Sometime ago I wrote about the fork in the road that was going to meet the Crossfire community head on. Now the fork is prodding down upon us like the dinner that we are and its time to look at one of the forks stainless steel prongs in particular, the Call of Duty prong.
I read Crossfire today and I see the same comments I saw when ET was released, it really is quite funny how similar the arguments are both for and against Quakewars. As vocal as the ET prong is now and was when it was introduced, its the Call of Duty prong’s who’s voice is growing louder this time around.
When Call of Duty 1 was first released it was something of a surprise to the competitive scene who had just finished with RTCW. It was one that saw many of the big names try their hand in the game and enjoying the refreshing breeze of a gametype that is so dissimilar to the Wolfenstein series. Infact Call of Duty was a wolf in sheeps clothing, released on the ever lightweight Quake 3 engine it really was CounterStrike in disguise to players who prided themselves on Wolfensteins team play dynamic that put it above the ever knocked CounterStrike.
It is here where you’ll see the games first attraction. Love or Hate playing CounterStrike the matches can most certainly be brilliant. This years ESWC CS final galvanised a stadium to find their voice and make 4000 spectators sound like 400,000. The bomb defusal or search and destroy gametype offers one focal point of excitement every 90 seconds. You are under pressure for 90 seconds (until you die, plant the bomb or kill your opponents) and then you have a rest for 10. Repeat 15 times, or 12 in CoD2’s case and there’s one half played, a completely different format of tension building and excitement to what the average Wolfenstein player is used to.
As a spectator it can be very easy to appreciate it, as a player you can either love it or find it the most frustrating concept ever. If you’re on the wrong side of a beating and you die early on many rounds you’ll find yourself doing nothing for 20 minutes of a 40 minute match. However that is a trend that with time and experience players learn to buck and reduce their ‘downtime’ as they get better (or play more evenly matched opponents).
What surprises me is how many people this time around are looking into the Call of Duty prong as some form of saviour. However I need only remember back into what made it a hit with the RTCW crowd to find out why. It is because it is SO different yet it feels so similar that is its strength. The Quake 3 engine is to gaming what a Bugatti Veyron is to Jeremy Clarkson, fast, slick and yet in CoD4’s case, still very beautiful.
For Call of Duty 4 destiny is knocking, two G7 teams have already announced their intentions for the game and LAN events appear to be knocking on the door. The competitive eyes of the world are looking done upon it with eager anticipation, this, one of the last big releases before Christmas will hope to welcome 2008 in with a bang.
Can it succeed and will you even like it? Starting on Monday, Crossfire will delve into the Call of Duty world and give you it’s a guide to its past, a guide to its present and speculate about its future.
I read Crossfire today and I see the same comments I saw when ET was released, it really is quite funny how similar the arguments are both for and against Quakewars. As vocal as the ET prong is now and was when it was introduced, its the Call of Duty prong’s who’s voice is growing louder this time around.
When Call of Duty 1 was first released it was something of a surprise to the competitive scene who had just finished with RTCW. It was one that saw many of the big names try their hand in the game and enjoying the refreshing breeze of a gametype that is so dissimilar to the Wolfenstein series. Infact Call of Duty was a wolf in sheeps clothing, released on the ever lightweight Quake 3 engine it really was CounterStrike in disguise to players who prided themselves on Wolfensteins team play dynamic that put it above the ever knocked CounterStrike.
It is here where you’ll see the games first attraction. Love or Hate playing CounterStrike the matches can most certainly be brilliant. This years ESWC CS final galvanised a stadium to find their voice and make 4000 spectators sound like 400,000. The bomb defusal or search and destroy gametype offers one focal point of excitement every 90 seconds. You are under pressure for 90 seconds (until you die, plant the bomb or kill your opponents) and then you have a rest for 10. Repeat 15 times, or 12 in CoD2’s case and there’s one half played, a completely different format of tension building and excitement to what the average Wolfenstein player is used to.
As a spectator it can be very easy to appreciate it, as a player you can either love it or find it the most frustrating concept ever. If you’re on the wrong side of a beating and you die early on many rounds you’ll find yourself doing nothing for 20 minutes of a 40 minute match. However that is a trend that with time and experience players learn to buck and reduce their ‘downtime’ as they get better (or play more evenly matched opponents).
What surprises me is how many people this time around are looking into the Call of Duty prong as some form of saviour. However I need only remember back into what made it a hit with the RTCW crowd to find out why. It is because it is SO different yet it feels so similar that is its strength. The Quake 3 engine is to gaming what a Bugatti Veyron is to Jeremy Clarkson, fast, slick and yet in CoD4’s case, still very beautiful.
For Call of Duty 4 destiny is knocking, two G7 teams have already announced their intentions for the game and LAN events appear to be knocking on the door. The competitive eyes of the world are looking done upon it with eager anticipation, this, one of the last big releases before Christmas will hope to welcome 2008 in with a bang.
