[CoD Black Ops] News and Discussion

Trevor451

Watched the multiplayer gameplay video and I am not impressed. It looks exactly the same as MW2 :rolleyes:.

MiCr0

well you can record gameplay directly, and there's remote control exploding cars!

krudler

Trevor451 wrote: »

Watched the multiplayer gameplay video and I am not impressed. It looks exactly the same as MW2 :rolleyes:.

Being that MW2 is the biggest selling game ever they'd be completely nuts to make something thats completely different from it. theres a gigantic fanbase that want the same but different, this is it.

everlast75

MiCr0 wrote: »

well you can record gameplay directly, and there's remote control exploding cars!

Sure they had them up the North back in the 80's...

hightower1

Trevor451 wrote: »

Watched the multiplayer gameplay video and I am not impressed. It looks exactly the same as MW2 :rolleyes:.

TBH I'm not suprised, I mean if you release one of the best selling games of the year last year and make another the next I am sure you dont want to change it up too much. I'd say it was a tough job for Treyarch to make this game. We all know what activision are like , its a business to them and nothing more than a money making vehichal. Look at the variation or inovation from rock bacn to rock band game, it was non existant becuase they are terified of changing a formula that made them money.

The danger is that COD falls prey to this ruthless activision formula of getting hold of a good idea and instead of nuturing it and the ip they just repackage the same basci game over and over and over until its bled dry for all its worth then move on.

We know this game is VERY mw2 esk, if this sells well can you really see Activision saying ... lets try and grow this, shake it up and evolve the idea... nope they will say make only minor changes becuase the ast few sold well and the idiot masses dont want anything else. In short there is a reason Activision are known to be p***ks in the industry.

krudler

hightower1 wrote: »

TBH I'm not suprised, I mean if you release one of the best selling games of the year last year and make another the next I am sure you dont want to change it up too much. I'd say it was a tough job for Treyarch to make this game. We all know what activision are like , its a business to them and nothing more than a money making vehichal. Look at the variation or inovation from rock bacn to rock band game, it was non existant becuase they are terified of changing a formula that made them money.

The danger is that COD falls prey to this ruthless activision formula of getting hold of a good idea and instead of nuturing it and the ip they just repackage the same basci game over and over and over until its bled dry for all its worth then move on.

We know this game is VERY mw2 esk, if this sells well can you really see Activision saying ... lets try and grow this, shake it up and evolve the idea... nope they will say make only minor changes becuase the ast few sold well and the idiot masses dont want anything else. In short there is a reason Activision are known to be p***ks in the industry.[/QUOTE]

Hence all dlc beign basic maps, no perk fixes or new weapons, too much effort for that, just use existing skins to make a new map and off you go.

although nintendo have basically been making the same Zelda game since Ocarina of time, doesnt hurt them

Nuri Sahin

hightower1 wrote: »

TBH I'm not suprised, I mean if you release one of the best selling games of the year last year and make another the next I am sure you dont want to change it up too much. I'd say it was a tough job for Treyarch to make this game. We all know what activision are like , its a business to them and nothing more than a money making vehichal. Look at the variation or inovation from rock bacn to rock band game, it was non existant becuase they are terified of changing a formula that made them money.

The danger is that COD falls prey to this ruthless activision formula of getting hold of a good idea and instead of nuturing it and the ip they just repackage the same basci game over and over and over until its bled dry for all its worth then move on.

We know this game is VERY mw2 esk, if this sells well can you really see Activision saying ... lets try and grow this, shake it up and evolve the idea... nope they will say make only minor changes becuase the ast few sold well and the idiot masses dont want anything else. In short there is a reason Activision are known to be p***ks in the industry.

Spot on.

zero19

The RC car looks retarded, otherwise looking good enough to warrant a first day purchase

everlast75

whilst I probably will buy it...
let's just say I won't be trading in MW2, just in case....

krudler

zero19 wrote: »

The RC car looks retarded, otherwise looking good enough to warrant a first day purchase

I'll def be getting this day one, purely so I'm not months behind everyone else in levels and map geography stakes, although you know people will be probabyl at prestige level already on the first day :rolleyes:

Hope they sort the matchmaking system as well, my very first multiplayer game ever of MW2 I was chucked in with prestige players, its an insane learning curve for newbies.

