Here are the first screens fresh from Activision for Black Ops II. There’s guns. Say what you will about CoD — that’s very pretty.
Call of Duty Black Ops II Screenshots
Here are the first screens fresh from Activision for Black Ops II. There’s guns. Say what you will about CoD — that’s very pretty.
Waitaminute…where are the above-it-all hipsters proudly proclaiming to the internet that they’re not going to play this game, followed by bemoaning how all Call of Duty games are the same with a chaser of how Call of Duty has destroyed all creativity and innovation in games?
I have no idea what the trailer looks like, I won’t bother watching it, and I’ve barely skimmed the screenshots and descriptions. But this looks good to me- it sounds like there’s a couple of new ideas, and presumably the game will maintain the high production values, rock-solid gameplay, and mainstream, blockbuster tone of the past couple of games. Sounds good to me, and I like the near future setting.
I like these games, I’m not on the “I hate it because it’s popular” righteousness bandwagon.
Apparently people are turning out in droves to preorder after only one day of availabilty. Suckers. Like there won’t be enough to go around. I’ll waltz into Target on launch day and pick it up without putting a dollar down. They can keep the posters and whatever else junk they’re using as bait.
I hate on COD myself, but not for the reasons you list. I hate on it because it is endemic of everything I can’t stand about the games industry. They are well crafted, technially proficient, polished gameplay experiences with top tier graphics.
They also cost a crapload of money to make.
They also make back that crapload of money and then some.
Other game companies see the big bucks that COD rakes in, and want some of that action too. So budgets bloat, graphics get pumped, and to ensure profitability risks are removed. With the kind of budgets high end graphics require they feel they can’t take risks.
So my problem isn’t much with COD really. I can’t stand shooters, and found even Half-Life 2 to be mostly uninteresting. So what millions of people go play COD, whatever. Doesn’t bother me. It’s when every. single. damn. game. feels the need to compete with COD. They spend so much time primping themselves that they are Kim Kardashian. Pretty on the outside, nobody home under the hood. That’s when I get irked. It’s why I love Paradox. Brains > beauty for me.
If developers would shut up about costs too, I wouldn’t get so annoyed. Every time they whine about how expensive games are to make, how they have to add ‘such and such’ DRM, how they are forced to do things like day one DLC or online passes because they can’t afford not to, I want to just Gibb’s smack them and yell ‘IT’S YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT! QUIT TRYING TO BE FUCKING COD!’
So I don’t play COD, or any shooter. I still have my games like Minecraft, EU3, or The Witcher 2. Even big blockbusters like AC: Brotherhood, Batman: AC, and Mass Effect. I just can’t stand when games I like are driven to the COD model in one way or another through things like anual releases (AC: Revelations), forced multiplayer and day one DLC (ME: 3), or emphasizing graphics over gameplay (most shooters).
Craig wins the thread.
^^^ Hipster alert !!! ^^^
It’s not like I listen to bands you’ve never heard of, or look down on most pop music, or hate the Michael Bay Transformers movies. It’s not my fault that Michael Bay sucks, or that radio songs are so autotuned and without real meaning. I mean my favorite bands are Redemption, Dream Theater, Vanden Plas….
Crap
Guess I should get used to wearing jeans that don’t allow circulation, and knit hats.
Don’t forget the beard and square, black rimmed glasses!
Really, Craig you exactly expressed what I was feeling, too. COD has never been more than a rental for me. Fun for a bit but a shooter is a shooter.
I am no hipster.
And I doubt I play this.
No, you’re definitely not. Two words- The Doors.
Soul Kitchen baby!
How about X’s cover of it with Ray Manzarek on keys?
Yeah, I don’t consider myself a hipster, but I haven’t played the last two CoDs. Thought about it, but I played MW1/2 and felt I had played enough. Kind of like Madden — I’ll play one every so many years, get my fill, and move on. Pictures look nice though.
Nothing wrong with not being into the whole CoD thing at all…but I am tired of the teenage mentality of a lot of gamers on other Web sites that treat the series like it’s Twilight, boy bands, or other popular/populist entertainment.
They’re good games, and there’s a lot to be said for how accessible, approachable, and replayable they are, not to mention their technical quality. They offer a really very specific kind of experience, and the fact that a lot of the industry is trying to copy what the people making these games are doing says a lot. As if the sales figures didn’t.
