so i got black ops

Count Snoopula wrote:

Old School wrote:

So put it like this, remember at the end of the year during grade school, a student is awarded an honors award for their sticking out the most in x subject? There you go, champ.

Except in that case the school giving the award has both the knowledge and authority to acknowledge a student for their high achievements. So it's not actually the same at all, buddy.

See, that's the problem here. It is the same.
You're just refusing to acknowledge it yourself out of your own accord.

Doesn't matter though. Everybody else recognizes Black-Ops as a milestone in the CoD franchise, and I have 100% faith that Treyarch is gonna make another behemoth.

Remind me who pinned the "FPS Shooter of the Year" award on Call of Duty Black Ops and who gave them the authority to do so?

"lol u juts dnt understand" isn't an argument, you know.

It's not that you don't understand. It that you're just deliberately refusing to understand something so incredibly simple.

Multiple sites/shows gives away awards to games. But obviously, the biggest most internationally popular video game award ceremony is the Spike TV VGA. There, Black-Ops won FPS of the year.
I have an idea what your response might be:

neo wrote:

Those doesn't matter, companies pay them off

And they have the authority to grant these awards based on...? The amount of advertising money the companies whose games coincidentally win all these awards throw at them to hire celebrities and plaster ads for it all over the internet?

You're aware that the Spike VGAs are considered a joke among the majority of gaming communities, right?

Good job, you pointed out that I would state facts.

Old School wrote:

As for the part about trying to achieve your killstreak, isn't that the point of playing the game?.

uhm, what about no? you pretty much just proved my point. you can't be that retarded to think that?

well ok, I'll give you one thing, i guess in a deathmatch type it kinda applies, but the main point of playing the game is to do the objective you are given. in deathmatch types it pretty much goes hand in hand with killstreaks though as the objective is to get as much kills as you can and hence as high of a killstreak as you can.

but in any other mode (and the majority of modes in COD are objective types) all these different killstreaks lend itself far too easy to people to abuse them, you're right, you can only use 3, but there's such a wide array of killstreaks including very powerful ones, that people will fill up their killstreaks with as much powerful ones as they can, and then rather than playing the actual game and do the objective, they sit back, camp and try to rack up kills so they can do their killstreaks and pad their stats and that's what ruins it. a good player knows how to deal with these people though, but it shouldn't be an issue.

Count Snoopula wrote:

And they have the authority to grant these awards based on...? The amount of advertising money the companies whose games coincidentally win all these awards throw at them to hire celebrities and plaster ads for it all over the internet?

A game is nominated for being the most outstanding in "x" category along side a handful of other titles.
The games are then put on a poll and voted on by via an online poll.
The one with the most votes win. Can't get more simple than that.

All that celebrity stuff is there for our entertainment I guess.

Quote :

You're aware that the Spike VGAs are considered a joke among the majority of gaming communities, right?

Please stop trying to speak your opinion on something for everybody.

Eevil-Psycho wrote:

Old School wrote:

As for the part about trying to achieve your killstreak, isn't that the point of playing the game?.

uhm, what about no? you pretty much just proved my point. you can't be that retarded to think that?

well ok, I'll give you one thing, i guess in a deathmatch type it kinda applies, but the main point of playing the game is to do the objective you are given. in deathmatch types it pretty much goes hand in hand with killstreaks though as the objective is to get as much kills as you can and hence as high of a killstreak as you can.

but in any other mode (and the majority of modes in COD are objective types) all these different killstreaks lend itself far too easy to people to abuse them, you're right, you can only use 3, but there's such a wide array of killstreaks including very powerful ones, that people will fill up their killstreaks with as much powerful ones as they can, and then rather than playing the actual game and do the objective, they sit back, camp and try to rack up kills so they can do their killstreaks and pad their stats and that's what ruins it. a good player knows how to deal with these people though, but it shouldn't be an issue.

I honestly don't see it as that big of a deal since people play the game differently.
But then again, I mostly play deathmatches. But let's be honest, aside from killsrtreaks this does not just apply to CoD on the matter of people not achieving their objective. Multiple games have these players.

In Battlefield when everyone isn't doing their part, chances are you're going to lose the whole thing.

As for the more powerful killstreaks, they are more difficult to achieve.
And as bad as people make it out to be, camping will only get you so far in CoD. I'm pretty sure the camper couldn't achieve a 5 killstreak before somebody comes around and kill.
Part of the reason Black-Ops was praised was because Treyarch designed the maps to lower camping.
I'm not saying it's not possible to camp, but it is more difficult and constantly get away with it.

Old School wrote:

I honestly don't see it as that big of a deal since people play the game differently.
But then again, I mostly play deathmatches. But let's be honest, aside from killsrtreaks this does not just apply to CoD on the matter of people not achieving their objective. Multiple games have these players.

