The Call of Duty FPS generation and its impact on competitive multiplayer.

[Sova]

We here a lot about how call of duty and halo are the leaders in FPS gameplay. There are plenty of us here who will say that CoD is taking over even in Halo while some might disagree. Just because I found this interesting I wanted to post something relevant to the matter. I was reading upon an article about one of my favorite games (Red Orchestra 2) and Tripwire's leading developer for the game. His thoughts on FPS gameplay is quite intriguing. Basically his view is that Call of Duty and its engine is ruining the current FPS generation because of how linear it is.

 

I quote:

 

"I make it sound like there was a combative conversation, probably because I get a little emotional when I think about it. But it was really a calm discussion of, “What don’t you like?” and “It doesn’t feel like Call of Duty.” Almost every element boiled down to “it doesn’t feel like Call of Duty.” And really, watching some of these guys play… one of the things that Call of Duty does, and it’s smart business, to a degree, is they compress the skill gap. And the way you compress the skill gap as a designer is you add a whole bunch of randomness. A whole bunch of weaponry that doesn’t require any skill to get kills. Random spawns, massive cone fire on your weapons. Lots of devices that can get kills with zero skill at all, and you know, it’s kind of smart to compress your skill gap to a degree. You don’t want the elite players to destroy the new players so bad that new players can never get into the game and enjoy it. I’m looking at you, Dota. [laughs] Sorry."

 

Parallels can easily be drawn between this and Halo. Let's put it in the context of Halo.

 

Halo 2- very balanced, power weapons were not of a plenty as they are in Halo 4, movement was slower (had to make better decisions), no bloom, etc..

Halo 3- similar to halo 2 but no hitscan (increased randomness), power weapons still not of a plenty however you had equipment (lowered skill gap), tie-beatdown system (problem same as equipment)

Halo Reach- unbalanced because of abilities, variety of power weapons (especially the ease of using the sniper rifle), bloom (increased the randomness a lot), sprint(allows for easy getaways now)

Halo 4- always a power weapon on the map and anyone can call in their own power weapon with an ordinance in specific playlists, abilities still there, sprint put in (movement a lot faster)

 

Those are just some of the things that have effected the game play in multiplayer. Sure there are counterarguments to some of them, but I think it's fair to say that when you increase the randomness, introduce more weaponry that doesn't take skill (boltshot much?), and increase the actions/abilities at your disposal, you level the playing field that much more and it turns away people, specifically elite players, because of how cheap or easy the game can be.

 

Let the flaming begin...

[Drizzy_Dan]

I read through it all and I gotta say I agree to a certain extent. Everything said about Call of Duty was spot on in my opinion, not that I'm one of those huge Pro-Halo, Down-with-CoD people, but it seemed accurate.

 

I could see how this is happening with Halo too but my question to you is: What is your point here? Please don't take that offensively, I think this has potential to be a great discussion but what are you trying to say? That Halo is taking the same path as Call of Duty or that you just simply see a resemblence between them?

[Real Talk]

I agree with most of this except the boltshot bit. Its not like it can shoot a great distance.

 

And to respond to Drizzy's question I think the point is that Call of Duty is causing games to increase the randomness in multiplayer games. That way they are able to draw in a bigger crowd, like Call of Duty.

Edited March 20, 2013 by Real Talk

[OhBobSagel]

What OP means is that CoD is setting a "standard".
If you have ever played Unreal, Quake, Battlefield, or any other shooter you'll notice how it's become increasingly more...casual, I guess you could say.
 

[Sova]

Yeah, the point I was making is CoD, because of how successful it has become, is the new "standard" in which I think many FPS's are compared to. Battlefield has always had a tough time competing with CoD, mainly on console, and the Unreal and Quake have gone by the wayside.  All are great games, but CoD is a giant because of how easy it is to take up.  

 

I just find it interesting that Halo has actually used some of these same marketing strategies that CoD has, specifically lowering skill gap by increasing randomness and frequency of power weapons.  Halo is quite different from CoD though and still has that skill element to it. You can't win in the upper echelon of the game by yourself, you need quality teamwork and people who can actually outplay the other side. That said, I still think Halo is implementing way too many elements that take away from the original formula.

[Elite]

Call of Duty really boils down to who sees who first.

The "Special Ops" and "Survival" in Modern Warfare 3 was a very good thing to add, as it is a very different play-style from the run-around circus that is Call of Duty multiplayer.

 

I'll always bear personal enmity on the common FPS games because they somehow change the way children act which is a bit... extreme.

