33 Replies Latest reply: Mar 26, 2014 10:27 AM by nuttin2say RSS

    Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played

    ghamorra

      Ghosts has been out for about 4ish months now and while I started out playing it non-stop I've found myself dwindling my gaming time down to rare occasions with friends. It's not that I don't like Ghosts but it's just no different enough anymore. I have few friends who play Call of Duty anymore, maybe 10% of what I had last year and 1% of what I had back during Black Ops.

       

      Dark Souls though never seems to get old. I've been playing it for about 3 years now which is about the same amount of time that I started playing CoD hardcore (I've played since Modern Warfare but not nearly as much as I have in recent years). I find myself growing more and more attached to the series.

       

      The reason why I think I'm playing more Dark Souls than Call of Duty is quite obvious. CoD isn't challenging. I don't say this because I've mastered all there is to master in Call of Duty; I say this because CoD is the same every year. The only challenge is going up against another opponent. What happens when that challenge gets old? What do you have to work towards? Hitting the highest prestige?

       

      Dark Souls offers PvP play, it has countless challenges that are all different, and even after investing thousands of hours over it's life you're still going to encounter something new (this is not an exaggeration).

       

      Though Dark Souls has a fatal flaw. It's a game that is very niche. There's a faint chance that the FPS crowd would be able to harness the game. After all, Dark Souls key is patience and as many know, the CoD community has very, very little patience.

       

      My fear is that Call of Duty cannot embrace what the Dark Souls series offers and use it their advantage. Reason being is that this community simply won't allow it. See, Call of Duty's largest audience has self-defeating ideals for their game. They want a game that's easy, simple to grasp, with instant gratification. It doesn't take a genius to realize this. However, human nature leaves one longing for something more. It's a fact, can't be argued.

       

      CoD is reaching the end of it's life and is only surviving by using it's popularity to real in new gamers. Old gamers who are veterans to the franchise seem to only cling on by playing with friends. An element that in itself adds a whole new dynamic to the game. Others who have still stuck around find alternatives to what the game offers, outside reasons to play such as YouTube, MLG, or new competitive elements that have been added.

       

      But how long will this last?

       

      Fact is, CoD itself is not challenging enough to retain it's senior citizens and once the community losses their senior citizens who's left to push the game's limits? Newbies? As we've seen newcomers to the franchise have a very flawed way of thinking. If anything it's the Vet's desire for this game to live on that's kept it alive. The Vets fight hard every year to let their voices or reason out preach those who wants to nerf the game to an even easier level than what it already is.

       

      What makes Dark Souls so different is that community constantly wants the game to get more difficult. If anything they want the game to be unbeatable! My absence from this forum over the last few weeks was do to my focus on Dark Souls. I spent a good bit of time on forums regarding Dark Souls 2 in hopes of learning the game. I played well of 1500 hours of the first Dark Souls and when I came to Dark Souls 2 I found that I had so much more to learn. I've spent the last two weeks drenching myself in pages of threads figuring out weapon and armor stats, boss strategies, and various others bits of info and I've yet to beat the game on the first NG.

       

      How long did it take you to learn Ghosts? I had the maps fairly well figured out in a day. By the end of the first week I was beating opponents with my superior knowledge and after a month I found myself on an even playing field with most players as we had all learned everything we needed to know. From there on out my only obstacle was myself and not letting my opponent beat me. That was it. I ran out of challenges, I ran out of growth.

       

      Sure Call of Duty offers new maps every few months but after a while you become able to learn a map in just a few playthroughs. I spent 15+ hours in one area of Dark Souls and I just found out from a friend that I missed something. Tell me, how much of the game did you learn in 15 hours?

       

      Dark Souls 2 also offers something Call of Duty doesn't. Each time you play through the game you enter a new NG and with each NG not only does the game get more difficult but you also unlock new weapons and armor. You learn more about the story. Each NG would be the equivalent of a prestige. So imagine with each prestige you unlock 2 or 3 new weapons, 5 new perks, and a new map.

       

      That would certainly motivate me to play through prestiges with a bit more urgency. But CoD couldn't function on that formula. The community would erupt in rage. Fact is, for having such a hardcore community the game favors casuals. A casual game is easy to learn, easy to figure out, and easy to fully explore.

       

      As a gamer evolves and steps outside of their comfort zone and away from casual gaming they realize the amount of satisfaction that exists in a challenge. In beating something that new, and defeating greater foes and overcoming greater odds. Instant gratification will never have the amount of satisfaction that something you've worked and slaved for has.

        • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
          Highwayman0226

               Hey G!  I'm not concerned at all about the CoD community not embracing a great game like Dark Souls.  They've ruined CoD, let them find some other cliche FPS omglookatmykd game to ruin.  We don't need selfish idiots like them in Dark Souls.  Nothing worse than using one of your few remaining effigies only to summon someone that wants to run in circles or jump off a cliff and not helping you.  This would be the normal standard if the CoD community infected DS2.

           

               I probably got a little over 100 hours on two different characters.  Just starting to scratch the surface and loving it! 

                    Happy Gaming!

            • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
              ghamorra

              I'm not neccessarily saying I want them to play Dark Souls, there's enough idiots who don't know who think they can stop the stampeding chariot with pure strength. I just feel as though CoD has worn out all it has to offer because the community doesn't want to have to work hard towards any goal or fight an uphill battle even if the reward is worth it. They keep wanting the game to be easier and in doing so they take away any challenge that allows for extended play.

                • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                  Highwayman0226

                       Yeah, we are on the same page.  I got some flack awhile ago for making a statement about how ghosts lets you unlock whatever you want, whenever you want.  Ghosts has no goal, no incentive to play.  The ghillie suit was the only thing that I took as a personal challenge.  I do like Ghosts over the previous few CoDs, but the lack of any real leveling or prestige system made me lose interest much faster than I would've otherwise.

              • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                alexjt22

                Great post, I too have seen and found myself in the same position I am playing other games more and more and I see friends who were COD vets not even going near a COD game anymore.

                 

                I think the main reason why I play less and less is not necessary because the games have got progressively worse which is what I thought the reason was but because I and many have mastered the formula to our best ability and because of it the game gets stale quicker with each release. There are other factors I am sure like the community is a disgrace on so many levels abusing everything, quitting games, cheating and playing cheaply when ever they get a chance too.

                 

                I think Call of Duty will die as such very soon as the problem is Vets of the game are leaving in there droves and new players will not buy the game as they get beat up on by the majority of the community who have played the game for years so the gap is just too big for new players, its why they always have to put newb friendly stuff in the game to help new players compete but that just gets abused by good players and also pisses off vets. What I can see right now is less Vets playing and less new players coming to the game with rising dev costs and increased advertising spent each year to get less players = disaster and it won't be long till investors demand COD to get the chop.

                 

                I think people want more depth to a game now its no surprise to see GTA do so well last year and lots of people look interested in Destiny & The Division as they all have massive depth to them that have very RPG like progression by what we have seen and heard about them and I think theses types of games I think will take over the arcade-ish FPS dominance that COD & BF have right now on consoles in this new generation of consoles.

                 

                I think the only way COD gets through this generation is to cut single player out of the game as that takes up the majority of the development cost, they move the game to a subscription model where there is no new game each year just constant free massive additions to it so people never get bored as they will be 100s of maps, weapons etc to play with as well as many different eras all at your finger tips for one yearly fee and they don't have to worry about second hand sales which seem to be heavily in stores more and more each year as people are more willing to sell the game now, they create a more in depth character progression so people want to play more and more and lastly they allow new players to get into the game without getting sh*t on every game without putting stupid stuff like deathstreaks in (yeah it was fun MOABing getting 100+ games on newbs and noobs but guess what it drove them away from the game and nobody wants to play a game with a dwindiling player base like we have now)

                 

                I would also never ask the COD community to come and play a game I like its a sure fire way to turn that game toxic.

                  • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                    ghamorra

                    Depth is a great word to use. I said the same thing but never found a word that really summed up my thought. CoD is very shallow, like I said it takes only a couple of hours to fully explore all that each CoD has to offer. I'm 200+ hours in Dark Souls 2 and I'm barely passed the halfway point. There's so much to learn, so much to experience and the game only took 3 years to make and is basically a rip of the first Dark Souls. The budget for Dark Souls in itself was roughly $800,000 (I read it only took 13,000 copies to break even). How much does CoD cost each year?

                     

                    I think Dark Souls is high quality game just in what it offers. You have all these AAA games that are in the tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars and they can be fully experienced in 10 hours of play. Think about that for a minute.

                     

                    I feel CoD needs to think about what it is they want to achieve. If they continue to feed the instant gratification crowd they won't last long. It appears that Titanfall has no problem offering themselves up to that same crowd. All ready it's being hailed as the next great "Jean Claude Van Dam" style game. Lots of action back into a formulaic system to get cranked out yearly. There's no real depth into Titanfall, it's only spark in popularity is that it's new, when the next title comes out gamers will see that it's more of the same but in a new case.