In Battlefield when everyone isn't doing their part, chances are you're going to lose the whole thing.

well, I agree, other games do have these kind of players that are just there to rack up kills, but other games don't have the killstreaks to go with it, or in other words, they don't have as much of an incentive to be playing that way. sure, lots of games have powerups and stuff, but they are mostly trivial compared to the stuff you can do in COD games. and I hate these powerups or perks in other games too, but COD really takes the cake.

Keep in mind though. The powerful killsrtreaks in CoD can be counteracted in some way.

Napalm Strike/Rolling Thunder/ Valkyrie? Stay out of its way
Black Bird/Spy Plane? Counter Spy Plane or Decoy Grenades
Attack Helicopter/Chopper Gunner/Gun Ship? Shoot it down or hide
Dogs? Kill'em(It's hard but it can be achieved)
RC-XD? Avoid it or shoot it

Old School wrote:

A game is nominated for being the most outstanding in "x" category along side a handful of other titles.

By who? If you wanted an accurate representation of what people considered the greatest game of the year you'd need to include them in that process as well. As it is now it's just a shortlist of games some guy with no authority whatsoever thinks will be the most appropriate for the show, that's not how a democratic vote works.

Quote :

Quote :

You're aware that the Spike VGAs are considered a joke among the majority of gaming communities, right?

Please stop trying to speak your opinion on something for everybody.

My opinion, as well as that of multiple game developers, journalists, forums and gaming communities. The Spike VGAs are blatantly sexist, focus group tested pandering bullshit that tries way too hard to appeal to "gamer culture" and, in the process, alienates almost everyone who actually plays games. Except you, apparently. Almost everyone considers them to be awful, frankly I'm amazed you've never noticed this before.
http://www.examiner.com/article/why-the-spike-vgas-are-a-joke?sms_ss=n4g
http://jasonschreier.com/2011/12/11/spike-vgas/
http://www.gamejudgment.com/the-spike-vgas-are-a-bad-joke
http://forums.gametrailers.com/thread/spike-vga-awards-are-a-joke/1153758
http://borderhouseblog.com/?p=3441
http://gonintendo.com/?mode=viewstory&id=168250
http://community.us.playstation.com/thread/3913406?start=0&tstart=0
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?p=40748285
http://www.psuni.com/making-the-spike-vgas-watchable-12901/
http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=663723
http://au.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27521006
http://www.nintendolife.com/forums/other_gaming/the_spike_video_game_awards_2011

It took me about a minute to find those links, including the time it took to paste them here. Make of that what you will.

Killstreaks are an awful negative-handicap mechanic that only serve to make the winners win harder and the losers lose more easily. They are not conducive to a competitive gaming environment. You are, of course, welcome to enjoy using them anyway but please try to see them for what they actually are.

[quote="Count Snoopula"]

Old School wrote:

A game is nominated for being the most outstanding in "x" category along side a handful of other titles.

Quote :

By who? If you wanted an accurate representation of what people considered the greatest game of the year you'd need to include them in that process as well. As it is now it's just a shortlist of games some guy with no authority whatsoever thinks will be the most appropriate for the show, that's not how a democratic vote works.

Okay, you keep telling yourself that.
There's no point in me trying to explain it to you apparently.

Quote :

Quote :

Quote :

You're aware that the Spike VGAs are considered a joke among the majority of gaming communities, right?

Please stop trying to speak your opinion on something for everybody.

My opinion, as well as that of multiple game developers, journalists, forums and gaming communities. The Spike VGAs are blatantly sexist, focus group tested pandering bullshit that tries way too hard to appeal to "gamer culture" and, in the process, alienates almost everyone who actually plays games. Except you, apparently. Almost everyone considers them to be awful, frankly I'm amazed you've never noticed this before.
http://www.examiner.com/article/why-the-spike-vgas-are-a-joke?sms_ss=n4g
http://jasonschreier.com/2011/12/11/spike-vgas/
http://www.gamejudgment.com/the-spike-vgas-are-a-bad-joke
http://forums.gametrailers.com/thread/spike-vga-awards-are-a-joke/1153758
http://borderhouseblog.com/?p=3441
http://gonintendo.com/?mode=viewstory&id=168250
http://community.us.playstation.com/thread/3913406?start=0&tstart=0
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?p=40748285
http://www.psuni.com/making-the-spike-vgas-watchable-12901/
http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=663723
http://au.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27521006
http://www.nintendolife.com/forums/other_gaming/the_spike_video_game_awards_2011

It took me about a minute to find those links, including the time it took to paste them here. Make of that what you will.

