Sunday, November 20, 2011



Call of Duty is my favorite FPS series and, in fact, last week I wrote an article about the top 11 reasons I love the COD series. Linked below are the two articles.

But I am also fair. Hell, when you're passionate about a game series, you're going to have gripes with it, and I have more than a few gripes with the Call of Duty series. Before we begin I want to list off the series, from COD 4 on, in order of how much I liked them from 1) being my favorite and 4) being my least favorite.

4. World At War, 3. Modern Warfare 2. Black Ops, and 1. Modern Warfare

And now here are the first five of the Top 11 Things I HATE About COD Multi-Player! Note: I consider myself a video game paladin and my least favorite things in games tend to be exploits and just overpowered weapons. M14 ---> The Paladin's Weapon!

11. The TKO: The Nuke

Kill streaks were, in my opinion, one of the most interesting and fun ideas that COD 4 brought to the table (among the other ideas that helped change the FPS landscape) and the concept has evolved from game to game since. Originally, the Killstreaks were very balanced. UAV, Airstrike, and Helicopter, were simply and balanced. In Modern Warfare 2, they added the option of customizing your killstreaks which allowed everyone to receive lots of different kinds of visceral satisfaction from simply helping the team out with radar surveillance to riding in the back of a helicopter with a chaingun.

One of the killstreaks introduced was the Nuke. The Nuke takes my Top 11 spot because it encourages players to lone wolf it and play for the big killstreak instead of helping their team. Their teammates could be getting their ass kicked, while he sits in a sweet spot sniping. Then his team instantly wins. Sure, you could argue that if a single player gets 25 kills (it takes 75 kills to win a match of Team Death Match) would probably win anyway; hence why is is at 11.

But I ask you to imagine a scenario where one team is at 6000 kills and the other 5800. When a nuke happens, when the teams are that close, it is a frustrating moment for almost everyone except for the nuker (who is to victorious to care). Remember: Tactical Nukes Have NEVER Won a War.

Solution: Make the Nuke a viable action to mercy kill a match where one team has 50 more kills than the other team or, simpler, remove it.


This one is kind of a mixed complaint. There are two ways that spawns can go wrong: spawn kills and random spawns.

The latter problem is usually not that big of a deal, especially on a large map, and the game usually does a fair job of trying to get you in a reasonable spot. But sometimes, the game drops you in just behind or just in front of enemies. The result? Either you get an extremely unfair kill or you get shot before you even  have a chance to defend yourself/evaluate the situation.

Now, as for spawn killing? COD is not the worst game, in my opinion, when it comes to spawn killing (that probably goes to Battefield with its big open maps, spawn sights and sniper rifles or Gears of War with its generally crappy map design) BUT it does happen, it is annoying, and even ridiculous. A big part of COD is grenades and knives and in Black Ops the art of tossing these objects across the map and killing enemies before they even get within a mile of you was perfected and while impressive, it is really annoying and really unfair.

Solution: Reprogram spawning so that players don't spawn near their enemies.


I am sure we have all heard so many stories about fending off attack dogs from veterans and we all know that dogs can kill in one bite, right? Or maybe dogs were never common enough or threatening enough to mention as viable means of warfare. Dogs are for sniffing out for enemies, finding bombs, and patrol. Call of Duty would beg to differ.

Starting with World at War, Attack Dogs were introduced as a multi-player killstreak and zombie mode (probably inspired by the dog attack moment from COD 4) but quickly became something that to this day I find ridiculous. In WaW, the dogs were so effect, they were the highest killstreak! When the killstreak is used, a horde of dogs invade the map, and kill the enemies of the player who summoned them. They can be killed but can kill in ONE HIT! Furthermore, they glitch and kill through walls, attack in twos and threes, and on certain maps have and are the most effective killstreak.

The other major reason I hate attack dogs? I don't like having to kill dogs in a video game. A couple times in the campaign is enough but making me do it dozens of times is disturbing.

Solution: Make the dogs have to get to hits to kill a player or remove them.


In every Call of Duty, as far as I can remember, there have been guns that were just superior in every title. Nothing is more frustrating than getting killed by the same weapon over and over and, when you complain about it, everyone tells you to quit whining and get with the program. I find this kind of thought to be lazy and cheap; hence why I almost always set rules for myself about which guns not to use, but in some of the titles it is hard to tell.

Luckily, starting with MW 2, but especially in Black Ops, thanks to the game extensive statistics it is easy to determine which guns are overpowered. For example, in Black Ops, I refused to use the Galil (an LMG that acts like an Assault Rifle), the AK-47 (the fastest gun in the game), and my least favorite gun in the title the Famas (faster than an Assault Rifle but more accurate than an SMG).

Some people will probably call me out on this complaint but I don't care. There should be a counter to every gun in these titles. Otherwise, we should all run around shooting each other with the same gun, on the same map, all the time. UGH!

Solution: More testing before releasing a game with quality control, listen to complaints from the community, and try to make guns have weaknesses and strengths.


Once again, Call of Duty doesn't necessarily have the rudest community in FPS (some of the stuff I heard in Gears still surprise me) and it really is a problem in pretty much any community (at least COD fans don't go out of their way to harass Battlefield fans), but I think the crap hit the fan with Black Ops.

I had experienced swears and full on trolling in COD before, but this was less common because, hey, most COD players play in a party and chat with their friends (one of the reasons I love XBOX LIVE), and yet, in Black Ops, the rude people found a way to ruin everything again. How? Black Ops had highly customizable playercards, basically player emblems you could put on your weapons, and while some people used this to create art and interesting designs, others had to make their player cards speak for their foul minds. From female anatomy that would make your eyes bleed to animal sex, the images I had to see in those playercards was more offensive than anything I have ever heard over the mic.

Yet, just being rude and mean are as bothersome as foulness. I am always impressed by female gamers who put up with a hail of bull from the mouths of male players who almost always ask, "Are you a real girl?"

Solution: Well, this is one is really up to the players. Just because you're practically anonymous doesn't give you the right to be a total butt-hole.

NOTE: PT. 2 will be posted on Tues. or Thurs.


No comments:

Post a Comment