Hindsight is always 20/20. When looking back on things you can always point out immediately what you like and don't like. Depending on your personal bias you can make anything out to be exactly what you want it to be if once it's over. I love hearing those say MW and MW2 were the best Call of Duty games while ignoring all of the problems associated with them. Black Ops was a great game functionally but people are quick to trash it because of the FAMAS. If an entire game was ruined by one single weapon than you're hopeless.
That being said, complaining about what Call of Duty is going to be in the future is the same. I thought Ghosts was going to be a Rusher's wet dream based on the trailers. They solely featured Cranked and tight engagements. For all we know Half the stuff in AW is campaign only. The Exo-suit (completely different than robotics) could be the new Jug. There's a lot we don't know and it's easy to pick apart what little info we have about something we know very little about.
You got to admit G it doesn't look good.I cant imagine them leaving out those suits, wall climbing gloves or jumping 50 feet in the air.I also see those drones back.I remember seeing the trailer for BO2 and thinking i hope those drones and flying dragons are not in MP and they were.Having said that Ghosts did surprise me,but this one looks like it has a lot of futuristic elements to it.
I don't think people really know what they want until they get it. I can understand where your coming from though/
From the "telling a story" relevance. It's gotten rather beyond just marketing. Sure it has to be entertaining, its a game. But Call of Duty being as large as it is likes to bring about certain issues to our attention. I have noticed in most of the futuristic games since black ops 2, it's been trying to nag our attention with extremely horrible scenarios of someone gaining access to weapon or something like that. A lot of stories of the past have been countlessly retold. Now they seem like almost, like they are trying to warn us about what could wrong in the future. Drones being hacked is a very real threat. As a group of students from the university of texas bet the military a thousand dollars they could hack their drone out the sky.
They walked away $1000 richer that day. You would think the kinetic bombardment space weapon in ghosts would be illegal, when actually it technically isn't. Only weapons of mass destruction are (Nuclear chemical biological) are forbidden. So that could very well be real as well.
Now they seem to focus their attention on not specifically exoskeletons, although I'm sure. That's what has caught your eye. It's PMCs (Private military corporations). In real life, as a video the developers themselves stated, the third largest corporation in the world (Employee #s) is a private military corporation, named G4S. That chances are none of you has ever heard of. It's right behind walmart. And Foxconn, a corporation in china that make the Iphone, Ipads. playsation, xbox and wii systems.
With PMCs being so powerful today as to be involved in human trafficking, and warlord protection, to being so close that they are some of the security personnel in your local airport is somewhat unsettling.
With a corporation that large, they could very very easily get their hands on and develop a lot of advanced technology and put themselves ahead of the military. Some PMCs like Academi already have some the most advanced facilities in the world. More advanced then our military. And PMCs can pay a soldier well. $1000 a day, without benefits.
A lot of this technology is already just over the horizon. That's what set it apart from Halo and Crysis. It's a lot more close to reality. Call of Duty has a lot of military advisors to tell them about possibility and practicality. Something like genetic engineering simply wouldn't be practical impliment. But an exosuit, come right out and return to your life. The only surprising technology in that trailer to me that I haven't heard of were the boosters, the very large mech suit and the foldable mini gun of some kind. There is actually a prototype hovercraft now that can travel a speculated 500 mph.
Back to the game, how would they go about balancing this? Well, your strength isn't going to matter when your enemy is riddling you with bullets. An exoskeleton will probably be standard. However that does not mean that it will be armored. I'd imagine you can only have so many of these options they provide you in the campaign. You'll have perks that give you certain things. Something like marathon or lightweight or commando could just be modifications to your suit. I'd imagine you can't super jump as high and likely it will require a fuel. They'll probably ultimately make it impractical to use frequently. The wall crawling, I'd imagine you would have a problem shooting climbing walls like spiderman.
Maybe some features won't be included entirely. I'd watch and see before I shoot this call of duty down.
A lot of this technology is already just over the horizon. That's what set it apart from Halo and Crysis. It's a lot more close to reality. Call of Duty has a lot of military advisers to tell them about possibility and practicality. Something like genetic engineering simply wouldn't be practical implement. But an exosuit, come right out and return to your life. The only surprising technology in that trailer to me that I haven't heard of were the boosters, the very large mech suit and the foldable mini gun of some kind. There is actually a prototype hovercraft now that can travel a speculated 500 mph.
And that's what I keep trying to tell a bunch of the haters who keep screaming this is "Halo territory" and such crap like that.
In terms of the "futuristic" CoD games like BO2, Ghosts, and Advanced Warfare (let's face it - 10, 12, even 40 years is not that "futuristic" anymore in terms of military technology today), all the stuff shown either...