Because that's as easy as going on google and typing in that the Spike TV VGA's suck, right?
Keep in mind that there are also a lot of people who actually enjoys watching it.

Count Snoopula wrote:

Killstreaks are an awful negative-handicap mechanic that only serve to make the winners win harder and the losers lose more easily. They are not conducive to a competitive gaming environment. You are, of course, welcome to enjoy using them anyway but please try to see them for what they actually are.

That's exactly what they are to some extent.
They are to help players get the edge in battle, even the losing ones.

Old School wrote:

Okay, you keep telling yourself that.
There's no point in me trying to explain it to you apparently.

Telling myself what? How a democratic vote works? I'd accuse you of trying to troll at this point if I didn't think that you honestly believe what you're saying.

Quote :

Because that's as easy as going on google and typing in that the Spike TV VGA's suck, right?

Yes, I think it's quite telling how many results on page 1 are from major gaming sites.

Quote :

Keep in mind that there are also a lot of people who actually enjoys watching it.

Please stop trying to project your opinion onto everyone else.

Quote :

That's exactly what they are to some extent.
They are to help players get the edge in battle, even the losing ones.

They don't actually help the losing players at all, they just get further behind. It's like if every time you scored a goal in soccer you got to bring an extra player onto the field.

Wingers if neo and psycho are willing to agree theres something wrong with what your saying it probably is.

Zero wrote:

Count Snoopula wrote:

Old School wrote:

Black-Ops is the best in the entire franchise in my opinion.

Not that that's much of an achievement.

It's very easy to hate on CoD. It's a trend to either love or hate on it. Now before I continue, I do understand that most of the CoD games are re-skins with subtle changes. But I have a legitimate question. If they make another CoD game, what should they change about it? The FPS genre doesn't exactly give too many options like many of the other genres. They already have a demographic set up and they're doing well with it. So what should they do to not make it a re-skin?

To me, Black Ops is the most unlike the others. They added more features than any other jump other than possibly 3 to 4. They gave the game more value for a party game. Combat training allows you to have up to four players on the same PS3 in a co-op TDM or something like that. You can add CPUs which no other game did. They also added some kickass game modes like One in the Chamber, Gun Game and Sharpshooter. Along with all that, they listened to a fair amount of the complaints of MW2 where now you have more life and recoil is increased. The cheap version of quick scoping is gone, etc.

Most of what u mention no other game did is only true of the CoD. So its not really innovation. Check out GRAW 2 or UT3 both launch titles and look at the local and online MP options they have. Anyway i'm not a CoD fan but i think many will agree spec ops in MW2 was probably one of the best parts of a cod game. The game go forwards and backwards. Reselling maps from previous games is also ridiculous as is the pricing. Also i thought MW 2 looked better then blops and abt the same as MW3 (although MW2 had more interesting environments i.e. ice levels with weather).

Most importantly CoD 4 was a landmark shooter, the sequels are not up to the leap that game made for FPS. Actually nothing beats timesplitters in terms of console shooters, more modes, variety and monkeys .

Oh Christ, Wingman actually likes the Spike VGAs? Seriously? It's the lamest, lowest-common-denominator-pandering piece-of-shit award show around. They don't even bother to get actual industry figures to represent it, they just get whatever TV actors are available at the time. And Dane Cook.

I think it was last year they had Rachel Bilson presenting an award (because she's a big name in the gaming community), and she was actually visibly embarrassed to be on the stage.

Wingman can't be a real human being. He has to be some kind of Frankenstein-monster cobbled together by marketing executives in Activision's secret underwater headquarters.

Count Snoopula wrote:

Old School wrote:

Okay, you keep telling yourself that.
There's no point in me trying to explain it to you apparently.

Telling myself what? How a democratic vote works? I'd accuse you of trying to troll at this point if I didn't think that you honestly believe what you're saying.

Quote :

Because that's as easy as going on google and typing in that the Spike TV VGA's suck, right?

Yes, I think it's quite telling how many results on page 1 are from major gaming sites.

Quote :

Keep in mind that there are also a lot of people who actually enjoys watching it.

Please stop trying to project your opinion onto everyone else.

Quote :

That's exactly what they are to some extent.
They are to help players get the edge in battle, even the losing ones.

They don't actually help the losing players at all, they just get further behind. It's like if every time you scored a goal in soccer you got to bring an extra player onto the field.

So it's okay to spread your opinion on something for everybody and shoot down anyone else's who sees differently from you?
Okay. Stay classy.

And killstreaks benefits any players who are using them, even the losing ones.
They are a reason why a team may somehow comeback and win a game.

