-Can't do too many things slowly over the course of a second. Number one will maybe save one perk, if you have a full set of perks, and you get lucky with someone being quick. Single player is fine, but easily exploitable. Buy QR first, then 3 more perks, and whenever you go down, simply buy a perk again. Infinite QR. Doesn't work if you don't lose QR along with another perk.
-I agree with number 2, for the most part.
-3 as well.
-I feel like more than four players make them feel like they have an obligation to make the EE's require a full party. I do not want to have to find 5 competent players to complete an EE. It's difficult enough to find 3 competent, patient, and tolerable teammates.
-Fine-ish. Depends entirely on how they'd implement such a feature.
-This game mode already has a hard enough time being compared to other franchises. We don't need more things to align us with L4D and Dead Rising. They handled special zombies in Shangri La pretty well, I think. Don't know if going further than what they did in Shangri La is necessary. Don't want to be spammed with obnoxious zombies. They appeared at a perfect frequency in SL.
-Absolutely not. I don't want to be some nameless jack-hole. The best part about the previous titles' banter was when they would talk to one another and make fun of one another. Extinction has the customizable players and it couldn't be more boring.
I'm not sure if you haven't played Black Ops 2 zombies much or if your are forgetting, but many of the points you have stated have already been touched on by Treyarch.
1. In Buried, a persistent upgrade allows it so that when you get revived, all but 1 of your perks (usually Quick Revive) are still there.
2. You can have up to 9 perk slots in Origins with the golden shovel.
3. Look up persistent upgrades for you're "temporary perk" wish. And zombie blood in Origins already makes you invisible.
4. Definitely agree with theatriks on this one. More than 4 is superfluous. Treyarch's addition of "Grief" might satisfy you.
5. Buried/Origins for destructible areas. And I do not want "larger maps". TranZit was big enough. Bigger maps with less empty space would be more tolerable.
6. Agree with theatriks.
7. More different types? Unlike other games, we only get 2 hits before the game is over (4 with Juggernog). I think a Max of 3 or 4 different types is plenty. Couple crawlers, and 1 or 2 special types are OK, but I don't want the game feeling like I'm playing veteran version of a game based off of one of Romero's movies. Maps like Origins and Shangri-La have just the right amount of enemies to survive against.
8. No. I'm sorry but playing as a character gives the backstory story element that some other zombie games lack. Customizable weapons would be cool though. In game challenges that give you certain camos coded for you. Grab a Ray Gun, kill 10,000 zombies with it in total, unlock a gold camo. I'm for that idea.
1. Love this idea, would really add intensity when someone was down and add more of a rush, while also adding less of a punishment for going down. Seriously, if treyarch or sledgehammer is reading this, PUT THIS IN THE GAME.
2.While it would be nice to have 6 perks, this could make things a little too OP, like how easy buried was, partly due to the fact it was easy to get all 7(I think) perks for free. Instead, I think that you should be able to buy four, and be able to obtain a fifth but it must be from wunderfizz (so you wouldn't be able to choose, making it less Op)
3. Temporary perks are pretty much power up drops, but I would like to see more of them,, as I loved the inclusion of zombie blood in origins, as that was the only new drop for all of bo2.
4. i would be ok with 4 or 6 players, but I would preder 4, as with 6 players, at least one would quit by the end of the game, and would make it harder to find a good game. 8 would be a disaster, but 6 would be a little more barable, but I still think 4 is the way to go.
5. As far as bigger maps go, I really have been hoping treyarc./ sledgehammer will have two maps on the disc( like bo1 with kino and five) and have one larger sized ( maybe a little Bigger than bo2) and one smaller sized (a little bigger than bo1) maps. This would have saved bo2 if they would have had a map second to tranzit (nuketown/town/farm don't count), because it ensures at least one good map.
6. Agree here mostly. This would require people to change up strategies, and would make it so players would train in the day and camp in the night, which would switch things up each round and take away from boring, repetitive rounds.
7. I agree here completely. The only reason I liked shangri-la was the varying types of enemies, they make gameplay more fun, but I think instead of having one special zombie that's signafantly stronger than a average zombie that comes very rarely, I think there should be a couple types of zombies of equal or lesser health of a zombie that come more often.
8. No. I would rather have the bo2 charecters than no charecters, and over that I would rather have the originals, obviously.
Just so you know, bo3 isn't the next game to have zombies, AW is. if you don't believe me, go to my other forum I posted for why I think (know) so. (Not trying to get attention for my forum, I just think it's cool and you deserve to know because surprisinglyy a lot of people don't.