15 Replies Latest reply: Nov 6, 2013 1:40 PM by WiimotesRus02 RSS

    Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?

    piiwii

      Almost every review and forum post I've read has assumed that the maps are generally larger in Ghosts because the emphasis is now on long-range combat (because of the new Marksman class), or to copy BF4.

       

      Is it me or is everyone missing the obvious...that the maps were increased in size to accommodate the larger player count supported by PS4 and Xbox One (which is now 18)?

       

      If this is correct, then the conclusion that I draw from this is that this isn't simply an issue that can be "fixed" in the next game (BLOPS3 or whatever it is), because if we now have games that cross generations, then this is an inevitability.

       

      So basically, if you like the smaller maps (all a matter of preference), those days are over. There's just no way a little map like Hijacked is going to comfortably support 18 players:(:(

        • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?
          piiwii

          Also to elaborate on my initial points. A) I very much doubt they would design most of the stages around a new rifle class. That makes no sense. B) I think the designers are smart enough to know BF4 is a different game, and it has vehicles which allows for the larger maps so they definitely weren't trying to ape BF4.

           

          The larger maps are entirely because of the increased PS4 and Xbox One player count.

          • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?

            y isnt the next gen versions 6v6 with 9v9 groundwar, also isnt the PC version 6v6 with 9v9 ground war?, something that is hilariously more powerful than next gen consuls 50% of the time(which are on par with midrange laptops).

             

            the large maps seems most logicly a responce to the complaints of MW3 and BO2. now we know the new IW with MW3 overreacts and overdoes everything with trying to impress the community. the MW3 host dissadvantige system to fix the host advantige issue in BO when there was no issue at all in MW2. the community complained about the hectic gameplay, small maps, and poor design. so in ghosts, they did the exact opposite, with remenets of there old unaddressed flaws. they improved the lagcomp(old MW2 lagcomp?), they gave the big maps that allows more tactical play, like the map complainers wanted, but the rushers and campers who liked taking of the BO2/MW3 maps hate. I think it is a massive improvement, but still needs some work. hopefully they didnt drasticly underpower some things while OP'ing others.

             

            guess to remove MOAB and similar, gota complain about it when people playing 3arc's next COD.

             

            i dont know Y they added insainly fast kill rates, i dont like it but i can live with it if the lagcomp is improved and there is little aimassist. only good thing about is it makes balancing alot easier for IW. so guess its a lazy workaround to balance issues.  Not great but i can live with it.

             

            man i tend to get off topic half way through.

            • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?
              nintendon't

              So far I'm lovng the big maps. It's been so long since I had to actually burst fire to hit someome at long range. Reminds me a lot of BO1.

              • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?

                personally, I think its a matter of personal preference. I can see both sides of the argument. The larger maps are very similar to the BF franchise and so is the combat "feel" of the game.

                 

                A lot of COD players play the game to kinda get away from the BF games, and adding the larger maps and combat feel of the game will deter most original players from the game.

                 

                On the other hand, the larger maps are very refreshing from a marksmanship stand point. Any way you cut the pie, gamers and fans alike will find something to either truly enjoy or ferociously dislike. 

                 

                So far I'm feeling pretty good about it.

                • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?
                  smashbrolink

                  I really like the larger maps too, but I feel that we need a bigger time limit, in Team Deathmatch at least, to compensate for the smaller amount of players.

                  I'm seeing too many matches end prematurely.

                    • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?
                      WiimotesRus02

                      I don't care one bit why the maps are large, I've always enjoyed the larger maps. It should allow for for some good flanking, good sniping, (which i'm never good at but love hunting them) and good tactical team work, which I know will enrange the rushers and accuse every one of camping, yeah it sounds good from that point of view. Hopefully I can use more guns in the tiers this time around. Also another good thing I've been hearing from my clan is the BS deaths have gone, there may be some lag from time to time but you don't get killed by the invisibles any more, that can't be bad. And another thing, the wiimote has still got some issues, but not as bad as what I've been reading here. I might actually have to swallow my pride and get in touch with amazon, but a few more days for some more reports as more more people start playing before I rush to the keyboard and order I think.

                      • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?

                        IMHO, the ideal game will have more clock than score. For example in BO2 on Hijacked I'd see score limit reached WELL before clock expired. Too short, too hectic. If a team is down 10 points and the opposition is at 70 I see guys f-ing off, dropping out, giving up. But if you know it's the clock that ends the game, not the score, there's always a chance to rally and come back.

                         

                        Just my opinion.

                      • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?

                        Some of these maps are just too big for 6v6. I played Siege yesterday and I had the most kills in the lobby. I had 16 kills and this was for a 8-10 minute game of Domination. -___-

                          • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?
                            WiimotesRus02

                            Is that a bad thing though? After all its meant to be an objective game and not a kill fest isn't it? I mean going by all the complaints in bo2 people were bothered by the fact that due to the small maps and stuff, people treated it like tdm and failed to win the objective, which is to capture flags no?  And going by past experience, this is always the way until people get used to the maps, once they've worked out all the choke points etc, battles are usually carried out on certain parts of a map, making the rest of it redundant. Take for example raid, everyone heads for the centre of the map to get the first kills, leaving the rest of the map empty until it starts getting used for flanking, but the majority of the battle takes place in the centre. I bet after a few weeks this will happen in this game too..

                              • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?

                                Yes, This is what seperates CoD from other games like Battlefield and Homefront. Haven't played many other FPSs.....In BO1, Array I could pull 60-70 kills. That was 5v5 as well.

                                 

                                Some of these maps are just sooooo slow. It's like IW is trying have a BF/CoD Hybrid. Keep CoD as CoD and keep BF as BF. Raid was perfect for almost every gamemode. Plenty of people went around the whole map. The middle was just where the noobs went to camp/spray their LMGs. The ring (place around B) was always had people in it. Down by the pool had very few people because there wasn't as much cover.

                                 

                                These maps I find my self walking around for 2 minutes straight just to get killed by some n00b sitting in a corner ADSd. Some maps are fine like Octatne,Freight, Sovereign, Strikezone, Warhawk and even Stonehaven.

                                  • Re: Large maps...am I the only one that can see why this is?
                                    WiimotesRus02

                                    Fiss you should know by now not many people are as good as you But I always find it takes a few weeks before people start running around like headless chickens. Maybe it will take a little longer if the maps are that big, who knows. I never played any other fps games, and I've been told BF is generally harder to play, in what way I have no idea, I can't use DA's or I would've bought it for myself for the xbox my son has. But if you have to think more or use more tactical play instead of just rely on fast reflexes, I think I will enjoy this game. Maybe it will attract a more mature type of gamer too, sounds good to me, sounds more realistic. Maybe. Its all speculation on my part as I haven't got the game yet, but here's hoping. Have fun bud!