discovered some good news for MP: No Stopping Power perk! No longer will we feel at a disadvantage due to not having a particular perk...now nobody has it. I like the sound of that.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You're singling out the CoD franchise, like its questionable AI is something new. Unless AI is absolutely awful, how much does it really matter how the AI performs if the gameplay is fun? Especially when the big selling point is MP. Fallout is a fun game to many in spite of crappy AI. CoD is a fun game to many with AI having zero impact in the multiplayer. I'd rather Treyarch left the AI alone and focused on making the MP balanced (which it seems they have done, and is probably the reason I'll be standing in line to pick up my preorder at midnight.)

I just discovered some good news for MP: No Stopping Power perk! No longer will we feel at a disadvantage due to not having a particular perk...now nobody has it. I like the sound of that.

Also, no death streaks. No Juggernaut and no Martyrdom.
 
Upvote 0
I just discovered some good news for MP: No Stopping Power perk! No longer will we feel at a disadvantage due to not having a particular perk...now nobody has it. I like the sound of that.
That's the extra damage one, right?
Hopefully DICE will get rid of that crap too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alexander Ostmann
Upvote 0
So what you're saying is you want 32/64 player servers running nuketown only and them being completely **** and unfun spamfests? the entire game is designed and BALANCED around there being 18 player ranked servers.
So the other CoD PC versions weren't balanced for 32 players? That's BS. It's a matter of principle -- it's all about them taking away features that we've always had.

I mean, I guess it doesn't really matter since there won't be an SDK or mapping tools for CoD:BO. They decided to take that away too.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
The Modern Warfare series certainly wasn't very well balanced for 32 players. That's why it was nicknamed Grenade of Grenade: Grenade Grenade, remember? Hell, half the maps were nadespam fests on the console versions. Remember CoD and UO on Carentan with 32 players? If you played Chinatown with 32 players, you certainly did. And you remembered why you stayed away from Carentan if the player count exceeded a certain amount. And thats a map from the ORIGINAL CoD, which had maps that were pretty well balanced for the most part.
 
Upvote 0
Well you all can argue about whether the games were "balanced" for 32 players until the cows come home. It depends on the specific map.

UO for instance had plenty of large maps that easily accommodated 32+ players. CoD 1 obviously offered some more congested experiences and I'd chalk that up to the game being young at that point. Nobody expected the first Call of Duty to be as successful as it became. Back then MOH was the king of WW2 shooters.

UO and CoD 2 remain the pinnacle of the series if you ask me.

It's not like they never called the later games Grenade of Grenade either. Lets not just give players grenades, lets have them drop a live one every time they die!
 
Upvote 0
You're singling out the CoD franchise, like its questionable AI is something new.

No i'm not, Murph said the game beeing "well-made" was obvious, i replied that, aside from 2D and 3D art, which is admittedly well-made, it's debatable in other areas of the game, and cited examples where it's not so "well-made".

I never said CoD's AI was somehow the worst ever or anything like that, i just said that it beeing "well-made" is debatable.


An argument that you apparently agree with, BTW, because you just argued that the AI in the CoD games is no better or worse than the average out there, but that the average is quite poor.

So if it merely has average AI, and the average isen't anything to be proud of, then why would anyone call it "well-made"? doesen't "well-made" imply above average? something of noteworthy quality or sturdy assembly?
 
Upvote 0
I wasn't aware AI factored into "art". Always seemed like a different field of study to me. Less pixel-paintin' and poly-stackin' and more number-crunchin'.
Besides, the AI in the CoD games does well enough for what it's supposed to do, which is swarm you in respawning waves and shoot at you. They really don't need to be sophisticated tacticians. For what it's worth they take cover, use grenades, switch positions occasionally and in certain cases they even do funny things like crawl around and shoot at you from the floor after they've been injured. What more can you ask for, really?

And to put it in movie terms: The games are very well produced and the art direction does an outstanding job working with the resources they got. What absolutely stinks, unfortunately, is the screenplay and the direction.

So if you, like any sane person, agree that a lot of good work went into the art of the game and you, like an elitist prick worth his salt agree that the game's direction is horrible then don't pirate it! For one of two reasons: Either buy it because it's a well-made game and you apparently don't mind the direction, or stay away from it because it's a stupidly directed game. But don't pop in here saying you torrent this because you don't like it. What kind of hypocritical nonsense is that?

There ARE games that are truly bad and you can't be expected to pay money for them. So if you want to boast about torrenting them as a goof, fine, but the CoD series is far, far above such games.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0