A_Nonny_Moose wrote:

Oh Christ, Wingman actually likes the Spike VGAs? Seriously? It's the lamest, lowest-common-denominator-pandering piece-of-shit award show around. They don't even bother to get actual industry figures to represent it, they just get whatever TV actors are available at the time. And Dane Cook.

I think it was last year they had Rachel Bilson presenting an award (because she's a big name in the gaming community), and she was actually visibly embarrassed to be on the stage.

Wingman can't be a real human being. He has to be some kind of Frankenstein-monster cobbled together by marketing executives in Activision's secret underwater headquarters.

Then again, this is from the same group who hates CoD because apparently, hating successful things is kewl and the epitome of independence.

What group? Don't group me in with some group. Everyone hates the Spike VGAs. You are literally the only person I've ever seen defend it.

Old School wrote:

So it's okay to spread your opinion on something for everybody and shoot down anyone else's who sees differently from you?
Okay. Stay classy.

As Moose said, you're in the vast minority, that is to say it's pretty much only you, when it comes to liking the Spike VGAs. Are you really going to criticise me for saying "Please stop trying to project your opinion onto everyone else."? Just so you know when I typed that I made a point of translating something you said yourself earlier in the thread into English.

Quote :

Please stop trying to speak your opinion on something for everybody.

Quote :

And killstreaks benefits any players who are using them, even the losing ones.
They are a reason why a team may somehow comeback and win a game.

This would be true if the losing team actually had a chance killstreaks while being bombarded with air strikes and the like.

Count Snoopula wrote:

Zero wrote:

But I have a legitimate question. If they make another CoD game, what should they change about it? The FPS genre doesn't exactly give too many options like many of the other genres. They already have a demographic set up and they're doing well with it. So what should they do to not make it a re-skin?

They should just not make another game.

If they want to make more maps (which is the most significant change between iterations of the series) they should just keep releasing map packs for the same game. This is a tried and true strategy and has kept various FPS games alive for upwards of 7 years.

There's really no benefit in the current CoD business model to the consumer, I don't know why people support it.

I think they should just stick with MW3 and Black Ops/2 until the next gen consoles. I do think releasing a game every year is overkill. My main point is that it's really easy to hate on CoD but they're actually decent games that are fun.

Well I'm not saying the VGA's is the greatest thing ever but it IS the most popular videogame award show which is a fact. Opposed to you openly bashing on it with your opinion.

And the second part isn't always like that unless the losing team don't know what they're doing.

Old School wrote:

A_Nonny_Moose wrote:

Oh Christ, Wingman actually likes the Spike VGAs? Seriously? It's the lamest, lowest-common-denominator-pandering piece-of-shit award show around. They don't even bother to get actual industry figures to represent it, they just get whatever TV actors are available at the time. And Dane Cook.

I think it was last year they had Rachel Bilson presenting an award (because she's a big name in the gaming community), and she was actually visibly embarrassed to be on the stage.

Wingman can't be a real human being. He has to be some kind of Frankenstein-monster cobbled together by marketing executives in Activision's secret underwater headquarters.

Then again, this is from the same group who hates CoD because apparently, hating successful things is kewl and the epitome of independence.

He didnt even mention CoD, he's talking abt the awards. Learn to present an actual arguement like everyone else in the thread. Ignoring facts is ignorant. Ppl not liking wat u like does nt reduce a products quality. Now its a anti CoD group seemingly forgetting Zero was pro CoD and moose didnt mention it. If u honestly think we are that petty, dn't waste our time or yours. If u kp this up u will end up losing friends.

Superbuu3 wrote:

Old School wrote:

A_Nonny_Moose wrote:

Oh Christ, Wingman actually likes the Spike VGAs? Seriously? It's the lamest, lowest-common-denominator-pandering piece-of-shit award show around. They don't even bother to get actual industry figures to represent it, they just get whatever TV actors are available at the time. And Dane Cook.

I think it was last year they had Rachel Bilson presenting an award (because she's a big name in the gaming community), and she was actually visibly embarrassed to be on the stage.

Wingman can't be a real human being. He has to be some kind of Frankenstein-monster cobbled together by marketing executives in Activision's secret underwater headquarters.

Then again, this is from the same group who hates CoD because apparently, hating successful things is kewl and the epitome of independence.

He didnt even mention CoD, he's talking abt the awards. Learn to present an actual arguement like everyone else in the thread. Ignoring facts is ignorant. Ppl not liking wat u like does nt reduce a products quality. Now its a anti CoD group seemingly forgetting Zero was pro CoD and moose didnt mention it. If u honestly think we are that petty, dn't waste our time or yours. If u kp this up u will end up losing friends.

No duh he was talking about the award.
Learn2reading comprehend.

And of course no EVERYONE is anti-CoD.