Can it succeed and will you even like it? Starting on Monday, Crossfire will delve into the Call of Duty world and give you it’s a guide to its past, a guide to its present and speculate about its future.
...."can my PC handle this game to my expectations" seems much more relevant since the introduction of Dual Core, Quad Core etc and the necessity to upgrade..... or is it me :(
Personally, I'm on normal boring 'ol singe core, so COD 4 looks much more attractive to me as a player who expects decent frame rates etc etc...
cod have the potential to be a great game, but as long as it's infinity ward who's behind it and their constant neglect of the community the game will fail, in the long term.
i was once a huge cod-fan, putting hours and hours to both playing and running various community-sites for the game. but i've given up on it.
I know you think the game is incredibly balanced and what not, but I've watched match after match and never got that buzz which you get from watching an intense match. The format is terrible, I written and explained many a time on SK why stop watch/objective is technically superior to bomb defusal/round by round (much to the annoyance of the '1.6 fanboys!) and it falls on deaf ears.
Continuous flowing action is what people want, just look at the mainstream popular sports and see which varieties are popular. The game at present is impossible to follow from the 'bigger picture'. Sure you can tab and see the map overlay, watching the colored dots moving from one location to another but you're missing the action.
The developers need to improve the spectator capabilities of games a lot and ESL needs to get rid of that fucking Asian with the lisp who can't pronounce anything.
I don't think the majority of gamers are intelligent enough to appreciate the qualities of stop watch despite its technical superiority. Or to put it into real life context, it's like having sex then pulling my dick out every minute and a half! Not going to please everyone!
P.S I prefer Tennis to Football
Which explains it all, I guess? =P
I agree dohfos that IW maybe aren't as in touch with the comp scene as they should be, but the core game they make is very good in MP and leaves little more for comp mods to do than set rules and remove some SP features like shellshock.
Hope I have been playing the wrong maps, using the wrong weapons (unlocks, y0) and been playing with the wrong settings :/
Really hope its good in SD with the right settings, really like the cod community and wish they get a great competition game in cod4 :)
I guess one of the big difference from cod2 is that there are no more bolt-action rifles, which made the gameplay very unique compared to other fps.
Tennis is boring unless you play it (I play it and concede that unless you're watching a very even match, it's boring as hell).
Boxing is very loosely based on rounds and it's mechanics are in place to extend the fight as long as possible. An uneven match is likely to finish in the first round, where as in cs you've to endure a rape.
It's quite funny that all but the first two (three, but I've no experience with volleyball and it isn't popular in the UK at all or played in schools so I'm guessing it's another handball crapfest [don't take this offensively]) are strictly American sports. Which says enough and draws among my comment that generally the majority of gamers don't have the intelligence to appreciate the complexities and diverse mechanics of objective/stop watch.
I didn't mention CoD in the same light as CS, as it makes slight adjustments and is slightly better in some regards (health system is one of the best innovations in fps gaming ever).
Does this not sum up how narrow minded you are to anything outside of your own opinion. If what I've quoted of you was FACT then it really wouldn't get the viewing ratings it gets.
You can say you've got more experience in eSports and that arguably gives your opinion more substance, but why only have one opinion? This coming from the same man who requested more coverage in eSports I find it getting a tad personal. If every narrow minded and opinionated person stopped writing and talking then nothing would ever get written and forums would be dead.
If you dont pretend to know better, then you're admitting you're mentally retarded. Its up to you
The age of literalism has well and truly begun. Naive would be me making judgment and having opinions without substance. I play the game personally and to a fairly good standard. Does that make me more qualified to speak about it than another? I leave that to them to decide.
I would gladly watch a federer vs Nadal over a boring football match, but the structures which I mentioned above are inherit in tennis as well. It means any relatively decent football match is better than the best tennis match from a spectators point of view.
I can understand why people enjoy watching wc3 but from a general spectators view, its' just unwatchable.
You obviously dont know shit, please shut up.
"I can understand why people enjoy watching wc3 but from a general spectators view, its' just unwatchable."
???? Starcraft and Warcraft are two of the biggest spectator games in eSport and really enjoyable and easy to watch. (Watching tons of wc3 games without playing myself)
God I dislike your way of writing, pretending to know things you dont know anything about.
Funny, the head admin of the W3CL (esl) admitted in a video interview that both wc3 and the entire rts genre was hard for those who didn't play it to follow. Guess he knows nothing eh? The popularity of rts and huge population of Asia has literally nothing to do with it being the biggest spectator games either! Just convince!
And u cant really compare the format to any of those games u mentioned. Mayb Dodgeball would be the closest to it... which is ofc a boring game.
'but I've no experience with volleyball' - You completely ignored? I explained why I had no experience with it 'it isn't popular in the UK at all or played in schools' Then I added 'so I'm guessing it's another handball crapfest'
Generally, sports which are only popular in one region or market means their concepts and foundations are flawed. I know some of mainland Europe likes handball and some of the Nordic countries like hockey, but everyone loves Football. There are a few British sports which have limited appeal beyond our isles as well, it works both ways. It's mostly cultural. Mass appeal bridges national and cultural boundaries.