1.) Exists/Existed in some shape or form form.
The M8A1 in BO2 for example, is obviously based on the XM8 weapons system by Heckler & Koch, originally meant to be a possible replacement for the M16 and M4, but also being multipurpose in being able to be configured into different variants, including a PDW and LMG. However, it has failed to see widespread use (that I know of).
Another example being the LSAT. In BO2 and Ghosts, it's obviously been mass produced and commonly used in each game. However, right now, it's still a prototype in testing to potentially replace the M249 SAW (with very positive results so far), but 10-12+ years down the road, it could very well be a mainstay SAW for the US military.
2.) Stuff that could potentially be made within the years down the line to that CoD time period.
The slimmed down exosuits being one of them. There actually ARE exosuits right now, but they're large and require bigger power sources so clearly not practical for military use right now, but forty years down the line, it's quite possible they could be slimmed down and get smaller, more powerful power sources.
Or the Lodestar of BO2 does exist as a couple.Northropp Grumman X-47Bs and could possibly be battle ready by 2019, so 6 more years after that, it's very possible for have a fleet of them (not definite, but possible), and the danger of being hacked is also very real.
Even something like the CLAW (the "walkers" of BO2) aren't exactly impossible to imagine existing in 10+ years.
You make some interesting observations on where the game is headed.
The future or the past is what these games can go.
Future - they are at liberty to create new things, guns, weapons, equipment, either our of their imagination or what is spoken about in military futuristic ideas. The possibility really is limitless.
Past - they can recreate past experiences that we all have read about, probably seen in films, photos. They use equipment we have seen, limiting their creativity and have to base the mechanics on a slower (no that its wrong) game system.
Mw3, BO2 and Ghost are very, very fast based games. I have played 3 other FPS games, and trust me Ghost is by far faster than BF and black light retribution are slower than Ghost. And what do people still clamor for? speed, they want to rush and rush and rush and remove the possibly to "camp" or play defensively.
So with that said, the future is the one that seems to provide the necessary speed everyone wants or talks about.
I agree. After getting a xone at launch and moving to MS, I got to enjoy Titanfall but that's just it. It seems like they are just copying other developers concepts. That doesn't seem very 'creative'. TF is fun but also has it's limits.
Personally, I just enjoyed the historical games more because you could, in a way, relate to them even though they are embellished. All these future shooters coming out at the same time is just too much in my mind. That's not creative in my mind.
Dude, sorry to break it to you.. but people thought the same thing at first when CoD went from WW2 to modern day... now everyone loves it! Bottom line is if they keep making the same stale game / gameplay and setting... people will get bored with it no matter how good (or not so much with the more recent CoD games!) the game is. This was inevitable. If you like the modern setting, I'm willing to bet they will still be making CoD games in that setting. Just sit tight... in the meantime lets finally see some innovation in the freaking series! I'm hoping this one will break CoD back from death's door...
Couldn't agree more i can't see COD hanging with the masses of sci fi games coming out at all, i think numbers online will be very low quicker than ever this year.
Developers have moved so far away from the COD formula with this game which is such a shame and mistake as no other game wants to go up against COD in terms of being a easy pick up and play military game that is relatable so why move out of that market i just don't get it maybe the devs are burned out on the traditional COD and want to do something different in which case they should move on or they want to let their minds run free and show how creative they can be in which case again they should move on from COD instead of turning it into some tribal game that the core audience isnt interested in.
It seems to me every game from BO1 they have been more concerned as to what game critics think about the game than its fans, you just hear the interviews at past years at E3 when they are being interviewed and it just makes me cringe that they use critics reviews/previews from previous games as to what should be implemented and improved for the next game and the critics barely play the game longer than a few hours to write a review.
call me crazy but i think there is plenty of creative ideas to make the game better & different while keeping with the core formula with what fans fell for the game with. To me they have just been making too many errors over the past few years and i think this might be the one that breaks the camels back unfortunately, you only have to look how disinterested the public is with the game that they can't even get into the top 10 of any sites pre order charts i have browsed and they have even released the MP pre order bonus earlier than usual as well and not only that they came at number 48 as to what game the public is interested in at E3 on CVG.
COD is on life support and has been for a while now, its only surviving by leeching off other successful original games. Its a pathetic joke, and if I worked on cod i would be ashamed of myself and wouldn't even want it on my CV.
Cod4 WAS EPIC, BEST GAME EVER. W@2 was awesome, since those two it is fking terrible. Only 12/13 year old kids like any cod after those