Call of duty 2 - Page 4

guys i again have to disagree about this game.. My opinion on it is that yes it has terrific graphics but honestly the game play is quite hopeless! its too linear!!! theres not enough to do, not enough vehicles and the tank for instance is pretty crappy! I do love the graphics so ill give it full marks for that and the sound. But not the game play this game is more like a movie where your in the audience watching as opposed to a game that actually involves you alot and allows you to do quite a bit. Also the AI in it is quite hopeless and predictable. Of the games Ive bought to-date it would only get a 5-6/10 from me.

This game seems right in line with every other WWII FPS, or any other for that matter, that I've played in regards to game play. BF2 and the likes which are designed from the ground up as MP games will always seem like more "open" games because there's no need for the devs to write and script missions. The lack of vehicles in CoD2 for instance, what would you use one for? You're fighting door to door and clearing buildings and trenches... they didn't use vehicles to do that when they were doing it for real. "You, take these guys and storm those trenches and clear the bunkers." The end. That's the way it was. Vehicles were for transporting those poor guys to the point that they started having to hoof it into battle.

I'm not saying it's not linear, but other than Far Cry, I can't think of much in the ways of an FPS that hasn't been. I've played pretty much every FPS to hit the shelf since Wolf 3D, of which I still have my original 3.5" floppies and manual, BTW. :-)

-Doc

Agreed. I'm defending the barn right now.

While at times I feel that the scripting is predictable, "Gee, I wonder what will happen when I achieve this goal..." COUNTER ATTACK!!!!! "Oh, I'm so surprised." I still have to remind myself that it's more a state of the industry, and just what the hell else am I going to play? Is it SO BAD that I shouldn't play it? Hell no!

I'm not the least bit looking forward to playing FEAR because I played the demo and already know that it's "just another FPS" and will have limited and repetitive bad guys and scenarios. It's not the game's fault, it's just the way things are when you're not playing MP.

Now in online multiplayer, it's very likely that you'll get to fight with, and against real people who just run around like banshees with no regard to teamwork or coordination of effort. Yay.

(Don't reply with, "our team is really good and takes it seriously" because I know there are exceptions, but It's not the norm.)

-Doc

In the American campaign there is a point where you have to get out of a house amidst a flurry of Germans and make it quite a distance to get to the next save point. After 20+ attempts in Veteran mode, I finally started the mission over in Easy just to get past that point. It just wasn't fun anymore.

-Doc

I'm now at Hill 400.

All I can say is that this is the most boring, repetitive game ever made. It's fun but it's still boring.

All you do is shoot and clear out houses or buildings.

I keep telling myself is this game done yet?

ugh.

They need to make Call of Booty O.o

So you mean it's just like the missions were in real life? Long, repetitive, wearing you down, making you wish it was just over? That's how I see it when I play anyway.


-Doc

So you mean it's just like the missions were in real life? Long, repetitive, wearing you down, making you wish it was just over? That's how I see it when I play anyway.


-Doc

In real life, enemys dont continuously spawn. The spawning makes using a rifle kind of useless since its best to charge at a position with a smg to stop the spawning. Not a bad game, but the game is too arcadey to give you a realistic experience. I prefer DOD source when it comes to online as well.

No, in real life they don't keep spawning, they just keep coming because there's just a hell of a lot more of them at times than there are of you. The effect is the same, and the rifle is just as useless in the end. And you're overrun and killed, and you don't get to respawn or load a saved game.

If I stay in one place in a game and they just keep coming, I can appreciate that a dev is trying to tell me, "You cannot stay here. I am creating a situation which has occurred in real life countless times. You are simply outnumbered and the only hope you have is to retreat, so get to it."

But that's not the point.

My point is that all of these games are all very similar because the AI needs to be VERY good, and the scripting of events needs to be well thought out and very complex to come anywhere near what real life might throw at you.

I'll take this opportunity to reiterate my previous point that I believe that games are getting worse because they are being marketed for both the PC and the console, and because of the undeniable control limitations of a console, the more and more common result is to dumb down the whole title towards the lowest common denominator. Result? Arcade-like games.

Look at Ghost Recon. The original version and it's expansion packs are a completely separate experience from the rest of the lot because if you get shot, you DIE. You don't lose a little armor or health and then go find a plate of food on a table to make you all better. You just die. (The vast majority of the time.) Therefore game play is slow and deliberate and filled with tension, and firefights are much more intense because you don't want to be hit at all. Not even once. Because it will probably kill you.

Then Ghost Recon 2 came out and was targeted at the console market with a port to PC planned. Guess what? The console game was so far removed from it's roots to make it more attractive to the "run-n-gun" console player that is was just another FPS POS. The PC gamers made it clear that if Red Storm were to port it to PC, they wouldn't buy it, and fark off for selling out and ruining one of the only FPS games that required you to think and plan a bit. Red Storm bagged plans for the PC port and started working on the next version of the game, promising that it would be what GR2 should have been. A lucky break for us.

So yes, CoD2 is pretty straight forward, so is FEAR, HL2 was boring IMO, don't even ask me about Doom 3, and on and on and on. The only real stand out that I can think of is Far Cry. But I believe that all of this is our fault. Most people value graphics over game play. So guess where all the effort goes when a game is being made.

But in the end, keep one thing in mind: The games, for all their faults, are still really fun when all things are taken into consideration. There have been several times in CoD2 when there were non-linear methods of getting to a location and each option would produce a different reaction from the AI. That's well done.

Online play is a whole different animal and not really part of any of this.

-Doc

Yep I agree with you in ghost recon, and somewhat on hl 2 being boring ( the first one though is 1 of the greatest games ever). I used to play operation flashpoint back a couple years ago, ever play that? Now that was fricken realistic, usually dead before you knew an enemy was there. Xbox version just got released (2 years later...) with some nicer graphics, and I think a sequal is being made.