[Graywolf]

Helel, on 14 July 2011 - 02:13 AM, said:

I don't get this Halo/CoD thing. Those games are so popular almost solely because of MP. While single player is also good, the main attraction for most of their audience is MP. How can a FPS single player scene be plagued by a mp-centered games?

Wrong, the games are popular because of both, not "almost solely MP," altought its the core attraction, that won't make the SP less important.

I know plenty of people that only cares for the SP part of those games.

[Kathy]

Graywolf, on 14 July 2011 - 03:52 AM, said:

I know plenty of people that only cares for the SP part of those games.

30% of CoD4 Xbox 360 players didn't even start sp-campaign.

[Graywolf]

Helel, on 14 July 2011 - 04:05 AM, said:

30% of MW2 Xbox 360 players didn't even start sp-campaign.

COD is the most selling game series of all time. Majority or not, a lot of people plays the SP and that's enought for it to be hugely influential on other SP shooters, as we can see in DNF and other games.

[Martin]

From my perspective, "COD-hate" just comes from whining faglets looking for someone/thing to blame for the PC gaming space fading into irrelevance. The only thing I hate about COD is how people talk to each other on it. It's "shut up, bitch!" this, and "Fuck you, noob!" that, etc. When you get a nice lobby where people aren't giving a shit about K/Ds and such, and are just trying to have a jovial time, it's a very enjoyable game. I give not one fuck that self-proclaimed "PC-only" deities look down upon the game. It kicks ass. Standard single-player perhaps, but the multiplayer component is great. Competitive multiplayer with a fuck-ton of different modes, and on the Treyarch games, the amazing Nazi Zombies mode.

Every time I hear the standard COD-moan, I grin because it means another fag has successfully gotten his knickers in a twist over nothing. If it's such a bad game, why does everyone play it? And no, answers such as "People are stupid sheep" etc will not suffice at all. That's tantamount to saying "I have no idea why I think it's bad, but I hate the game and intend to display this fact by belittling it's user-base". Aren't you big and clever? Go you.

[Jimmy]

I think COD sucks because the gameplay gets stale, unlike Goldeneye.

[Graywolf]

Martin, on 14 July 2011 - 09:59 AM, said:

From my perspective, "COD-hate" just comes from whining faglets looking for someone/thing to blame for the PC gaming space fading into irrelevance.

Every time I hear the standard COD-moan, I grin because it means another fag has successfully gotten his knickers in a twist over nothing. answers such as "People are stupid sheep" etc will not suffice at all. That's tantamount to saying "I have no idea why I think it's bad, but I hate the game and intend to display this fact by belittling it's user-base". Aren't you big and clever? Go you.

I never said that I hate COD (altought I hate HALO) or its fanbase, but I don't like its scripted SP campaign style. If you look at the SP campaign of games like DNF, Killzone 3, Crysis 2 just to name a few, its clear that inspiration that these games took on COD sp style and pace. For me its a bad thing, because I hate linearity. As I said on my first post, its all a matter of taste.

[Mikko]

Martin, on 14 July 2011 - 09:59 AM, said:

If it's such a bad game, why does everyone play it?

Because it's very easy to play, especially the multiplayer mode. I'm not saying it's bad, however. In fact, I love MW2 (the one PC gamers tend to hate).

[Graywolf]

Mikko_Sandt, on 14 July 2011 - 11:39 AM, said:

Because it's very easy to play, especially the multiplayer mode. I'm not saying it's bad, however. In fact, I love MW2 (the one PC gamers tend to hate).

I played a lot of MW2 back in end of 2009/start of 2010, and before IWnet became a hacking paradise (with modded lobbies screwing you rank) was a pretty enjoyable game. But the game has so much broken features, like COMMANDO and the overpowered tubes, for me overalll the mp was very bad balanced. But I never liked the SP campaign of COD, the game plays like it's on rails.

[Mikko]

Graywolf, on 14 July 2011 - 11:43 AM, said:

But the game has so much broken features, like COMMANDO and the overpowered tubes, for me overalll the mp was very bad balanced.

Oh, I LOVE the Commando perk. Sometimes half of my kills in a map are melee kills. The thing is that the system is balanced so damn well: if you want Commando you're gonna have to give up something useful.

Noobtubing is indeed annoying. In MW1 it was basically banned thanks to dedicated servers and in BO it's useless. But it's funny how something stops being annoying when you start using it yourself. I started using the noobtube myself once I got fed up with everyone else using it.