Now I know you will probably jump on me and say cs is the most widespread fps and I agree. But I'm looking at the concepts and mechanics of the popular of sports and cs lacks them, popularity doesn't equate to quality, that's why 1v1 games will remain timeless.
You only have to look at the ammount of people who play CoD2 and CS and then compare it to ET.
I'm not going to get into it, but basically Stopwatch is good, yes, but round based games have so many more advantages it's unreal.
I love how your analogies only remain valid if they suit your purpose :)
What the fork-community really needs are forks made from f.e. X5CrNi 18-10. You could make it shiny, but the steel will only allow you to make a simple design. Such a fork would accompany you for the rest of your life.
plizzzzz why didnt they made qw out of q3 or rtcw2 :@@@
the q4 engine is nothing more than SHIT, feels so laggy and strange
In my opinion the best form of entertainment (sports/games) is continues flowing action. The game flows and ebbs and it continues. The idea of objectives only directs the action around certain areas, the same way that duelers move for armor/health when they re-spawn.
If a team/person plays badly they should be punished. In CS, they lose a round, it's completely irrelevant and insignificant in the context of the whole match. If that happened in ET or Quake, that could mean the typically weaker player has complete control in the early stages and has the opponent on the back foot (ie more excitement).
I dislike the idea of 'slippery slope gameplay' in competitive games, where if you're in a disadvantage, health or position wise, it makes your chances of a comeback or kill close to impossible. This is one of the ways in which I feel CoD2 is better than CS because of its health system. ET has its medic class for this means and duelers have the option of running away and getting health. CS has none of this, players have the option of dying or pulling out a clutch, which as I mentioned before, wins one round, wholly insignificant for something potentially important.
Stopwatch/objective adds significance to play and makes it more exciting, both tactically and objectively. The best team always wins (in ET). There must be something pretty flawed when the best cs teams lose occasionally to bad teams. Look at idle's unbeaten streak, proof that despite map chances, roster changes, if the concept and game play is good the best team always win.
No matter how good the other team is, in stop watch, it doesn't affect my chance to win the match. In cs, if I get absolutely raped in the first half, it affects my chances to win the match, since the oppositions has only to win a couple of rounds to win the match overall.
seems like its going to be gameplay wise CoD>CoD2>CoD4
GO NEW AWESOME GAMES
go play ET or even better, die of some disease..
maybe its you who is hurt by the truth that et is dead?
oh yea, it's more shiny!
each new game series becomes worse and worse as a result of fucking commercialisation, hype it, sell more, get more XBOX users to buy it, make random Joe like it
and it does not help gameplay in any way, if you fail to notice that, well, good for you
But ok, what else?
If you'd have touched the game you'd have noticed that it's not shiny at all on dx7(which all players use basicly) but actually just as plain as cod1.
You could say the exact same thing about Stopwatch gameplay?
I'm failing to comprehend that post.
You've thirty rounds, the first to 16 wins. Some maps are quite horribly balanced making point scoring, either very hard or very easy. If a team in the first half blows out the other (harder than expected) then it makes it stupidly hard to fight back.
eg
SK Gaming [13:02] fnatic
SK Gaming [03:03] fnatic
In stop watch terms, it's the equivalent in saying despite there being a chance of you winning, if you don't get the cp in 3 minutes you're not getting a chance to beat the full time.
If all the stages of an ET map were equally difficult (impossible) THEN it would be logical to say "if you don't get the CP within 3 minutes you lose", because it would be technically impossible for you to win, which would make the rest of the game a huge waste of time.
It's not ridiculously hard at all, infact it's more balanced than stopwatch just without the 15 minutes of rape you would have to endure.
Think about it (using your own example):
SK Gaming [13:02] fnatic
-> Now, whether they score 3 rounds in the first 3, or the last 3 makes NO DIFFERENCE they have still won. The score of the next would could be:
-> SK Gaming [03:00] fnatic
-> SK Gaming [03:03] fnatic
-> SK Gaming [03:12] fnatic
-> and in all 3 cases, it is really the same result.
The difficulty does not change at all, you just seem to percieve a change in difficulty because you seem to assume Stopwatch gameplay elements which don't exist.
The only way it can be "harder to win" on imbalanced maps, would be MENTALLY. But the thing is, after playing CoD2 for quite a long time I got over the whole "being depressed after getting raped" thing, as have most people I know. We can get raped 9-1 in the first half and still bring it back to 10-10 (hi mp_burgundy).
Maybe I cleared this up a little bit, I don't think it was too fluid but it should make sense.
The only game I find entertaining is CS/S, but in that game I got no chance in hell to be a top-player, and then its no point playing it. :<
And ET is full of cheaters, so what should I do? =/