                      • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                        Gerbera

                        I'd suggest watching Angry Joe's review of Titanfall as it's a very fair and realistic assessment of the game now that it's actually out. While so many sources constantly overhype it with constant 9/10, 10/10, 4/5, and 5/5 scores (and usually based solely on the multiplayer aspect), Joe only gives it a 7/10.

                          • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                            ghamorra

                            I like Angry Joe's videos. He really levels out his thoughts and openly admits to what the developer wants him to say and he'll be like "They told me to say ______ and I don't agree". I like that.

                             

                            I don't think Titanfall is anything special. I'm sure it's a ton of fun as any game would be and I'm sure it has a good bit of quality to it, but that doesn't mean is completely innovative and will stand the test of time. That doesn't mean you'll find yourself falling in love with it. It's just a great game that will be nothing more than a fond memory a few years down the road.

                      • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                        matuzz

                        I have 800+ hours on Black Ops multiplayer and I didn't even bought the map packs until they were all released (to play zombies). I pretty much play Ghosts only with my friend and it doesn't really entertain me to play alone. And main reason I bought it in the first place was just because there isn't much games for PS4 and my friend already had it.

                         

                        I have absolutely no interest on the next game, maybe I will buy Treyarch's next game IF they have done some serious overhaul on the engine and the game itself.

                        • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                          Doctorpsylus

                          yanno what

                          AGAIN ghosts froze my ps3 last night  & AGAIN

                          47 mins for it to boot the disc

                          so i thought bollox to this & went on blops 2 zombies Grief

                          id forgotten how much fun that was

                          • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                            Izjar11

                            ghamorra wrote:

                             

                            Ghosts has been out for about 4ish months now and while I started out playing it non-stop I've found myself dwindling my gaming time down to rare occasions with friends. It's not that I don't like Ghosts but it's just no different enough anymore. I have few friends who play Call of Duty anymore, maybe 10% of what I had last year and 1% of what I had back during Black Ops.

                             

                             

                            Im having a good time playing the game, still. I party up though allot with others (been sending you some )

                            ghamorra wrote:

                             

                            GCoD isn't challenging. I don't say this because I've mastered all there is to master in Call of Duty; I say this because CoD is the same every year. The only challenge is going up against another opponent. What happens when that challenge gets old? What do you have to work towards? Hitting the highest prestige?

                             

                            Challenging can mean various things to people, one thing that has been more challenging for me and the CTFI clan is winning at clan wars together. This meta game has brought forth a new dimension when winning means everything. Though I agree with what your saying, when I play BF4 (solo) the game becomes monotonous.

                             

                            ghamorra wrote:

                             

                            CoD is reaching the end of it's life and is only surviving by using it's popularity to real in new gamers. Old gamers who are veterans to the franchise seem to only cling on by playing with friends. An element that in itself adds a whole new dynamic to the game. Others who have still stuck around find alternatives to what the game offers, outside reasons to play such as YouTube, MLG, or new competitive elements that have been added.

                             

                            But how long will this last?

                             

                            This is just the reality of any game, they will all end and we will all clamor for the next new thing and we all want something new, exciting, different gaming is becoming more and more complex each year. Think, how the developers must feel to create and wow us all, and live off that creativity year by year. To me GHOST has done a far better job at that than the last two titles and yet its getting hated on. Goes to show, no matter what they do they cannot please the vets, because they all cling (literally) to the older titles memories like babies on a pacifier.

                            ghamorra wrote:

                             

                            Sure Call of Duty offers new maps every few months but after a while you become able to learn a map in just a few playthroughs. I spent 15+ hours in one area of Dark Souls and I just found out from a friend that I missed something. Tell me, how much of the game did you learn in 15 hours?

                             

                            Dark Souls 2 also offers something Call of Duty doesn't. Each time you play through the game you enter a new NG and with each NG not only does the game get more difficult but you also unlock new weapons and armor. You learn more about the story. Each NG would be the equivalent of a prestige. So imagine with each prestige you unlock 2 or 3 new weapons, 5 new perks, and a new map.

                             

                            That would certainly motivate me to play through prestiges with a bit more urgency. But CoD couldn't function on that formula. The community would erupt in rage. Fact is, for having such a hardcore community the game favors casuals. A casual game is easy to learn, easy to figure out, and easy to fully explore.