Nuri Sahin

krudler wrote: »

I'll def be getting this day one, purely so I'm not months behind everyone else in levels and map geography stakes, although you know people will be probabyl at prestige level already on the first day :rolleyes:

Hope they sort the matchmaking system as well, my very first multiplayer game ever of MW2 I was chucked in with prestige players, its an insane learning curve for newbies.

Well I'm sure there will be a **** load of people namely in the US who will get their hands on a copy early on. That guy from Youtube, f1stdacuffs or however it's spelt had the game for like 2 weeks and was up 9th prestige legit by the time the worldwide release of the game. He took 2 weeks off work apparently to just play it constantly :rolleyes:

hightower1

krudler wrote: »

Hope they sort the matchmaking system as well, my very first multiplayer game ever of MW2 I was chucked in with prestige players, its an insane learning curve for newbies.

+1 on this for sure, twas crazy starting off being level 1 - 20 or so, only having played for a few hours and up against people who have played for days at that stage. Soooo much of the game is knowing weapons, ranges, enviroments, peoples typical movement through the maps etc and it lead to them having a HUGE advantage.

Of coarse you cant say just match folks with the same prestige level cause the dam boosters will screw that all up but the playing time could easily be range matched up together where your only in matches with people who have played 5 hrs + or - to your own time.

Issue is with the matchmaking as it is is simply because there are no dedicated servers, when that happens you have 2 choices....

Set you up with people of the same level BUT they could be some distance away or have poor connections leading to same level games but hit and miss lag / latency wise....

OR

Set you up with people of all levels and play time regardless but the deciding factor then is the connection quality.

Seems like IW went for connection quality over ruling player skill level in terms of match making prefrence. More than likely they too were nervous about not having dedicated servers and didnt want to end up being slated pre release as they were for going in that direction and then to get slated after by everyone having laggy games (more so than now) and people saying I told you so.

I would imagine if they had no dedicated servers and tried their best to compensate for that by preferring connection qulaity over player skill set up it wasnt IW's decision not t have dedicated servers but more and Activision thing. Its more expensive and man power consuming to have servers in place for these things but in the end leads to easier mantenance of the game and better connection controll.

With black ops I think Activision KNOW 100% it will make a shed load and will spring to have the servers, also wants to avoid the whole string of patches thing. If some glicth comes up they can patch almost immediatly with dedicated servers in place. Also with having the game recording they really do need to run that off dedicated servers to constantly monitor the game feeds.

Leeg17

I'm not much of a techhy.

What's a dedicated server? I know Mw2 hasn't got them and that's why there's host migration, but what difference will it make to the new game with dedicated servers?

krudler

Leeg17 wrote: »

I'm not much of a techhy.

What's a dedicated server? I know Mw2 hasn't got them and that's why there's host migration, but what difference will it make to the new game with dedicated servers?

You know the way everyone but the host usually has 3 bars or less? a dedicated server means everyone is on the same playing field, so the host doesnt have and advantage. if you have a 2-3 bar connection and the host has a 4 bar, he'll win every confrontation as hes a few miliseconds ahead of you, ever see a killcam where you were full sure you emptied a clip into a guy, but when you see his pov you didnt get a shot off? thats because hes ahead of you in the game, and in something like MW2 reaction and ping time is everything. dedicated servers means everyone is level.

Leeg17

krudler wrote: »

You know the way everyone but the host usually has 3 bars or less? a dedicated server means everyone is on the same playing field, so the host doesnt have and advantage. if you have a 2-3 bar connection and the host has a 4 bar, he'll win every confrontation as hes a few miliseconds ahead of you, ever see a killcam where you were full sure you emptied a clip into a guy, but when you see his pov you didnt get a shot off? thats because hes ahead of you in the game, and in something like MW2 reaction and ping time is everything. dedicated servers means everyone is level.

Sounds alot more fair on everyone so (except if you're host all the time ). Yea that happens alot to me, big head wrecker.

Cheers man.

hightower1

Leeg17 wrote: »

Sounds alot more fair on everyone so (except if you're host all the time ). Yea that happens alot to me, big head wrecker.

Cheers man.

Its a pretty serious advantage tbh, when the game just starts and you get the count down just hit select and see who has the best signal... thats your host. 90% of the time you will see at the end of the match they are ether the top or second from top on their team.

