Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[miauw62]

Imo, the airport level was pretty fun

[LoSboccacc]

Nah it's that Milgram thingy all over again. We already know and it is nothing new, why people keep beating this particular dead horse escapes me.

[Shadowlord]

and then it came out that you absolutely 100% didn't have to shoot anyone, and everyone just looked insane.

Call me crazy, but I'm pretty sure you have to shoot people to progress through the campaign in any Call of Duty game. But then, I have no idea what airport mission you're talking about and don't remember anything with civilian-shooting in an airport in any of the ones I played the campaign in.

[LoSboccacc]

Mw2 no russian mission.

You are an agent infiltrated in a terrorist cell dragged into a terror action in an airport and left to frame america.

The stupid part of all of it is that it works and nobody stop to ask who the oter five on the scene with you were, including the cell leader which enters with no face cover and is widely know to both countries involved

[Shadowlord]

Ah. One I've never played.

[Retropunch]

Nah it's that Milgram thingy all over again. We already know and it is nothing new, why people keep beating this particular dead horse escapes me.

The thing is, in Milgram's experiment there's a lot of persuasion used and its set up like an actual scientific environment - in this there isn't any actual persuasion. You just go in and start blasting because everyone else is and it seems like 'the thing to do'.

Similarly, the only thing you get out of playing a game is satisfaction and enjoyment - if you don't get those things out of it why keep playing? In Milgram's experiment they got money for doing it, and it wasn't necessarily supposed to be something they would enjoy.

I agree, it shouldn't be surprising, but the reaction to it, followed by a sort of silence once the critics realised they didn't have to actually shoot anyone to progress was pretty funny.
 

[Hanzoku]

The first point in the airport where you have to kill someone to advance is when the police and military start showing up, and then you're back to targets that can shoot back at you at least.

I think one of my favorite Call of Duty gimick missions was one of the finales where you storm a house in an up-armored bomb disposal suit with a minigun. It was silly but great fun to not have to give a crap about cover and just house down enemies with a storm of lead in a game where otherwise having proper cover was king.

[LoSboccacc]

and most hated moment was when defending that restaurant in the campaign from the invading chinese

[Jopax]

and then it came out that you absolutely 100% didn't have to shoot anyone, and everyone just looked insane.

Call me crazy, but I'm pretty sure you have to shoot people to progress through the campaign in any Call of Duty game. But then, I have no idea what airport mission you're talking about and don't remember anything with civilian-shooting in an airport in any of the ones I played the campaign in.

Fairly certain this was disproved for atleast some of the games, I think somebody beat certain mission/s in BlOps without actually firing unless forced to by QTE's.

[Radio Controlled]

My reaction to the airport mission was to repeatedly, and fruitlessly, try to shoot my 'allies' in the face.

Alas, they were invincible. But I sure did try!

[Retropunch]

My reaction to the airport mission was to repeatedly, and fruitlessly, try to shoot my 'allies' in the face.

Alas, they were invincible. But I sure did try!

That was one of the few times when I thought they could have really made something interesting with CoD. If they'd allowed you to change the whole last part of the game by shooting your 'allies' instead, it'd have been a really, really good story moment.

Even if it'd still played out the same, it'd have still added a lot to it.

[Graknorke]

PRESS 'F' TO PAY RESPECT

[Graknorke]

I saw something where it had 'PRESS F TO PAY MONEY', with the guy holding a wallet and a person sat at the end of the coffin grinning.

Either that's an obvious joke or you just ruined what could have been a pretty good mechanics callback.
It's not like I would have played the game anyway, but that still kind of hurts.

[Cthulhu]

I agree that the 'shocking moments' have become a bit trite now that they sort of arbitrarily add them in because they feel they have to.

I still think how absolutely crazy that airport scene was. Not because of the actual content, but because so many people just shot the civilians, and so many news anchors/media people said they played it and had to shoot people to progress and how hard it was for them and whatever - and then it came out that you absolutely 100% didn't have to shoot anyone, and everyone just looked insane.

Strangely nothing much was made of it - I imagine because everyone was too embarrassed that they just shot them without having too - but it's one hell of a social experiment.

I see it more as proving the games are shitty rollercoasters that mostly play themselves.

[Antioch]

I absolutely loved CoD 1,2 and 4 but I seriously lost interest when mw2 came out. It was when dedicated servers got thrown out and the sole innovation of each title was to introduce more gimmick perks and weapons to hide the fact that the actual game formula had become extremely stagnant.

I think a lot of the success CoD has had in the reason years comes from the fact that oddly enough there don't really seem to be a lot of actual high profile competition in the shooter sub-genre that CoD occupies. Most other shooter focus on either a sci-fi theme (halo, gears of war, titanfall) or on combined arms warfare (battlefield, Arma). I can't actually recall any really serious attempts to break into the market of arcade low time to kill shooters.