                             

                            As a gamer evolves and steps outside of their comfort zone and away from casual gaming they realize the amount of satisfaction that exists in a challenge. In beating something that new, and defeating greater foes and overcoming greater odds. Instant gratification will never have the amount of satisfaction that something you've worked and slaved for has.

                            Your absolutely right on that COD doesn't take much more than aim, memory, and alittle of cunning to play it well and reach a level that can plateau. Lately, my focus is finding those routes that aren't used by the crowd, learn new ways to use the maps, and how to best work that area to my advantage.

                             

                            COD is simple, not very complex and that should really not change. In other words G, whats changing is not COD but you which is not a bad thing my friend. Cheers, good post.

                              • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                ghamorra

                                I think simplicity only goes so far. There needs to be a depth in Call of Duty if it's going to survive. Games that are simple can only captivate for so long.

                                 

                                Why does Call of Duty turn a game around every year? Because they need to constantly beat us over the head with a new game or else we'll grow tired and stop playing all together.

                                 

                                Why does Call of Duty constantly release new maps? Because our attention isn't even lasting a whole year anymore and we need to be stimulated.

                                 

                                Why does Call of Duty have Clan Wars? Because 3 months is too long to wait for DLC and we need something every couple of weeks to keep us playing.

                                 

                                What else can they do? The game is exhausting it's options for keeping simple and redundant new and fun. The lack of satisfaction we get isn't keeping the community's collective attention. As I said, some players, such as yourself, are finding ways to stay interested but I don't see that lasting for much longer.

                                  • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                    Izjar11

                                    I hear you, depth in video gaming is not very easily sold (considering -most) people do not want to over think when playing a video game, I say most not all.

                                     

                                    - Why do they turn a game around: Money, and more money, business, promises to share holders, someones salary and a firms reputation.

                                    - Why does COD release new maps: Mostly to try to keep us guessing, adding new things, so that we are not entirely bored after four months.

                                    - Why does COD have CW's: The game has to (as you say) offer more than just shooting and winning, rewarding that through CW's is a more organized form to say good job guys, heres a new camo!

                                    - What else can they do? Geez, this is what I was mentioning, imagine your job being a developer coming up with "new" things, things that will sell, that will be good that players wont necessarily hate, bash, ridicule, you over! Imagine, the pressure to create the "wow" factor, to get peoples emotions running for ANOTHER title. Not an easy job.

                                     

                                    Your totally right, my interest is thinning with the series (this after 4 years) of COD gaming says allot about them, many probably feel the same. But look at the market itself, they through out TF at us, claiming it to be the game to play, but it looks like COD except its not. I have played FIFA and ive played so many (futbol) games that they are all the same as well. So........ whats left something entirily new is missing in gaming.

                                     

                                    Who ever can create that, we (gamers) shall see.

                                      • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                        ghamorra

                                        Izjar11 wrote:

                                         

                                        I hear you, depth in video gaming is not very easily sold (considering -most) people do not want to over think when playing a video game, I say most not all.

                                        I have to disagree. Many forums of RPG games are still very active even 6-8 years after the game's release. Oblivion is 8 years old and still the forums are full of players asking questions. Skyrim is now over 3 years old and I can still go on their forums and see several players online. The original Dark Souls still has a very active forum and it's 3 years old. GTA IV is still popular and GTA V is was a huge success.

                                         

                                        You'll find that more players are wanting depth in their games. They want to spend hundreds of hours playing a game that keeps giving them a challenge.

                                          • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                            rlbl

                                            I have to agree with you here...

                                             

                                            I am very old school, and in my day (lol) when a game came out one played it for years.  One does not even have to look back too far to find games where people continued to play them for 10+ years.

                                             

                                            A game could (maybe should) have elements to it to keep playing them for longer periods of time than a year or two.  COD, for example, no longer has that. It is unfortunate that the support for the older (better?) games gets dropped leading to hacks that never get patched. If this was not the case, I am sure most people would have stuck to COD4 and/or W@W and there would never (?) have been a need to move from there.

                                    • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                      _Guest_

                                      Nice to see some mature conversation on the forums.Unfortunately what you and i are looking for will never happen in cod.While cod continues to make ridiculous amounts of money they wont change.Can you imagine quick scoping being taken out?So things like this will cause too much outrage and leave us with no change whatsoever.But then if you do make changes people will complain that it is too much like another game.So you cant win either way.With the revenge spawn kill that just leaves you to think how bad things are getting in this game.They would rather you get a cheap easy kill then to go back to your spawn point and use tactics to get back to where you were.For a more fun and challenging game they need to start from scratch and i cant see them doing that.

