24 Replies Latest reply: Nov 29, 2013 10:32 AM by Bielsalmighty RSS

Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?

Yppecaye_the_Dogged

Anyone who has visited the Support Forum must be aware that there are many technical problems with the game, on all platforms.  The same issues seem to occur over and over again.

 

I kinda anticipated that there would be problems a few months ago (not saying I'm some kind of Guru), Ghosts being a new title in general and it having to cross generations of platforms specifically.  Many must have felt the same way.  But, did you purchase the game anyway knowing the high likelyhood of problems, or did you decide to wait and perhaps buy the game when the kinks were ironed out?

 

Notwithstanding the rather negative attitude I took when I started the following thread a few months ago discussing the same topic (http://community.callofduty.com/thread/200703724), in this OP I'm not trying to play consumer advocate.  Rather, I like to know how the community goes about in making a decision to buy something.

 

Now that the game's been out long enough to see how well (or poorly) it functions, are those that took the "wait and see" approach vindicated.  Or, is it just "meh", we'll end up buying it anyway so what's the difference.

 

Happy Thanksgiving!

  • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
    toby_jugs

    vindicated if you ask me and i doubt i'll be pre-ordering again that's for sure

  • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
    phxs72

    It has it's issues but the game itself has run pretty well for me.  Actually better than expected but that's probably because I wasn't wearing my rose colored glasses before I made the decision to buy.  If anything I'm finding that the biggest issue with my success in this game is me.  Sometimes I do quite well and other times I don't because I don't always adjust my tactics properly.  Sometimes I wonder why I don't adjust them properly but I think that it comes down to stubbornness.  I've found as in most CoD games that each weapon has a pace (as I like to call it) at which it excels.  When I try to play a certain weapon outside of its perfect pace, it doesn't always work out.  That has from time to time made me question how this great gun that I just kicked butt with suddenly turned to garbage.  At the end of the day the gun didn't change, what I was doing with it did and that is the true source of my problem.  I think that the gun differences (ie the paces) are a bit more distinct in Ghosts than they have been in previous titles.  That's not a complaint but rather a challenge to myself to step up my game.  All in all I'm statisfyed with my purchase.

     

    Now that I've typed my thoughts, I'm realizing that this thread was for those that took the "wait and see" approach.  While I preordered the game, I did take the wait and see approach to deciding to buy it.  There were some issue with MW3 that didn't suit me and quite frankly would have prevented me from purchasing Ghosts had they not been addressed.  I actually made my preorder very late in the season.  In fact, I think that it was no more than a month prior to release and only after I read and confirmed separately that my issues had been dealt with in a satisfactory manner.

    • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
      RunAndGun1

      Doesn't run well for me at all. Lag, lag, lag. Throw in the ever increasing population of campers, and you have a pretty disappointing game and lame community of players.

       

      Half of my deaths the past week have been by campers, just laying prone on the ground waiting for people to come by. It works because they choose popular routes. But, it makes the game boring and repetitious.

    • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
      Yppecaye_the_Dogged

      phxs72 wrote:

       

      While I preordered the game, I did take the wait and see approach to deciding to buy it.  There were some issue with MW3 that didn't suit me and quite frankly would have prevented me from purchasing Ghosts had they not been addressed.  I actually made my preorder very late in the season.  In fact, I think that it was no more than a month prior to release and only after I read and confirmed separately that my issues had been dealt with in a satisfactory manner.

      Exactly.  That's what I'm wondering about.  Whether people just preorder/buy it at release simply because it's CoD; but at the same time not having given it some thought as to whether they'll get a game relatively meeting their expectations and perhaps whether they game cured what now seems to be innate release issues (such as error messages, unable to connect to MP, etc.).

  • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
    Izjar11

    Each of these games have a slow learning curve, it takes time to "master" it and same goes for the developers working the behind scenes.

     

    I experience less "problems" on connectivity then I did with BO2. Other than that the game plays very good for me.

  • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
    iHattoriHanzo0

    Personally, I look at CoD like my favorite sports team. Sometimes what happens in the off-season doesn't sound so good. Lose a player, sign a new one, fire a coach, hire a new one.

     

    At the end of the day, I won't hesitate to watch and root for my team. Same with CoD. I look forward to pre-ordering and enjoy the anticipation. I want it to be good, fun and successful. Some titles work with me better than others. I feel fortunate that Ghosts and I work well together.

     

    I won't lie though, its kinda upsetting the initial response from some of the community. I wish everyone could enjoy it as much as me.

     

    Not sure how the numbers are doing, but there are many factors because of the next-gen editions. And some players may have to wait till the holidays to receive their consoles let alone the game itself.

     

    Happy Turkey Day to you too

    • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
      Izjar11

      I keep saying this: People buy the game (knowing how they are) and then love to hate it, and never put them away.

      • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
        otisman666

        Izjar11 wrote:

         

        I keep saying this: People buy the game (knowing how they are) and then love to hate it, and never put them away.