If your in a one on one with the host his xbox is where all the players signals are routed, so you hit the fire button ... it has to travel from your connection through the net to his xbox , he has to hit fire and its already on his xbox. There is your advantage time. On a dedicated server you find it looks at everyones ping times, and sets artifical ping times that are slightly worse than the worst ping there meaning if the best ping in the lobby is 16ms and worst is 40ms it will artificially slow them all to 45 but the important part is that ye all have the same response time.

You more than likely wont notice that if no one else is faster than you and its all consistant, also typically on a dedicated server them times are only for illustration purposes, most dedicated servers will be close to you and served by high quality SME fiber lines meaning most of yer pings will be super low anyway.

2smiggy

thanks hightower , great way to describe how it works. would be great if there was something similar on the consoles.

on rare occasions i am the host and its so easy to hammer the other team. just running around with a sotgun. but at the same time it drives me mad when i get killed this way as more often than not i am not the host.

i'm on the ps3, and if i join a TDM usually my ping is 100 or 110 before i can join a game

daireb9

Looks like commando's back
but now its a gun =D
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Commando_%28weapon%29

krudler

daireb9 wrote: »

Looks like commando's back
but now its a gun =D
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Commando_%28weapon%29

Probably shoots bullets around corners or something..

ReacherCreature

daireb9 wrote: »

Looks like commando's back
but now its a gun =D
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Commando_%28weapon%29

Or you point to the sky and fire the full clip - then all the bullets home in on a guy, slaughtering him.

gavitron22

yeah thanks hightower i didn't really have a clue what they were, but kinda explains my connection! my freind (who's almost always host) has a connection nearly 7 times faster than mine, and if normal hosts are like that, it shows how damn far behind in the game!

would love to see that, it'd just make it more enjoyable (particularly for people like me with particularly bad connections...) is there any chance of a dedicated server then on 360? also, treyarch are much better for fixing glitches than activision, even in cod 5 they had quite a few patches for them

I was hoping for some dismemberment but by the looks of it, even if someone gets hit by a huge explosive weapon they won't have a scratch on them, they'll be dead though! No biggie, just would have liked it as there were some rumors they might do it initially.

MagicIRL

I wont buy this. A MW2 reskin that looks even more frustrating then prior.

r3nu4l

A radio controlled car and exploding crossbow bolts

Sigh.

Looks like COD4 was the last truly great COD game.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy MW2 a lot but COD4 was near perfect. This looks like it's going to be even more gimmicky than MW2.

Leeg17

r3nu4l wrote: »

A radio controlled car and exploding crossbow bolts

Sigh.

Looks like COD4 was the last truly great COD game.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy MW2 a lot but COD4 was near perfect. This looks like it's going to be even more gimmicky than MW2.

Can you imagine driving the car into where someone is camping with a shotgun pointed at the door? Sweet revenge.

Plus the crossbow from the video only had 1 bolt in its magazine, so I can't imagine it'll be used too much, short range and only 1 shot. Presumably it'll take up a secondary slot, which I'd much rather have for a pistol / anti air weapon.

Never played CoD4 myself, Krudler said it was "mw2 without commando, noobtubes and glitches", so I might buy it myself to see what it's like.

everlast75

Anyone else reminded of the game "goldeneye" when ya seen that remote controlled car?



PS. A rediculous idea for a game that is supposed to be based on reality

krudler

everlast75 wrote: »

Anyone else reminded of the game "goldeneye" when ya seen that remote controlled car?



PS. A rediculous idea for a game that is supposed to be based on reality

you are aware that remote controlled cars do actually exist right? i had one 20 years ago :pac:

whats an rc car that blows up any less realistic than a missile piloted from a laptop? the army uses rc cars all the time.

r3nu4l

krudler wrote: »

whats an rc car that blows up any less realistic than a missile piloted from a laptop? the army uses rc cars all the time.

In Vietnam? In the late 60s and early 70's?

EDIT: Also ballistic knife?

Leeg17

krudler wrote: »

you are aware that remote controlled cars do actually exist right? i had one 20 years ago :pac:

whats an rc car that blows up any less realistic than a missile piloted from a laptop? the army uses rc cars all the time.

They used one in Hurt Locker, kinda.

krudler

r3nu4l wrote: »

In Vietnam? In the late 60s and early 70's?

EDIT: Also ballistic knife?

rc cars have been around since the 60s, isnt the game set between 1960 and 2010? maybe the killstreaks take the entire timeline of the game into effect. and ballistic knives were around back in the 80s, thats when they were banned.