                                      • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                        RunAndGun1

                                        You nailed it, ghamorra. On the head!

                                         

                                        This is exactly why I've become frustrated with COD. As someone who has played COD since COD2, I have found each COD since has become progressively dumbed down.

                                         

                                        Dumbed down in various ways:

                                         

                                        1. Lag comp has progressively gotten worse. No coincidence there. Why can I pop in World At War and have a better experience and more successful matches, yet play Ghosts with insta-deaths and lag? Because lag comp is being adjusted to favor people with weaker connections and less experience with COD. Noobs. Lag should be LESS noticeable with each new release of COD. Yet, it's worse. Why less? Technology. We shouldn't need XboxOne to enjoy COD. The technology to make the games cross platform exists today.
                                        2. Teeny, tiny maps. Tiny maps placate those who want instant gratification and constant kills. There is no challenge. No strategic thinking at all. W@W gave us larger maps, forcing us to think before we moved. That's what a challenge looks like. Trying to stay "alive" two seconds after we spawn is not a challenge, it's an annoyance.
                                        3. Favoring the "newcomers" over the veteran players is all about the bottom line. Those of us who've played since COD2 are being left in the dust. People who've played COD for a long time are, as ghamorra pointed out, more likely to "move on" to other games because we've grown bored. Challenges are fading from COD as the focus is placed more on getting younger players who are going to be around longer. Younger players are seen as a long term investment. I get it. Makes sense. But out of respect to those who have played COD for a long time, make each new release challenging to spread the love to new and old COD players. I was drawn to COD because of the challenges. Challenges improve a game's longevity. COD is being changed to accommodate new players, but the changes are creating boredom for the veteran COD player.
                                        4. Contracts. The contract Activision has with Microsoft has lead to those of us with XBoxes having access to the games and DLC before anyone else. That's great for those of us with XBoxes. But, now that XBoxOne has come out, that has become the focus of the developers and of Microsoft for obvious reasons. Sure, I'd like to have an XBoxOne. But, I can't afford one now. It might be a long time before XBoxOne consoles outnumber XB360 consoles in ownership. Do the devs really want to push it on us while delaying other choices? I hope not. Delays lead to resentments. After a while, people might get fed up with these delays and move onto other games. Like Dark Souls 2.


                                        I could go on. But, I'm sure others will make other equally valid points worth discussing. Thanks for letting me share. These are only some of my views. I'm not religious about them. As I can always learn from your views here.

                                        • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                          _Guest_

                                          I would like the idea of the prestige thing you were talking about.I think they should take ideas out of movies or something similar like hamburger hill,or force10 with the bridge.You could have 1 team defending the other attacking trying to destroy it and trying to get under the bridge to plant explosives,have a big map like that.Maybe add clues for teams to try figure out or something.You can have another where a team defends a village and the other team is in a big field/forest trying to get into a certain point.

                                          • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                            TL_Bare_B_V2

                                            A friend once said: Ghosts is like the girlfriend you want to meet but always make excuses not too.

                                             

                                            It's not a bad game and I like playing it but i'm just enjoying other games more at the minute.

                                            • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                              rankismet

                                              COD and Dark Souls... two entirely different genres.

                                                • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                  ghamorra

                                                  You completely missed the point.

                                                    • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                      rankismet

                                                      Actually... I didn't.

                                                       

                                                      The analogy doesn't make sense. You're comparing the experience in an action RPG with a FPS.

                                                       

                                                      They have inherently different unlock, experience, and basic gameplay mechanics. You are lauding prestige unlocks of weapons, perks, even maps... that would not function well in shooter (weapons, yes, but not the rest). RPG's take hours for a story to unfold and truly get the ins and outs of the gameplay. A FPS is pick up a gun, find an enemy... and shoot them.

                                                       

                                                      The challenge is supposed to be your opponent.

                                                       

                                                      COD has always been easy to play... hard to master.

                                                       

                                                      Still is.

                                                       

                                                       

                                                       

                                                       

                                                      Sounds to me your are just burnt out on shooters.

                                                        • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                          Izjar11

                                                          This G, is what I truly meant. Your probably burned, and find the RPG role more challenging.

                                                           

                                                          Good one Rankismet.

                                                          • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                            ghamorra

                                                            To some degree yes, the challenge is your opponent. However, I find challenges elsewhere too. Playstyle, mechanics, maps, and objectives.

