Call of Duty is dead?

Stainless 151 Jan 31, 2014 at 12:22 gaming

I decided to have a few games of COD Ghosts last night, not for very long. I can’t play the game for very long, it’s just too crap.

After about 20 minutes I quit out and found I had a message. I don’t remember the exact words, I just blocked communications, reported the sender, and closed down.

This morning I woke up pissed about it, the message had played on my subconscious overnight and I woke up in a bad mood.

The message went something like this.

“COD is dying because of you. Campers ruin the game and assholes like you are the worst. Enjoy COD before it dies”

Removed a lot of the expletives.

That particular player was one of the biggest idiots I have ever seen. It was fun shooting him in the head 10 times in a row. The map was the one with the castle, I had worked out that the other team were re-spawning in the castle so I set up with a clear view of one of the three exits from the castle. He ran out of the same exit ten times in a row with his akimbo pistols, and I shot him in the head ten times. He hadn’t the brain power to realise that “hey that exit is covered, I’ll use a different one”.

This has brought up a lot of questions for me.

  1. Should we be designing games for the brain dead? What target IQ should we design games for?
  2. Is COD really dying? I don’t see any decrease in the sales figures. Don’t get me wrong, I would be down the pub buying a round if it did die, It’s crap code.
  3. If we wrote a game with a feedback system that allowed players to classify other players, then used that classification in the lobby code to group people together. Would it be a hit or a flop?
  4. How many complaints should be received before Microshaft does something? There is no way for them to verify everything, so the system is up for abuse.

COD for me is an insult. It was a good product when it first came out, but they have never improved the game play or network code since. Yet it still sells huge volumes.

You can still see the original design in the single player game even today. The design was very simple.

while (!next_waypoint)
     if (addEnemy(waypoint))
     next_waypoint = checkNextWaypoint(waypoint);  

So you have a FPS game where you don’t actually need to shoot anyone. Just get to the next waypoint alive. You can go into a room, the room has one entry point and one exit point. Kill everyone in there, try to leave, and get shot in the back. Crap.

The multi-player game design is just awful. The host processes all logic and just transmits the game state to all other machines. This means that if someone has a better network connection than you do, you are screwed. It’s actually even worse than that, the result of firing your weapon is totally random because it all depends on which network packet arrives first. You can shoot someone in the head from three yards and nothing happens. Or you can shoot someone through a tank. It’s just crap.

Then the scoring system, I despise the scoring system. It makes my skin itch that someone who just lost the game for you by dying 30 times scores more than me because he got 10 kills and I only got 9 even though I didn’t die.

When it comes to the knife, I want ten minutes in a room with the guy that decided the knife would be the most effective weapon in the game. I’ve been shot before, and I’ve been stabbed. I know which one did the most damage, and I know which one hurt the most. I would like to demonstrate this to him in person.

The whole design means that people with good network connections can run around at a million miles an hour with a knife, akimbo pistols, or a rapid fire sub-machine gun, and you can’t do anything about it. You can’t shoot them unless they run straight at you. You can’t use defensive explosives, they just run through it. Try doing that in real life. No really, please try it. The world could do with an increase in average intelligence.

Anybody else feel the same? Or is it just me. Have I become a grumpy old man with a really nasty streak?

21 Replies

Please log in or register to post a reply.

Reedbeta 167 Jan 31, 2014 at 19:09

It’s gotten pretty bad. I was just talking to my cousin the other day and she was getting sexually harassed by 6 of the 8 players in her DotA match. And just yesterday, a guy at EA who I follow on Twitter almost shut down his account because he was getting a stream of abuse from a bunch of morons who were pissed off about something or other. COD players seem to be the worst of the bunch - there have been multiple stories on the gaming press sites about them going on insane rants or bombarding people with threats and flames because someone said something they didn’t like.

I don’t think games make people go on shooting sprees or anything like that, but I have to think that games like COD, that are basically about shooting people in the head as many times as you can, are going to bring out the worst in certain people. If you have a pre-existing tendency to be an idiot asshole, it will feed that. And there’s usually no consequences for bad behavior.

Hyper 96 Mar 30, 2014 at 20:09

I am pretty sure people are capable of muting their audio, or particular players… Sexual harassment is old news!

Reedbeta 167 Mar 30, 2014 at 22:55

“Just ignore/mute them” is not an acceptable solution to sexual harrassment.

Stainless 151 Mar 31, 2014 at 00:43


I think it is only a matter of time before someone gets prosecuted based on in game communication.

If something isn’t done about it, governments will get involved, and when governments get involved they always go to far and screw everything up.

Hyper 96 Mar 31, 2014 at 17:09

That’s like saying you’re going to stand there and LET somebody stab you, as opposed to walking away. It becomes a threat when they circumvent your simple defense tactic (in the case of audio: Muting that player). That’s sexual HARASSMENT.