        I thought this would be me, but honestly I think I am just growing tired of COD.  I haven't played a whole lot of MP, where with other titles I would usually be mid-way through my 2nd prestige and hoping for 2xp Thanksgiving bonus.  But this one I could care less.  I don't see any game breaking issues, yeah I encounter insta-deaths, but so does my competition, so it's just a part of the game.  This one is just so boring, it doesn't get my blood pumping.

         

        I guess the clanwars thing is bringing me back, I think last night was the most I played this game (I think it was about 2 hours). 

        • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
          rlbl

          I like your post, as it brings to mind something I think many fail to realize:

           

          It is COD, and it is not going to be a lot different year to year (there has to be some level of staying true to the COD formula).  So after a few years of playing the same game (with additional features of course), one should ask themselves this:

           

          Is the game bad, or are you getting bored? 

           

          If one is getting bored, time to move on to a new series.  But for those who have not been around for awhile (or are not bored yet), the game could be good in their opinion.

          • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
            Yppecaye_the_Dogged

            It's CoD fatigue.  Both Mega and otis above mentioned this too.

             

            I may or may not get it eventually (probably will get it as a gift, my family knows I like CoD.)  But, playing BOII last night I asked myself would I be having more fun if I was playing Ghosts if for no other reason, it's at least a new title with new maps, weapons, etc.  I was thinking this because I was getting a liitle bored playing BOII. 

             

            I may prove myself wrong if I end up playing Ghosts and find that I like it, but I felt that I was bored not because of the maps or weapons, etc., but because I was just kinda bored about the general CoD gameplay.  Same maps skills, same gameplay, same controls, same class of guns, you get the idea.  This is one of the reasons I didn't ensure I had it at release for the first time since BOI.

             

            Along with this, there's the other issue of new releases having many technical issues (remember BOII crashed PS3's at release.)  And we see it now with Ghosts--just visit the Support Forum and you'll see there are glitches, errors and freezes galore. 

             

            These are the reasons I'm glad I took a wait and see approach for the first time, again, since BOI.   

        • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
          Izjar11

          This game grinds you down, I have fun with other friends the most. Solo = the pits.

  • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
    Megadog14

    The only thing that really interested me was Extinction, so I went over to my friends house and played it. It was actually really boring lol, felt like you had a crapton of health. MP seems like the same-old same-old (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) but id rather just play BO1- so I do.

  • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
    rlbl

    I was going to wait and see, but when they announced dedis I was happy so I decided to get it on launch.

     

    I have not been disappointed one bit.  Am I saying the game is perfect? Good lord no!  But for me, they put some attention to the #1 issue in the series for the past few years.

     

    We can complain about OP guns

    We can complain about colours and graphics

    We can complain about gun sounds

    etc...

     

    But unless you address the matchmaking (which can seriously contribute to lag), you do not have a playable game (no matter how good it looks).  Because they have put some attention to that, I am glad I did not wait.  Have I experienced lag? yep... but nowhere (and I mean NOWHERE) near all the BS that was present in BO2 and MW3.

     

    So far this game has played better for me than even BO1 (which now may no longer be my favourite).

     

    Side Bar: This also has been the best launch in years. I feel that when they address some issues (which they are doing), this is going to be a decent game.

     

    * started with PS3 version and upgraded to PS4 fyi

  • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
    nuttin2say

    I don't know. I rented the game - just as I promised I would - and played it for, apparently, 4.4 hours. I think that's the MP time because I did start the campaign and tinker around with other parts of it.

     

    Am I glad I waited and have still put off buy the game?

     

    Honestly, I'd rather play a badly constructed game than no game at all. But with COD, I know roughly what I'm going to get when I buy it. I really hated how MW3 started off playing extremely smooth, no lag, etc ... and then quickly devolved into crap for at least two months. But about mid-January, the kinks seemed to be gone for me and I enjoyed the game for the rest of the year.

     

    BO2 played pretty smooth when I bought it a week after release and, from the technical aspect, I had no issues with the game ... until I went through the high sensitivity, no aim assist issue. That really turned me off of BO2 (as if I needed help to begin with) From a design perspective, I flat do not like BO2. Period. To the tune that I regret I bought the game at all. I could have just skipped it all together. Oh, no doubt - I did and will continue to have fun playing BO2. I guess it's kind of like getting a puppy for Christmas when what I really wanted was a Ferrari. I still love the little mutt (I'm being rhetorical - I don't have any dogs and I damn sure don't want any) ... but it's almost a forced love. Wow. That's always fun, right?

     

    I do not like the challenge/mission/squad point design aspect of Ghosts. If I opt, ultimately, to not get the game after all - this will be the reason why. It does not at all feel like a finished game. I'm also greatly disappointed that I am forced to upgrade my laptop's OS if I want to look at the information Elite has provided us for 2 1/2 years. Why can't it be web-based like it has been in the past? I don't like that at all. My Windows XP works just fine. Best OS I've ever had. I don't want to upgrade it.

     

    So ... yes, I'm glad I waited. The sad part is that, even though I enjoyed Ghosts much more than I did BO2 and like Ghosts design, overall, better than MW3 ... the longer I put off buying it, the less likely I am to buy it at all.

    • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
      Yppecaye_the_Dogged

      nuttin2say wrote:

       

      BO2 played pretty smooth when I bought it a week after release and, from the technical aspect,

      Except for crashing my PS3 at first, BOII ran quite smoothly for me.  I expericend a lot of lag issues with MW3, but at the end of its cycle I figured out how to tweek my connection and speed and when I started BOII, it worked wonders.  (It's no surpise to me that my BOII KD is a whole 0.7 or so higher than my MW3 KD.)

       

      In hindsight, a wait and see approach would have avoided the crashing.  But if I didn't eventually buy the game, I would have missed out on the many hours of fun I had playing BOII MP.  BOII was far from perfect.  My standard is WaW.  I'm a proud WaW apologist and any title that varies too far from it is a "B", or worse, title.

      So ... yes, I'm glad I waited. The sad part is that, even though I enjoyed Ghosts much more than I did BO2 and like Ghosts design, overall, better than MW3 ... the longer I put off buying it, the less likely I am to buy it at all.

      This is how I'm feeling too.  The longer I don't have it, the more I'm losing that initial excitement and desire to have it.  Kinda not a bad idea anyway to wait until next year.  The game would seem new again, and maybe I'd have recovered from my CoD fatigue by then.

      • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
        nuttin2say

        COD fatigue. Yep. That just may be what it is. I play for the challenges and, honestly, I've only completed all the challenges on COD4. And I did that because I got tired of the hackers in WaW. Don't get me wrong - I LOVED WaW ... when there were not levitating super-snipers flying across the map. I still stick the disc in every now and then just to play MP. My bro and wife both like Der Riese on BO1 better than on WaW, but I love zombies on WaW the best - even without the ability to dolphin dive and even without a third gun.

         

        Anyway, so yeah, I play for the challenges. I thought for sure the changes to the challenge system we got in MW2 would be good for the game ... but, frankly, it's been a flop since then. 2500 any-type kills is pretty easy. Getting 1000 headshots, in addition, is a complete joke. As we can see with BO2, less than 9% of kills are the result of headshots. I usually average about 9.8% to 10.1% headshots. That means an above average player has to score roughly 10,000 kills to complete the headshot challenges for over 30 weapons. It's not ever going to happen except for less than 0.5% of the community - if that. You look at the top of the leaderboards, you'd be lucky to find a single top 10 player with over 200k kills after a year's time.

         

        Even the top players can't finish all the challenges.

         

        With BO2 that changed a lot. I liked the challenge system for BO2 on one hand, but on the other I didn't. It only counts the things you've unlocked so if you pick up a weapon before you unlocked it, tough luck. That needs to further change. BO2 also felt like it had fewer challenges. In any case, they got the ratio right. Some guns I managed to complete all the challenges for the gun with well under 2000 kills. Most take around 2300 kills to complete all the challenges - including headshot challenges. I've not got a whole lot of primaries to finish. Frankly, I don't think the pistols will take a long time to complete, either. Big change and I did like that aspect of BO2

         

        There's really not an emphasis for players to complete challenges in COD games. It seems counter-productive to encourage getting a higher prestige without a requirement to complete challenges. Personally, what would have been ideal to begin with would have been to keep the exact same challenges from WaW and COD4 but to require players to complete all of them before moving to the next prestige.

         

        That would actually give meaning to prestige. As it is now, people whine "Oh, you're a 10th prestige and I'm just a 2nd prestige and therefore you're supposed to be better than me." BS. Prestige level does not indicate player skill in any way under the ongoing systems. It only indicates amount of time played - and not a good indicator at that.

         

        The whole point of all this, in case anyone got lost in that rant - LOL - is that I'm trying to find a reason to NOT have COD fatigue. After six CODs, there seems to be no hope of ever "finishing the game." Well, if there is no way to complete every aspect of the game, then why bother trying?

         

        That's why I'm looking to move over to PlayStation and just moving on to games that are more about personal customization instead of ... whatever COD has become. From what I see of the Ghosts challenge system, it's just more of the same thing. Well, if that's the case, why not just enjoy the last two years of my X360 trying to finish the challenges from the last five games? It's cheaper and those games are fun enough.

         

        Sorry guys, but I'm just not interested in chasing another lost cause. I've gotten good enough to maintain respectable KDRs and WLRs. I've gotten nukes, I've gotten MOABs and I've max prestiged. There's challenges to the game, sure. But they are obtainable only on an isolated basis. There will people that respond to this thread with "I've completed this set of challenges or that set of challenges" blah blah blah. You didn't complete ALL the challenges (Maybe you did in BO2. Maybe). 500+ hours in-game by an above average player and not every challenge can be completed?

         

        It may be time to move on, I'm thinking.

  • Re: Are Those Who Took the "Wait & See" Approach Vindicated?
    Bielsalmighty

    I bought it because I knew there was a good chance I'd get a good amount of enjoyment out of it - I wasn't CoD fatigued by the end of BO2. With plenty of other good games on the horizon, plus GTA5 still tempting me back from time to time, I'm not so concerned about fatigue setting in on this title