                                                             

                                                            Call of Duty hasn't evolved any the need to learn, grow, and adapt stops at your opponent. Everything else can be seamlessly translated to the next title. I understand an RPG and FPS are two different games but RPGs can be just like Call of Duty in the sense that they stop evolving. Look at all the hate Assassin's Creed is getting.

                                                             

                                                            This thread is suppose to highlight that CoD is no long pushing the limits of players. I, as a gamer, am no longer being challenged by the game. I have fully explored and experienced all that Call of Duty has to offer.

                                                             

                                                            I can still enjoy FPSs, I have since Golden Eye on the N64. It's not a matter of being burnt out on the genre. I played some Killzone the other day and loved it.

                                                              • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                                rlbl

                                                                Oh how I loved Goldeneye.. but here is a point:

                                                                 

                                                                Note that the next 007 games did not do as well, and stopped more or less altogether.  Imagine if they had pushed out a new game every year?  I would be the same thing over and over...

                                                                 

                                                                I do not think COD has lost its bite, I think (and yeah I could be wrong) that it is essentially the same game, pushed out every year. It is like AC/DC:

                                                                 

                                                                They have pushed out the same record every year since 1980... eventually one starts to hear the same thing over and over, and no matter much one likes (more so liked) it, it gets tiring.

                                                                 

                                                                I still believe your (and many people's) issue is: your premise is that you want to play the franchise.  I am curious why. When I asked myself, I could not really come up with an answer.  In an ideal world: They would have continued support for COD4 and pushed out map pack and game enhancements until the community just dropped off (like Diablo 2)

                                                        • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                          sennalike

                                                          Each CoD I am getting bored with quicker and quicker. Ghosts was too quick to reach max prestige. Now I am just accumulating squad points, and gaining xp for no real purpose. I only play domination because I need to have an objective or purpose to play, dom gives me that. But too many players aren't interested in playing the objective because all they want to do is make out they can play the game by 'boosting' their KDR. My issue with CoD is more about those who play it than the game itself.

                                                           

                                                          I've already started splitting my time between CoD, BF4, Assasins Creed, and Thief. The last two I only playing the single player versions, I'm finding it much more enjoyable, and issue free, than multiplayer CoD. I just don't like BF4 much so that avenue will be a short run.

                                                           

                                                          I think come June and the release of The Elder Scrolls on ps4 will see the end of Ghosts for me. I can't say whether I will buy the next CoD, maybe, maybe not. It's still a long way off. But if I do it will need to be radically different because as I said, the current formula just isn't keeping me interested.

                                                            • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                              RunAndGun1

                                                              sennalike wrote:

                                                               

                                                              Each CoD I am getting bored with quicker and quicker. Ghosts was too quick to reach max prestige. Now I am just accumulating squad points, and gaining xp for no real purpose. I only play domination because I need to have an objective or purpose to play, dom gives me that. But too many players aren't interested in playing the objective because all they want to do is make out they can play the game by 'boosting' their KDR. My issue with CoD is more about those who play it than the game itself.

                                                              This is one of the main reasons I'm losing interest in COD as well. People playing every mode as if they were TDM. Ignoring the objectives simply to boost their KDR. If you're gonna play Kill Confirmed, kill the enemy and get your tags, or at least attempt to. If you're gonna play Dom, try and help your team capture the objectives. With Dom, though, the devs could help by making it so a single player doesn't have to wait an eternity to capture a flag/objective. Reward players who are trying to single handedly capture the objectives by reducing the capture time. As it is now, it takes SO long for a single player to capture the objective that it gives the enemy enough time to spawn from the other side of the map and still have time to get to the flag and stop you. If they reduced the capture time for single players, MORE people would be encouraged to work for the objectives. And the enemy would be equally encouraged to work for the objectives. In Kill Confirmed, reward players each time they grab 5-10 tags in a single streak, maybe with squad points or double XP. Whatever.

                                                               

                                                              Reward entire teams with bonus XP when they win a match. Each player getting credit towards new camo or something along those lines. Maybe reward a player with new camo after he captures his 100th flag, or 100th tag. And or a reward for every 25 matches they win in a row. There are many ways to encourage players to play for the objective and play as a team. KDR means so little when it comes to my enjoying COD. Sure, it looks good. But, did I really have fun or accomplish much during that time? The possibilities are endless.