And to quote Wikipedia: “Sexual harassment refers to PERSISTENT and unwanted sexual advances”

Has this said person ever verbally said to “STOP” it? And if so: Did they do anything other than that (muting them)?

fireside 141 Feb 01, 2014 at 00:53

I would think you would want zones of players that are beginners up to experts so people play others close to their level, but I suppose then friends couldn’t play on each other’s team. Another thing I would do, would be leave bodies for quite a while, so it’s obvious if someone is lurking and shooting people coming out of an exit. I’d also leave alternatives and make it very hard to hide completely without being seen. Myself, I played Doom for a few hours and kind of got tired of it and that was pretty much it for me and shooters.

Hyper 96 Mar 30, 2014 at 20:11

Lots of games implement this. Unfortunately ‘smurfs’ circumvent the system, and nothing happens to them (because they can always “derank” back to that low level and not be banned).

What they need to do is prevent deranking on such a massive scale. You should derank so slowly: It’ll take 200x as long, than it did to rank up!

In this sense: Those who are truly good go up, go up fast, and stay up!

That, and/or introduce a “TRAINING” system scheme. As in: You versus computers, or! You versus particular set of challenges (before being allowed to play against other players).

You could easily cut it up into sections: Strategy (determined by the path(s) taken by a player, compared against time) Aiming (the player’s ability to hit moving targets while standing still, or while the player is moving (increase in player base rank)) and more…

This would literally eliminate A LOT of problems off the bat! I would be able to play a new game, with other players ‘around’ my skill level, without having to play against a bunch of boring newbies who suck horribly and just camp all day long (thus ruining the enjoyment of any challenge).

TheNut 179 Feb 01, 2014 at 06:05

If everybody were intelligent, we wouldn’t still be living in a class based society where 1% of the richest people own 65x as much as the poorest half of the world. It’s genetics man. Can’t fight the gene. Just be thankful you have the good traits and it’s not you running out getting shot every time and scratching your head :)

If you ok with MMO games, I’d recommend PlanetSide 2. Find a couple mates, form a platoon, and have a crazy good time. I didn’t think the net code was bad, it seemed pretty fair. Tanks, vtols, infantry, max units, and so many great battles (if you have the right crew of course!). I use to chill with a few mates and we commanded legions. It was really something to organize 30 tanks, a dozen aerial fighters, guarding waypoints, assaulting fortresses. Good times, intelligent people.

Stainless 151 Feb 01, 2014 at 10:02

@Reedbeta Yes, that sounds about right. I have heard of people having their xbox live accounts suspended for three months because of the voice comms. I never hear any of that because I always mute everyone.

@fireside I’ve thought about it a bit more. I would probably have different game modes. At the moment COD has modes like team death match and blitz. I would have modes that allowed the arseholes to run around like ants and modes for people who want a more strategic game.

@TheNut The problem with genetics is evolution. At the moment if you plotted IQ against number of children, you would find a peak around the 75 IQ level. There are whole towns in the UK whose main income comes from the government in the form of child support. Need more money, have another kid.

Luckily I will be dead before it becomes a major problem.

tyree 102 Feb 03, 2014 at 18:48

the problem is gun games in general. for the most part their mindless, the gun does all the work. makes it too easy to kill. you need a weapon that forces players to kill in some way other than shooting. build a game where you can destroy the opponents gun instead of killing them. forcing them to get another gun by whatever means

rouncer 104 Feb 07, 2014 at 15:08

something sorta on topic, considering you guys are complaining about rude little weeners on the internet playing games… heres my ancient opinion on the subject of all bloody games….

games are like candy, i just cant play them anymore without cricking my neck, and paralyzing my hands, just like candy makes my teeth ache… all i want now is my neural net games, and they are so pointless to play, its just funny controlling something that looks as real as tv. :) but they are still in theory stage, cause its bloody hard, and anything out there is too maths heavy to ever learn shit off.

cause i dont do maths.

its got nothing to do with maturity of my personality, its just my body is getting SO OLD.

Stainless 151 Feb 07, 2014 at 17:18

None of my fingers point in the same direction as they used to, I’ve broken them so often.

Had to re-learn to type so many times.

I play games now more as an intellectual exercise, I look at them and think “ahh they are using deferred rendering and they are using influence maps and …..”

Some games I play as stress relief, as a true Englishman I enjoy killing the French at any opportunity. I’m too old to play rugby any more, too unfit to do judo, have to make do with virtual violence.

rouncer 104 Feb 07, 2014 at 20:20

oh god… we are all kinda in this together… this… growing old thing…

Stainless 151 Feb 08, 2014 at 10:59

It’s much better than the alternative.

You only stop growing old when you die.

Hyper 96 Mar 30, 2014 at 20:06

And if you can’t see how pathetic spawn killing is, and destroys the enjoyment of a game: Perhaps you should stand back and look at other easily conceivable like-wise concepts.

Somebody in this “thread” mention the 1% owning 65 times more than the richest of the poor. You complain about that, but say it’s OK to spawn kill and abuse a game’s system?

If you follow the logic of abusing a game’s system: Why not just take one step further in that direction. Plenty of people have in the past. Auto-aim hacks make you “such a good player!” You’re so elite. Hehehe…

Or wait! There’s another step in abusing systems. Why not continue to exploit the system, thus destroying the fun, and make a wall-hack, so you can shoot any player during spawn while making yourself impunitble to damage by aversion (due to the nature of other players attempting to enjoy a game by NOT abusing it’s system)?