 

I've found with Halo 4 that plenty of opportunity is given to make a skill-demanding game, though. 

Utilising things like long-range DMR fights or limiting weapons and abilities to a simple A counters B, B counters C and C counters A system.

 

With Call of Duty, you just can't do that; I still love the "Special Ops" and "Survival" in Modern Warfare 3, though.

[BearClawsKiller]

I can basically agree with what your going at. But I gotta say, Call of Duty made a big impact on the whole gaming community, not just on certain things. 

[Slayer25]

I'm becoming mad with these effects. How the text says CoD doesn't requires much skill. The best players are those who know good positions in map and many times those who camp. Anyway it has made successful with casual gamers and how a game is very expansive to product, the already established franchises are destroying games making them noob friendly.

There is no problem in like CoD (I don't), but the developers can't turn every shoot game in CoD,it let us without variety. Neither Gears of War: Judgement escaped.

[Is not JL]

Any good Call of Duty player will tell you that Call of Duty is truly bull*#&$ because of how many times the retards manage to kill you, most of the time for bs reasons which I don't even want to bother to start to list.

 

 

To the point that most of the time, they don't play in the normal playlists anymore.

[Sgt. DUKE]

Call of Duty does take skill. I just started playing it again, and i have lost some skill. Halo 4 takes skill. And by the way randomness is part of battle, it takes skill to over come that randomness

[Sova]

It takes luck to overcome randomness.

[Sgt. DUKE]

It takes luck to overcome randomness.

Depatable. Luck has no involvement in overcoming randomness. It takes skill to look at the factors and see randomness, and yet over come that with a 25-7 K/D ratio. No luck. Look at what you got, use it to your advantage.

[CrimsonVolver]

Well, Halo is not only influenced by COD or Battlefield, which anyone who has ever played Crysis will tell you. What you have with Halo is that they are constantly needing to balance an evolving FPS system and add new elements while trying to stay true to the original game. It can't be easy doing this, and there will always be people who have a 100 page book of complaints.

 

I am generally not one to complain. I have played Halo since CE. I miss Halo 2 like many others who have been in this community for a long time, but I am easy going and tend to go with the flow. And I like it that the Halo makers, be them Bungie or 343 are willing to take chances and try new things. You really don't see this with COD. Every time I play COD it feels like the same old game, both in terms of experience, graphics and all other elements. I think that type of thinking will come to haunt them down the road, esp with Halo on the rise again (in my mind), but particularly with FPS games like Battlefield, which are so many notches above COD I can't even begin to tell you.

 

Not complaining, just pointing some things out based on my experience. I don't happen to think armor abilities brings the game down, it just adds to the experience. And, on a parting note, I am really excited to see what the next gen will do for Halo. One of the things I really love about Halo is the art and the architectural creations, and the color pallet. Battlefield has huge maps, much larger than any Forge World, and tons of weapons and vehicles, but they can do this because they have a limited color pallet. When I hear Halo fans bring up the lack of weapons or why don't we have all the vehicles, etc., I wonder if they have ever contemplated the limitations of the current xbox, and that I am sure the developers would love to include everything, but it is simply not possible at this state. Perhaps more so after next gen is here.

 

CV

[Sova]

Well, Halo is not only influenced by COD or Battlefield, which anyone who has ever played Crysis will tell you. What you have with Halo is that they are constantly needing to balance an evolving FPS system and add new elements while trying to stay true to the original game. It can't be easy doing this, and there will always be people who have a 100 page book of complaints.

 

I am generally not one to complain. I have played Halo since CE. I miss Halo 2 like many others who have been in this community for a long time, but I am easy going and tend to go with the flow. And I like it that the Halo makers, be them Bungie or 343 are willing to take chances and try new things. You really don't see this with COD. Every time I play COD it feels like the same old game, both in terms of experience, graphics and all other elements. I think that type of thinking will come to haunt them down the road, esp with Halo on the rise again (in my mind), but particularly with FPS games like Battlefield, which are so many notches above COD I can't even begin to tell you.

 

Not complaining, just pointing some things out based on my experience. I don't happen to think armor abilities brings the game down, it just adds to the experience. And, on a parting note, I am really excited to see what the next gen will do for Halo. One of the things I really love about Halo is the art and the architectural creations, and the color pallet. Battlefield has huge maps, much larger than any Forge World, and tons of weapons and vehicles, but they can do this because they have a limited color pallet. When I hear Halo fans bring up the lack of weapons or why don't we have all the vehicles, etc., I wonder if they have ever contemplated the limitations of the current xbox, and that I am sure the developers would love to include everything, but it is simply not possible at this state. Perhaps more so after next gen is here.