                                                                • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                                  alexjt22

                                                                  RunAndGun1 wrote:

                                                                   

                                                                  sennalike wrote:

                                                                   

                                                                  Each CoD I am getting bored with quicker and quicker. Ghosts was too quick to reach max prestige. Now I am just accumulating squad points, and gaining xp for no real purpose. I only play domination because I need to have an objective or purpose to play, dom gives me that. But too many players aren't interested in playing the objective because all they want to do is make out they can play the game by 'boosting' their KDR. My issue with CoD is more about those who play it than the game itself.

                                                                  This is one of the main reasons I'm losing interest in COD as well. People playing every mode as if they were TDM. Ignoring the objectives simply to boost their KDR. If you're gonna play Kill Confirmed, kill the enemy and get your tags, or at least attempt to. If you're gonna play Dom, try and help your team capture the objectives. With Dom, though, the devs could help by making it so a single player doesn't have to wait an eternity to capture a flag/objective. Reward players who are trying to single handedly capture the objectives by reducing the capture time. As it is now, it takes SO long for a single player to capture the objective that it gives the enemy enough time to spawn from the other side of the map and still have time to get to the flag and stop you. If they reduced the capture time for single players, MORE people would be encouraged to work for the objectives. And the enemy would be equally encouraged to work for the objectives. In Kill Confirmed, reward players each time they grab 5-10 tags in a single streak, maybe with squad points or double XP. Whatever.

                                                                   

                                                                  Reward entire teams with bonus XP when they win a match. Each player getting credit towards new camo or something along those lines. Maybe reward a player with new camo after he captures his 100th flag, or 100th tag. And or a reward for every 25 matches they win in a row. There are many ways to encourage players to play for the objective and play as a team. KDR means so little when it comes to my enjoying COD. Sure, it looks good. But, did I really have fun or accomplish much during that time? The possibilities are endless.

                                                                   

                                                                  This whole KDR problem has been left without an attempt of a solution by the developers for far too long now, but its a tough one to get the balance right they could remove stats completely people would have a lot more fun with the game but at the same time maybe it would have less longevity because there is nothing for some people to aim for. The best solution I have heard is remove overall stats and make in depth stats that are game mode specific where KDR does not show up for objective games stats, I just hope they attempt to change what we have now with the next COD.

                                                                   

                                                                  Again your spot on about quite a number of people playing TDM in objective games but again the developers seem oblivious to the main problems: TDM has less potential kills to have so party's will gravitate in particular towards DOM, Objective games have easier kills making it a better way to pad your KDR if you don't play the objective, Objective games have more people moving about than TDM where quite a number of people can play like complete scum bags. The developers must know this yet here we are years down the line without any solutions again. I think the biggest solution to get people away from playing TDM in objective games is to make TDM a 10 minute game flat out with no score limit that way it gives party's enough kills to go round and it gives kill whores something to aim for with the most kills in TDM which I am sure will be quite popular on YT which will then encourage people to try the same.

                                                                   

                                                                  Agree bigger bonus XP for winning teams and in general more rewards for playing objectives like camos, more squad points, character customization etc would be a great idea to at least encourage objective play. Its a real shame what is happening with COD with one of the main reasons of its demise being that they take far to long to remove the cancers from the game.

                                                              • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                                _Guest_

                                                                As i already stated they need to start from scratch.So i suggest:Do away with kdr,but keep wlr,this will have players play the objective more.Lower the killstreaks to a minimum like in waw,lower the perks to a minimum,there are seriously too many perks in this game now.Same with attachments and customizations.Just go back to basics,things are becoming over complicated and theres no need.Try get players playing as a team,some of my suggestions above or something different.Maps seriously need to change too,i dont think many people liked the maps we have gotten in the last 3 games.Needs the 5 large 5 medium 4 small maps like it was before.Also id like to see the 3 lane linear maps like blops1 return,biased opinion but they were the best released maps we have gotten so far in all the cods.Have less clutter,less pathways and more open space would be perfect.Quickscoping needs to go and so does this spawn revenge system.Come up with ideas for unlocks/bonuses etc to keep the game longevity of a year at least till the next cod comes out.

                                                                • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                                  rlbl

                                                                  Although I have an understanding at what you are driving at and I do agree, there is something that is fundamentally incorrect with all of this:

                                                                   

                                                                  Our premise is wrong.

                                                                   

                                                                  What do I mean?

                                                                   

                                                                  Is COD simple? sure

                                                                  Has it become more and more "dumbed down" with every release? Ok

                                                                   

                                                                  So what is wrong?  The point of making COD what it isn't so we (from noobs to vets) will be pleased.  We do not NEED to be playing it.  If it is not what we expect it to be, move on. Again, we do not need to be playing it.