[Martin]

Graywolf, on 14 July 2011 - 11:38 AM, said:

I never said that I hate COD (altought I hate HALO) or its fanbase, but I don't like its scripted SP campaign style. If you look at the SP campaign of games like DNF, Killzone 3, Crysis 2 just to name a few, its clear that inspiration that these games took on COD sp style and pace. For me its a bad thing, because I hate linearity. As I said on my first post, its all a matter of taste.

Fair enough, but I just don't see it in all those games. Killzone 3? Plays the same as Killzone 2, which played the same as Killzone (2004, pre-COD4). Crysis 2's heightened sense of linearity was more to do with getting the thing on consoles rather than copying COD. And I don't get any COD-vibes at all from playing it. Perhaps the way you aim down sights is the same. DNF? It's certainly a cobbled together frankengame, with elements of COD and oldschool. That's not COD's "fault", though. It's Broussard's fault for totally missing the mark in what people wanted from a Duke game.

There's enough shooters coming out which are definitely not like COD. Prey 2, BioShock Infinite just to name two.

[Micky C]

Mikko_Sandt, on 13 July 2011 - 12:27 PM, said:

That's a weird thing to complain about. I hate scenes where you have to put up with tons of dialogue while your movements are severely constrained.

Well I think the game should have had the interview, but made it optional, at least after the first playthrough. Anything would have been better then having to be forced to wait while Johny Lenoman winged about how the show had been cancelled and the crew and everyone had gone to Duke Burger.

Martin, on 14 July 2011 - 09:59 AM, said:

From my perspective, "COD-hate" just comes from whining faglets looking for someone/thing to blame for the PC gaming space fading into irrelevance. The only thing I hate about COD is how people talk to each other on it. It's "shut up, bitch!" this, and "Fuck you, noob!" that, etc. When you get a nice lobby where people aren't giving a shit about K/Ds and such, and are just trying to have a jovial time, it's a very enjoyable game. I give not one fuck that self-proclaimed "PC-only" deities look down upon the game. It kicks ass. Standard single-player perhaps, but the multiplayer component is great. Competitive multiplayer with a fuck-ton of different modes, and on the Treyarch games, the amazing Nazi Zombies mode.

Every time I hear the standard COD-moan, I grin because it means another fag has successfully gotten his knickers in a twist over nothing. If it's such a bad game, why does everyone play it? And no, answers such as "People are stupid sheep" etc will not suffice at all. That's tantamount to saying "I have no idea why I think it's bad, but I hate the game and intend to display this fact by belittling it's user-base". Aren't you big and clever? Go you.

As a matter of fact I (a PC gamer) tried out Black Ops on the PS3 for the first time today with a friend at his house. I did a lot of practice on the training mode, zombie mode, and played a few rounds. My kill/death ratio was over 0.5, which I thought was pretty good considering I've never played any of the maps before let alone the actual game (or any other game in the series), and I have to say I didn't like it at all. The graphics were terrible, DNF on the PC was 100 times better, I don't know why people are complaining about DNF's graphics when this stuff is on the market. Although I'll grant that's probably the case for any console game.

More on the gameplay however, the players have no health whatsoever! What's the point of that? If the other guy has a half decent weapon (which he normally does) he can kill you in about half a second before you even know which direction he was attacking from. That didn't appeal to me at all, and I had no idea it was so bad. It really makes me appreciate how much health Duke has even if it is regenerating, so that you can withstand at least some weapon fire before you die and have a chance of fighting back.

I'll admit I played the MW1 singleplayer campaign and thought that was pretty fun, but I had no desire to replay it.

[Martin]

Micky C, on 15 July 2011 - 12:14 AM, said:

As a matter of fact I (a PC gamer) tried out Black Ops on the PS3 for the first time today with a friend at his house. I did a lot of practice on the training mode, zombie mode, and played a few rounds. My kill/death ratio was over 0.5, which I thought was pretty good considering I've never played any of the maps before let alone the actual game (or any other game in the series),

That indeed is a respectable K/D for a first time.

Micky C, on 15 July 2011 - 12:14 AM, said:

and I have to say I didn't like it at all. The graphics were terrible, DNF on the PC was 100 times better, I don't know why people are complaining about DNF's graphics when this stuff is on the market. Although I'll grant that's probably the case for any console game.

