What if MW3 flopped?

Drunken_Master wrote:

Photek wrote:

Drunken_Master wrote:Huh?

The Call of Duty games have always followed the same formula, irrespective of what Bungie did with Halo. It's laughable to suggest that the COD games have evolved the way they have today, because IW knew they couldn't beat Halo.

Halo introduced 2 weapons only to FPS gaming. Believe it or not, Halo:CE has influenced more games than you think.

Apart from the 'two weapons' thing, what else did Halo bring to the table?

Isn't it possible to dual-wield in Goldeneye?



Halo's "big thing" was vehicles, done fun*. Something which is largely ignored in Halo MP these days.


*Anyone who remembers Counter-Strike's early attempts at driveable vehicles will know what I mean.

TheTurnipKing wrote:

Drunken_Master wrote:

Photek wrote:

Drunken_Master wrote:Huh?

The Call of Duty games have always followed the same formula, irrespective of what Bungie did with Halo. It's laughable to suggest that the COD games have evolved the way they have today, because IW knew they couldn't beat Halo.

Halo introduced 2 weapons only to FPS gaming. Believe it or not, Halo:CE has influenced more games than you think.

Apart from the 'two weapons' thing, what else did Halo bring to the table?

Isn't it possible to dual-wield in Goldeneye?

I thought he meant the limitation Halo has of only carrying two weapons. I remember Rise of the Triad allowing you to dual-wield. That came out a couple of years before Goldeneye.

Drunken_Master wrote:

TheTurnipKing wrote:

Drunken_Master wrote:

Photek wrote:

Drunken_Master wrote:Huh?

The Call of Duty games have always followed the same formula, irrespective of what Bungie did with Halo. It's laughable to suggest that the COD games have evolved the way they have today, because IW knew they couldn't beat Halo.

Halo introduced 2 weapons only to FPS gaming. Believe it or not, Halo:CE has influenced more games than you think.

Apart from the 'two weapons' thing, what else did Halo bring to the table?

Isn't it possible to dual-wield in Goldeneye?

I thought he meant the limitation Halo has of only carrying two weapons. I remember Rise of the Triad allowing you to dual-wield. That came out a couple of years before Goldeneye.

Oh, possibly. That would make sense.

Does anyone have any pics of Counter-Strike's once-famous failmobiles?

I remember some amazing screenshots of vehicles lodged in improbable positions.

Can someone explain all the CoD hate to me? Genuine question - I always assumed the games were popular and I though MW2 and World at War were ok, though they're the only ones I've played. I'm not a big first-person fan, though.

poser wrote:Can someone explain all the CoD hate to me? Genuine question - I always assumed the games were popular and I though MW2 and World at War were ok, though they're the only ones I've played. I'm not a big first-person fan, though.

It's chav gaming

They are so on rails they might as well be light gun games with QTEs.

It's all about trying to shepherd the player from one Michael Bay set piece to another without the user noticing the AI breaking.

I completed MW2, just out of bloody mindedness. The White House level where you had to snipe the advancing enemy. I never received the "let's go" command and sniped infinitely spawning enemies for 40 minutes until I put the gun down bored, and noticed my team were just stood at the back of the room waiting for me to put my gun down and trigger the next part. <-- utter bollox gameplay

Of course there's the "it's all about multi-player" argument. I got bored of being spam killed by teenagers with nothing better to do but get good at an online game 10 years ago with CS and Unreal Tournament, and if I wanted that, I'd chose Halo anyway.

And of course there's the deliberately controversy baiting indefensible "No Russian" level" - what a bunch of cnuts whoever thought that was defendable in a rational argument about the maturity of video games.

CloudDog23 wrote:And of course there's the deliberately controversy baiting indefensible "No Russian" level" - what a bunch of cnuts whoever thought that was defendable in a rational argument about the maturity of video games.

It isn't going to bomb, pre orders were tracking above Black Ops and Modern Warfare is a bigger part of the franchise than the Treyarch games.

God, i love the elitist FPS snobbery on this board. Such a shame i only discovered it late.

Denster wrote:God, i love the elitist FPS snobbery on this board. Such a shame i only discovered it late.

I know, 'chav' gaming indeed. What a knob! Could it possibly be that the reason it's so popular is because a lot of people enjoy it? - -

Don't be ridiculous DM. Anyone who plays COD isn't a real gamer - they're just one of the herd.

TheTurnipKing wrote:Halo's "big thing" was vehicles, done fun*. Something which is largely ignored in Halo MP these days.

And they managed to spoil them when they made the Warthog destructible

CloudDog23 wrote:It's chav gaming

Amazing.

Just saw the TV ad

Drunken_Master wrote:

bear wrote:[

I don't think we'll see any massive decline in Call of Dutys success until the next-gen to be honest. Too many studios are trying to match Call of Dutys formula now instead of attempting something new. If you look back to before MW came out every other FPS wanted to be Halo but it was by going a different route that MW was so successful because IW knew they couldn't out Halo Bungie. The same thing needs to happen for their to be a dramatic shift away from Call of Duty.

Huh?

The Call of Duty games have always followed the same formula, irrespective of what Bungie did with Halo. It's laughable to suggest that the COD games have evolved the way they have today, because IW knew they couldn't beat Halo.

I've expressed myself poorly.

Given the success of Halo 1 and 2 it would have been easy for IW to try and Haloise Call of Duty. The fact IW instead played to their own strengths helped the game stand out. At the moment there are too many games trying to be Call of Duty by following the Call of Duty formula as closely as possible. Nearly every Battlefield 3 review I have seen has labelled the single player component as a middling to poor Call of Duty wannabe while praising the multiplayer which is where DICEs strengths traditionally lie.
In order for Call of Duty to be toppled I think a dev needs to really nail a different style of FPS to Call of Duty and theres not a lot on the horizon that looks to be trying to be different.

Preezy wrote:

CloudDog23 wrote:And of course there's the deliberately controversy baiting indefensible "No Russian" level" - what a bunch of cnuts whoever thought that was defendable in a rational argument about the maturity of video games.

I laughed so hard at this It just works perfectly

I think people are kind of missing the point of the thread here. PCCD's question wasn't whether it would flop or not, but what would happen if it did.

Frank wrote:

TheTurnipKing wrote:Halo's "big thing" was vehicles, done fun*. Something which is largely ignored in Halo MP these days.

And they managed to spoil them when they made the Warthog destructible

Less realistic it may have been, but trying to scrounge up vehicles "in the field" was a far more entertaining mechanic than "just" waiting for them to respawn at base.