                                                                   

                                                                  Not saying I am correct, but I came to realize that the issues with the game go far beyond glitches, hacks, simplicity and noobish tactics... It comes down to whether or not "I" wish to play the game that is what it is.  We loved the games of old, and as mentioned above it is too bad that support for the old games was dropped; but to expect that new games be as the old games were, is not well founded (even if desired).

                                                                   

                                                                  COD is not dead (yet), it is just different. Some love it, some (many?) not so much.  When people start to think: "This game is better than that game" or "this series is dying (be it true or not)", we need to start thinking inwardly and ask ourselves:

                                                                   

                                                                  "If we are no longer enjoying playing it, we do we keep doing so? Maybe it is time to explore something new"

                                                                  - Izjar11 (lol not a circle jerk going on here: question the information, not the source)

                                                                   

                                                                  If one is thinking: "I want to play this game but it is not how I want it to be or used to be. etc etc..", remember that you do not need to be playing it.

                                                                   

                                                                  As usual, no insult is ever intended by my posts

                                                                    • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                                      ghamorra

                                                                      As someone who's grown up over the last 10 years playing Call of Duty I want to play the franchise, just not what it's become. Again, I really enjoy Ghosts. CoD overall though is losing it's bite. It's not difficult to grasp and I'm not growing anymore. There's a challenge that missing that I find with other games. There's not much to explore, learn, conquer. When I started playing Ghosts I had a 3.4 K/D playing the objective.

                                                                       

                                                                      I spent more time playing Black Ops II and I think in some respects I enjoyed it more. Black Ops II tried so hard to prevent my playstyle and I took that as a challenge. Sure there were some, a lot of choice words used when playing but I found pleasure in the pain.

                                                                        • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                                          rlbl

                                                                          As an addendum to my post above about "wanting" to play the franchise, I care to add some explanation:

                                                                           

                                                                          I liked InFamous, and I loved InFamous2.  If I wanted to play the franchise, I would have run out and bought the 2nd Son. However, because I am deciding on game-by-game basis (I am evaluating the game and not the franchise), I have not bought it (yet) - the jury is still out.

                                                                           

                                                                          I did not like BFBC2, and I was not crazy about BF3. If I was making decisions on a franchise basis I would have stayed clear of BF4. However, I am loving it (issues and all).

                                                                           

                                                                          I guess there is nothing wrong with wanting to play a franchise, however when doing so, you get what you get and that can be disappointing. (like I mentioned before I loved AC/DC). When "Flick of the Switch" came out I ran out and bought it because I did not evaluate its merit as a standalone album, but did so based on all the albums before it (I also did that with QR3 - Quiet Riot's 3rd album)

                                                                           

                                                                          I was very disappointed, but had nobody to blame but myself.

                                                                            • Re: Ghosts: 64 hours played | Dark Souls 2: 202 hours played
                                                                              nuttin2say

                                                                              rlbl makes a rock solid argument (no pun intended).

                                                                               

                                                                              I'll admit it - I want to play the franchise - to the degree I often wonder if it would have been possible to have continually expand COD4. I often wonder what the economic fundamentals would have been. You've got a couple of issues at play. You can run with the single product until you hit diminishing returns ... or you can come out with a new product just after the peak of maximum profitability. I'm not 100% certain which route is more profitable in the long run. I think in the long run, the "playing the franchise" model works out better because you can artificially enhance the staying power of the individual release.

                                                                               

                                                                              At some point the product does lose its appeal though. The you have to come up with a new product. In that light, at some point "playing the franchise" fails making the "playing the game" model more logical. At least, it is more logical in the short run.

                                                                               

                                                                              Why? Because if you release a new "product" every year, eventually having a new game every year becomes the franchise. In other words, each release IS the update or add-on that just so happens to be incompatible with previous elements of the game. In this case, you hit a point of diminishing return no matter what.

                                                                               

                                                                              Somewhere, though, you have to take into consideration the automobile. Yes, the automobile. There is an industry that releases a "new" product every year. yet, they are still going strong. Even if you discount GM and Chrysler, you have to consider the entire industry. Its as strong as ever. The only critical difference I see between the auto industry model and the gaming industry model is that cars are largely a necessity. Games are not.

                                                                               

                                                                              Anyway. I would rather play the franchise and not the individual games, I admit it.