Or is that too much to ask?

Stainless 151 Mar 31, 2014 at 00:40

When is killing someone who is so stupid, they run into your field of fire 5 -6-7-8 times when there are four alternatives considered spawn killing? He could have run out of another door and tried to flank me. Sensible tactic which would have probably succeeded.

That’s not abusing the games system, that’s a player being brain dead.

To then send abusive messages is unacceptable.

I consider no-scoping abusing the system, even though it is actually part of the system. I find it ridiculous that firing a sniper rifle without aiming actually hits a target. Try holding a modern sniper rifle to your shoulder and aiming while stood up. You would be lucky to hit a barn door at 20 metres.

Yet people actually message asking for no scoping matches. No accounting for taste or intelligence.

Hyper 96 Mar 31, 2014 at 17:13

And that’s why I dropped people, or made them lag horribly until they quit being a douche.

In other games: I’d just exploit other means to force them to stop, and actually play the game. Namely Diablo II’s “flash” packet.

From what I understand: You’re making excuses, and playing word games. You have the exact same vantage point regardless of exit point to “flank” from. Halo and Halo 2 are both great examples of this. You can sit in the same spot, and spawn kill REGARDLESS of “which side” they move out from behind the rock.

I can almost sense your immediate reply will be something on the lines of, “Then don’t move,” or “don’t get killed in the first place.” Which is just more of the same: I just dropped players or lagged them so hard they couldn’t abuse the system, and I’d stop once the game started again.

That or stand-by so I could move freely to a safe spot so the game could resume. :)

In regards to “NO SCOPING”: You’re comparing apples to oranges in attempt to make more excuses. I don’t even know how to categorize that… Sad, delusional, or just plain wrong.

Let’s just follow your silly “argument”: THAT GAME’S SO UNREAL! YOU CAN JUMP MORE THAN 2 FEET OFF THE GROUND! THAT’S ABUSING THE SYSTEM! I’d like to see YOU jump 2 feet off the ground with 200lbs of gear on you!

And as a final note: I was going to post a thread regarding programming, but after seeing this horrific display of immaturity: I think I’ll take my questions else-where, to a more adult audience. Not sure what kind of “advice” I’d be given, if I did ask a serious question. Probably something on the lines of, “Reformat your operating system to solve your problem.” Sounds about right.

Stainless 151 Apr 01, 2014 at 00:44
From what I understand: You’re making excuses, and playing word games. You have the exact 
same vantage point regardless of exit point to “flank” from. Halo and Halo 2 are both great  
examples of this. You can sit in the same spot, and spawn kill REGARDLESS of “which side” they 
move out from behind the rock.

Total bollocks.

In the case I am talking about the exits are so far apart you can’t see all of them from anywhere on the map. The castle map. You can’t even see the spawn point from outside the castle.

The only one showing immaturity here is you. You seem to have a vision of the way you want to play the game and if anyone wants to play differently, you force them out of the game.

Just take your ball home and see your mommy, she’ll explain that you are supposed to share.

As for lack of realism in the game, you need a certain level of reality in a game so the players can become absorbed in the game. This creates the suspension of disbelief that is required for immersion in a game. Something that is glaring wrong, like no-scoping in COD, or poor movement routines in other FPS I have played, break that absorption and ruin the game.

As someone who has been writing games for 30 years, I do actually know what I am talking about

Hyper 96 Apr 01, 2014 at 20:51

“Writing games for 30 years”: Purely anecdotal and just furthering my point of your delusional behaviors.

To start: I could spend an hour writing a reply picking apart every “stance” you just made, but I think I’ll cut it short and let reality set in on you, by allowing you to search it for yourself. -

“The spawn killers in those literally made me stop playing” – Because of losers like you, that are so terrible at a game, that you can’t even play it for what it is. That’s why I forced players who wanted to be pathetic, into being skilled (although it wasn’t much of a challenge after that). The game would become a land-slide and my team would win, simply because I was able to actually play the game for what it was.

Halo, Halo 2, Rogue Spear, COD, Black Ops, or even Modern Warfare (although they addressed it to a great degree) doesn’t matter. All the same. Spawn killing exist in every sense on every map. And again, from my understanding: That’s all that’s being shed about in this thread.

People quit playing because people don’t want to resort to the same low level skilless tactics. Fortunately: I’m not that brain dead, and can force a player’s hand to be skilled (or show a lack thereof).

So take your ball home and see your dead mommy too. We’ll see who gets spanked.

Stainless 151 Apr 01, 2014 at 21:39

Written by, oh lets think, ME!

Written by, oh let;s see ME!

Wonder who could have written that, oh let’s think about it., ME!

And that’s just the shit I can find in 20 seconds

What the fuck have you ever done apart from annoy people?

Don’t ever accuse me of lying again. I have the sort of money that will make me end up on your doorstep for an upfront personal discussion.

Reedbeta 167 Apr 01, 2014 at 21:47

The discussion’s getting a bit nasty here…let’s everyone try to stay calm and lay off the personal attacks, please.