Just a fun post here, i watched a video of someone i like on Youtube, and he was doing a review of the last CoD, he plays Cod a lot and i think we can believe what he is saying.
I found it very funny, because his complains are like 100% the same complains we have for Gears 5.
From the terrible maps design, to make it easier for new players, to new mechanics to cater to a new audience that veterans don’t like, key feature not working at launch, removing map votes or basic old things taken away, … it was very funny to me.
In the video @Hottest_Lamia I watch when he said that the developers created the game to cater new players instead of focusing on the players that has been playing such games a lot…
it seems to me thats the actual trend as of now… which could cause also negative effects towards COD as a whole.
Yeah that’s why i posted that here, i find it “interesting”.
Idk about this “gamble” of trying to change things in order to bring new people, or make new people stay on the game … Sure it’s a valid and good business practice and should mathematically and in theory make more money.
But in practice i think a good % of people buying Gears 5 are old gears players that want to find something similar to what they know.
While writing this reply tho, i remembered that the big difference with everything else i knew from the industry so far is that Gears 5 was on the game pass, i never thought about it but maybe thye tried to change things to make the people who played gears 5 through the game pass stay by changing things to please them. Idk. It sounds logical, it’s just sad that it didn’t really worked. Or maybe it did but we are too focused on the veteran leaving that we don’t see all the new players, all those things are so complicated to analyze without datas.
I do agree with the part where you state that is a good practice or at least its something new that the industry its trying to do in focusing in new players, however its not economical-wise to attempt to create a new game and designing it with focus to cater new players instead of first trying to design the game with your current customers on mind and then along the way make events of horde or Versus to try to cater those new players to try the game.
I believe Gears 5 was the other way around in was designed with new players in mind ( which plays FORTNITE or APEX LEGENDS), and the core playerbase was left behind… such business movement did hurt the game and the future of it… since it now relies to sell you stuff in order to have life.
Mathematically speaking its better to have the secure numbers in hand and then attempt to create a new proof , than to leave behind the solid numbers and trying to gather new numbers which no one knows the true meaning.
No, Modern Warfare has a lot of solid content, cosmetics, and I don’t believe they could make the store worse than what Gears 5 has even when they do eventually put stuff in it.
I understand your point but if i remember correctly i think it’s been years that MS and TC weren’t happy with the total of sale and/or players in gears and they maybe tried a new approach to be closer to their expectation.
But yes of course to me, the minimum while making a game is to at least please the people you know will buy the game or else they will lose faith in you and your games and you will lose your current customer.
I’m not following game that much since i don’t have that much time to play, but ttoday again i saw a 2h video of gameplay and interview of someone working on Diablo 4, and they seemed to have a way “healthier” or more like we both think about making games, and i’m more confortable knowing that while waiting for a release of D4 in a far future.
I have also seen videos of the developing of Diablo 4 and seems to me that current playerbase are happy with the advancement that are being shown… I looks awesome the game and I’m looking forward to give it a try.
I remembered playing Diablo on my computer it was a blast !!:
i watched a review for the new cod since gears 5 has been so bad i was actually considering getting COD, then i noticed the complaints and thought “wow sounds like the gears 5 complaints maybe i wont get it…” lmao
COD games were always inconsistent, janky twitch shooters. Don’t kid yourselves.
The fun was in the insanity of some of the perk customizations, it doesn’t get better than Warlord Infinite RPGs and akimbo Model 1887’s (as a secondary lmao) in MW2 and Perk Monster Pistoleers in Black Ops 2
Although in all fairness most COD players abandoned the franchise years ago, and only just returned. Unlike Gears–where we’ve only had one installment that jumped to the collective=catering, not some eight games in-between the originals and the “return to form.”
I had problems with MW because it wasn’t really fun. Yes, it suits players of a slower play style, but it also favours camping. And as of yet, I haven’t met a person who thought camping was fun.
Spec ops looks like a tacked on mode (although they are adding new missions soon), and yes the campaign is good, but it hasn’t got that much replay value outside of the difficulties and achievements.
This is a classic case of a game not living up to the hype. Hard to believe this, but I had more fun on Gears 5 than I did on MW. And that’s saying something.
Lmao codmw is gears 5 the shotgun work in modernwarfare you can snipe some one across the map with the Olympia 725 and get 10,% in one putting your gnahser in someone chest in gears 5 but gears 5 every one use assult rifle instead of up close in personal which really what defined gears but it’s not gears anymore it’s call of duty just no kill streak third person a cover system no perks instead of 12 players 10
It’s capitalism guys and frankly I’m surprised (still, somehow) that people don’t understand the idea that companies want to make a game that the largest number of people will buy and NOT spend tens of millions of dollars making a product that only caters to people who like what they made a decade ago.
I dont blame developers/ publishers for trying to maximize profits and bringing in a larger audience. However it appears the suits only see dollar signs and not what makes these franchises attractive. Gears is not gears they have slowed down the combat significantly and thus killing one of the major traits that was unique to gears. I cant speak of COD because aside from the campaign I’ve hated that series for a long time and will probably only pick it up when its steeply discounted and only play the campaign. But the issue here is to attract a wider audience while not alienating current players and losing the games identity in the process.
I don’t play COD every year like some people do, but after at least a good 5 years away from it I have been having fun. Mainly I have been playing Kill Confirmed since it incentivizes players to be less campy. Unfortunately camping is a problem in other modes. I played a game of domination where the team couldn’t even make it to the B hill.
Overall though I have to say it is far better than Gears 5. Off the top of my head here are some reasons why it is better…
You can be the character (Operator) you want to be
Some characters (Operators) can be unlocked by playing the campaign and the others each have a single objective to complete to unlock
You can select the mode you want to play
You can save multiple loadouts
Patches swiftly provide meaningful improvements from community feedback and are not anti-player
The free cosmetics are of good quality
The game searches for matches with lower than 25 ping first
Doesn’t make much sense to me. COD has a massive audience in comparison to Gears, enough where the shouldn’t have to cater too much. Unlike Gears that needs new players to keep it’s games afloat.
Regards.