Yup. I have DNF on PS3 (along with some of the COD games), and on the same platform, COD looks better. Miles better.

Micky C, on 15 July 2011 - 12:14 AM, said:

More on the gameplay however, the players have no health whatsoever! What's the point of that? If the other guy has a half decent weapon (which he normally does) he can kill you in about half a second before you even know which direction he was attacking from. That didn't appeal to me at all, and I had no idea it was so bad. It really makes me appreciate how much health Duke has even if it is regenerating, so that you can withstand at least some weapon fire before you die and have a chance of fighting back.

That's just how the game has always been, and even then you are basically incorrect. Knowledge of the maps means there are far less scenarios where you are shot from an unknown location. You are given the direction of the enemy firing at you, and you have a split-second to choose whether to turn and face him, or to retreat. Your frustration comes from never having played the game, and thus not being used to it's mechanics. If I can get away from enemy fire successfully, I'm sure you can. Just takes practice. Drop a flashbang and run around the corner. Wait for that hit-marker. If it appears, return and finish him. If it doesn't, you are alive and have several choices available to you. It is not an arcade shooter like Quake or whatever, but you actually can take a few hits. Unless they get you with the L96A1, which will usually kill you in one hit.

[Mikko]

Micky C, on 15 July 2011 - 12:14 AM, said:

As a matter of fact I (a PC gamer) tried out Black Ops on the PS3 for the first time today... The graphics were terrible, DNF on the PC was 100 times better, I don't know why people are complaining about DNF's graphics when this stuff is on the market. Although I'll grant that's probably the case for any console game.

On PC Black Ops is graphically superior to DNF.

Quote

More on the gameplay however, the players have no health whatsoever! What's the point of that? If the other guy has a half decent weapon (which he normally does) he can kill you in about half a second before you even know which direction he was attacking from. That didn't appeal to me at all, and I had no idea it was so bad. It really makes me appreciate how much health Duke has even if it is regenerating, so that you can withstand at least some weapon fire before you die and have a chance of fighting back.

DNF has exactly the same system even if there's a bar in the upper-left corner.

As I said, it is precisely this ease of killing someone that makes CoD appealing to many. It also makes it more random which is why I prefer games like the BF series over CoD.

[Martin]

I play Battlefield on Hardcore mode, where people drop just as easily as in COD.

[Mad Max RW]

Here's something to think about. After more than a month the current worldwide sales totals combining all platforms is 702,676 units. You'd expect to see that number for the Xbox 360 version alone. For a AAA marketed title that isn't a good thing. DNF isn't in the top 40.

[Mikko]

Martin, on 15 July 2011 - 04:42 AM, said:

I play Battlefield on Hardcore mode, where people drop just as easily as in COD.

I don't because that's the noob mode, just as it is in CoD.

[Jimmy]

I agree. More health makes for a more difficult experience, ESPECIALLY if you can carry a medkit and pick up medpacks. It's better gameplay mechanics, plain and simple.

[Graywolf]

Martin, on 14 July 2011 - 11:13 PM, said:

It's Broussard's fault for totally missing the mark in what people wanted from a Duke game.

you're right.

I don't know about you guys, but off all the things that I hated on the game.. what I hated the most was the shrun duke missions. I found the duke burger jumping section PAINFULLY annoying and the RC driving on the lady killer the lamest part of the game. Everytime Duke got shrunk I screamed in pain playing the game.

Am I the only one that think this? On the gearbox almost everybody loved those parts.

[Mad Max RW]

The problem with DNF is they never had a clear design. Instead of following a set goal they just crammed a little bit of every type of game into one experience. You have a little bit of classic run and gun here, some platforming there, cinematic stuff over there, long driving sections, fetch quests, and none of it is done particularly well. If they had focused on one or two things and perfected the hell out of it there wouldn't be so much to complain about.

[Jimmy]

I was excited for the shrunken parts, myself. In a modern engine I felt that what was only played with a little bit in Duke3D could be done very well. The result was only lackluster. It could have been done much better. I think the biggest let down for me is that in all the things that DNF took and did again from Duke3D, I think Duke3D still tops it every time. Look at the pool minigame for example. In DNF they didn't even take the time to let you use a pool stick and such. Instead you're just vaguely aiming at a ball with your crosshair as it shoots across the table like a ghost touched it. In fact, I found the pool balls in Duke3D to not only be more responsive, but to have better physics. Beyond that, I've played SNES games that have a better billiards experience.