I agree that you have to change and add new things to a game, I mean, CoD really is the same game over and over. The problem that I think Tripwire is getting at though is taking that element out of a game that separates the good from the bad. Something that CoD does really well is exactly what Tripwire is voicing its opinion against and that's adding in things that make the game easier to play for "noobs" and "casuals."

 

Depatable. Luck has no involvement in overcoming randomness. It takes skill to look at the factors and see randomness, and yet over come that with a 25-7 K/D ratio. No luck. Look at what you got, use it to your advantage.

 

It is debatable but more often than not I see luck being an extremely big indicator in determining the outcome of randomness. Ordinance drops on maps are random, weapons within the personal ordinance drops are also random, spawns are quite random. Those three are determined by luck.  

 

My problem with Halo 4, which I think Tripwire developers would agree with, is upping the frequency of power weapons.  Example: a person who is terrible with the starting weapons gets enough assists, kills to get an ordinance, calls it in, and what does he get? a Incineration cannon or rockets. Weapons that don't take much skill to use.   You can't control them getting it either. That's drastically different from Halo CE, 2, 3, and even Reach where weapon spawns needed to be controlled and time accordingly.  A good team will know how to work a map to their advantage, that no longer is the case because drops are randomized.  

 

But that's just one example of compressing skill gap.  

[CrimsonVolver]

I agree that you have to change and add new things to a game, I mean, CoD really is the same game over and over. The problem that I think Tripwire is getting at though is taking that element out of a game that separates the good from the bad. Something that CoD does really well is exactly what Tripwire is voicing its opinion against and that's adding in things that make the game easier to play for "noobs" and "casuals."

I hear what you are saying. I just read the PC Gamer article where the Tripwire President went into detail about why COD is ruining FPS games. I always hear other gamers talking about this and other issues within the Halo community, but I have really not given much attention to it. I agree with the criticism I understand. I want Halo to remain unique among the COD influenced FPS games. But I can understand the concerns about the toxic influence of COD, and honestly I am not a real COD fan, other than the Zombie mode on Blackops, which is actually really fun, but I have a thing for games with zombies I guess. It is why I mentioned Battlefield, because while probably some of the same criticisms of COD can be lobbied against Battlefield, I think that what separates Battlefield from COD is that there is a genuine attempt to foster team play and cooperation, in some ways at a more sophisticated level than Halo. I don't want Halo to mimic Battlefield, but I think there are some things they can learn from Battlefield. I also see more similarities between BF3 and Halo in that there's more skill required. You can't always just randomly shoot like in COD and get kills. Like in Halo, in BF3 oftentimes I am able to manuever fast enough when being shot at to swing around and kill the attacker, maybe because they are not a good shot, I don't know.

[Zelda]

The only thing I am sure of on Black Ops 2, is that is has some of the most gorgeous graphics I have ever seen on a game. Its so clear, so bright and so brilliant.

[Sova]

Graphics aren't everything my friend. I'd go back to Halo 2 in a heartbeat given the chance just because the physics of that game are untouchable.  

 

As for Bf3. I'm a huge fan of it because of how it is based around squad teamplay. You HAVE to work as a team to win. One person can't control the game. And I think Halo is similar in this fashion.  Plus, bf3 you need to know how to use every weapon to be able to be good, you need that skill. A noob in bf3 will get crushed if they don't actually take the time to learn the game. Huge skill gap in bf3.  But of course, bf3 has its problems too. Every game does. I just hope CoD's influence will fade.

[CrimsonVolver]

Graphics aren't everything my friend. I'd go back to Halo 2 in a heartbeat given the chance just because the physics of that game are untouchable.  

 

As for Bf3. I'm a huge fan of it because of how it is based around squad teamplay. You HAVE to work as a team to win. One person can't control the game. And I think Halo is similar in this fashion.  Plus, bf3 you need to know how to use every weapon to be able to be good, you need that skill. A noob in bf3 will get crushed if they don't actually take the time to learn the game. Huge skill gap in bf3.  But of course, bf3 has its problems too. Every game does. I just hope CoD's influence will fade.

Agree with everything you just said. CV

[AnimeAddict]

lol Halo 4 isnt THAT bad for a new complany taking their first stab at it face it guys H4 could have been way worse xD