Jump to content

Opinion: CoD comparisons.


Vamphaery

Recommended Posts

As always, this is just an opinion. Feel free to disagree.

 

Halo 4 does not strike me as being particularly CoD-like, despite the near constant refrains to the contrary. A game would have to do a lot more than add instant respawns and give me loadouts to feel like CoD, a game I've never particularly cared for personally.

 

Halo 4 feels nowhere near as arcadey as CoD. (Though, despite what many hardcore Halo aficionados feel, I do think it's more on the arcadey end of the spectrum than many online shooters, and always has been. It's not ARMA or something... but it's also not Quake or CoD. There's a little more complexity and uniqueness to Halo than those games in my opinion.) Deaths don't feel as cheap as they do in CoD to me. Loadouts and specializations, while definitely significant, don't feel anywhere near as decisive in matches as in CoD. New players don't seem anywhere near as outmatched by a specialized, optimized player as they would in CoD generally. Maps don't feel as cramped (or in the case of their larger maps, scattered) as CoD.

 

Just because something exists in CoD or was popularized by CoD does not render it automatically anathema to me. I am not a fan of CoD, but I will not deny that there are what I consider rational reasons why some of its mechanics have increasingly become industry standard. Specialization and loadout adds granularity to games that would be more cut and dried otherwise, or would be limited to aesthetic customization options to make a player feel unique. It makes sense to me that they would be included. Instant respawns don't feel like a bad thing to me. Maybe I'm crazy, but I want to get back into the game as quickly as possible once I die. And they apply equally to everyone, so I don't feel that they unbalance the game as much as others seem to.

 

And perhaps most importantly if you're a fan of the universe and the fiction, Halo 4 has (to me) a satisfying, substantive single player (and co-op) campaign. I know a lot of people disagree, but that's how I feel about it.

 

The irony here, at least to my thinking, is that the insistence on keeping things as they were (no instant respawns, no loadouts and specializations, etc.) and the vitriol exhibited toward any change to what we had before (which is everyone's prerogative, don't get me wrong; you have the right to an opinion,) is exactly the kind of response that makes developers think to themselves, "Well we know this works, so we better not change it or we risk losing sales." And that's exactly what CoD seems to do consistently. They may make some marginal tweaks here and there, but ultimately it's tried and true with a fresh coat of paint. Which is fine, if that's your thing. I'm just sayin'.

 

Anyway. Just my two cents. I am not going to argue about it.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is, anyone, of any age, of any intelligence, of any gender, and of any rudeness can play Call of Duty.

 

... same with every other online video game. There are people that are just like this in the Halo franchise. It shouldn't have a large impact on how good a game is. I mean you can just mute them and then enjoy the game the same way you would if they weren't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...