[Graywolf]

Mad Max RW, on 15 July 2011 - 12:07 PM, said:

The problem with DNF is they never had a clear design. Instead of following a set goal they just crammed a little bit of every type of game into one experience. You have a little bit of classic run and gun here, some platforming there, cinematic stuff over there, long driving sections, fetch quests, and none of it is done particularly well. If they had focused on one or two things and perfected the hell out of it there wouldn't be so much to complain about.

For me, the classic run and gun parts were fine.

[MusicallyInspired]

I haven't touched it since I beat it. I tried going through it again for achievements but then I wanted to show someone else the game and the lack of save files made me have to start all over and erase my save. Yes, I know you can copy the elusive save file somewhere on your hard drive but I shouldn't have to do that much work.

I enjoyed the game when I played it, but it's done. Now I can say I've played it and that's all I care about. Until someone starts making some interesting custom additions and gets mod support going then it's had its short-lived day in the sun. I've also stopped visiting the GBX forums. It's clear they're not going to give us a straight answer about anything with 2k holding their leash....at least that's my theory. If not, then it's that they have no intention of giving us the features we have expected and requested all this item. "We'll see" and "We'll pass that along and let you know as soon as we know anything" just doesn't cut it anymore after they've said it 10 times and we haven't heard back from them since.

The game is a bit of a disappointment after all this. In the end I wish there wasn't as many game design aspects stolen from Halo and CoD, but I still remember the fun and the laughs. However, it's not very lasting at all. From someone who had next to no expectations, I was a bit let-down. The lack of PC-specific features really hit me the hardest, though. And I haven't touched multiplayer at all. Don't really care to, either. Unless some of you folks wanna have a match sometime.

[Micky C]

Mad Max RW, on 15 July 2011 - 05:06 AM, said:

Here's something to think about. After more than a month the current worldwide sales totals combining all platforms is 702,676 units. You'd expect to see that number for the Xbox 360 version alone. For a AAA marketed title that isn't a good thing. DNF isn't in the top 40.

What's the source for that?

[DavoX]

Vgcharts mostly. It all adds up to more than 700.000 units sold not counting steam sales.

[Micky C]

I would have thought the number of DNF steam sales would be in the 10s of thousands.

[thelegend4ever]

Multiplayer is the one of the only replay values in the game. *kinda hig as I type that*

[Mikko]

Micky C, on 15 July 2011 - 04:35 PM, said:

I would have thought the number of DNF steam sales would be in the 10s of thousands.

I'd put it at at least 100 000 copies.

[Mad Max RW]

Unfortunately they don't count digital sales, especially when PC is still the minority. If I had to guess +100,000 would be in the ball park.

[Martin]

Mikko_Sandt, on 15 July 2011 - 06:14 AM, said:

I don't because that's the noob mode, just as it is in CoD.

How so? No killcams, spotted enemies can only be 'seen' on the pull-out map as there is no radar, less health, no health regeneration, bullets do more damage, etc. How is it 'noob mode' lol? It's harder. I've never really played COD hardcore, so I can't comment.

[Mikko]

Martin, on 17 July 2011 - 04:20 AM, said:

How so? No killcams, spotted enemies can only be 'seen' on the pull-out map as there is no radar, less health, no health regeneration, bullets do more damage, etc. How is it 'noob mode' lol? It's harder. I've never really played COD hardcore, so I can't comment.

Precisely because it makes killing so much easier. It encourages camping. Even a noob can kill a player that passes by. Compare this to, say, Counter-Strike, a game that I've always thought requires quite a bit of skill. In CS, if a noob is hiding in some corner and tries to kill a player by shooting him in the back there's a very good chance the noob doesn't survive the encounter if the one he's trying to kill is of higher skill level. In CoD games and BF's HC mode the noob has a much better chance to survive. No killcam is obviously a huge part of the problem because it protects campers by not revealing their location.

Of course it's even worse in CoD than in BF because assault rifles have hardly any recoil in CoD. I'm afraid this will be a factor in BF3, judging by the videos that have been released so far. In fact, BFBC2: Vietnam was already a step toward CoD-like weapon behavior.

The very worst example of this is Medal of Honor, a game with no recoil, high damage and no killcam. Everyone camps.