They’re not the best games ever made, and you bet I’d play Metro 2033 over any of them- but mainly because I like story-driven FPS games over multiplayer. But I’ve played every CoD game and enjoyed them all. I tend to play the MP game for a while and then just sort of lose interest until the next one. But the way this game hooks people is crazy. If you’re one of those kind of people, your $60 (plus whatever add-ons you buy) goes a LONG way.
Day on purchase for me. In fact I took the day off when MW3 came out just for the multi-player, but I also like the Doors.
What does that make me?
Joe Public.
Maybe.
But i draw the line at Nickleback and Mario Kart.
It’s humanity’s calling to reject the “music” of Nickelback, so you’r right on target there.
Even though it is a CoD game, at least Treyarch is again trying to do something different with it where as IW keeps doing Modern Warfare X.
“IW keeps doing Modern Warfare X.”
God willing we WILL make it to Modern Warfare 10.
IW was just a skeleton crew after Zampalla and West were canned. MW3 is the combination of Activision producers calling the shots and not taking new risks, and Sledgehammer and Treyarch coming in to pick up the pieces left by the team jumping ship. And really Treyarch has always been a couple steps behind IW, releasing WAW after MW1, and Black Ops after MW2, and each of those games incorporating the innovative features IW introduced.
Bemoaning dissidence and labeling anyone who might be a hipster is just as bad as anyone who makes decisions based on simply being contrary. By no means would I call myself a hipster, but anyone watching me mosey down the street with my group of friends probably would. This anti-hipster thing is getting really annoying, especially when it feels directed at anyone who is trying to be creative or pioneering, and especially when some of us are making games! I spend my childhood and teenage years being made fun of for being weird then as an adult embrace my weirdness and do things with my hair and wardrobe to intentionally not look like the same people who don’t like me, and find solace in my nerdy ways with games, comics, animation, and books. While engrossed with those mediums I strive to come up with creative stories myself and see the creativity in other’s works, and finally set out in the world and make games for my brethren. But then on a site like this, where board games are previewed and reviewed alongside video games, it’s odd when there is such a strong sentiment against anyone who resembles a “hipster”, like being an outcast to the outcasts.
I for one will probably play Black Ops 2 but probably won’t like it too much the same as I didn’t with the first Black Ops, and it was mostly because I don’t agree with Treyarch design philosophies. They have a “stick” approach to design and far less “carrot.” I could just imagine the lead designer on the first Black Ops game was online playing MW2 and complaining about the noob-tubes and scavenger, so they put in a “no noob tube timer” at the start of all matches and altered the scavenger perk so that it doesn’t pick up any ammo. Then when people WANT to play Nuketown over and over, because it was a really fun map, they change their map loading method so maps can’t be loaded more than twice in a row. A lot of the design decisions coming from them use punishment for doing something instead of encouragement in other ways, and usually that kind of encouragement can really open up a game, like it did with the first two MW games which I really think was a big aspect of their success, whereas Treyarch games need to played with guns and bullets only played their way or else.
I do however think the MP map design was far better in the first Black Ops then the maps in MW3, which I think Sledgehammer did. So I will definitely rent it and see how it goes.
My primary problem with any FPS multiplayer is that the primary audience seems to be the noscoping teleport stabber, and I f*cking hate that part of shooters. Guns have no weight, no one gets tired, shooting center mass doesn’t drop enemies instantly, and even Battlefield 3 rewards people (somewhat) for running INTO suppressive fire.
Real bullets are scary. Any shooter that rewards stupid behavior in the face of gunfire is dumb as hell. Feel free to let your mileage vary from my version of reality.
While people are free to play what they like, it’s still a fact that the insane chase of sweet, sweet CoD money directly contrasts with my vision of a better world. Why can’t people set money on fire in search of a better story structure, instead of a better graphics engine?
First, I’m going to think it’s likely because people are tasteless heathens. Then, I’m going to grow up a little and let people like JeffTalor decide how they want to have fun for themselves. Am I not, after all, the guy who admits to owning Nickleback albums?
Coyote, have you tried hardcore mode in Black Ops? It sounds like you might like it. The maps in BLOPS are larger than MW3 and more suitable for hardcore.