PDA

View Full Version : Video game rants: Call of Duty: World at War Map Pack



Glassclaw
05-07-2009, 06:08 PM
I'm gonna try to do something a bit different. I am a very avid video game player, and always have been since I was a kid. So there's some things in video games that annoy me like pet peeves more than anything else. So I'll rant about some things and see if people agree.

I'll start with a game I kinda hate, at least playing online; Call of Duty: World at War. The multiplayer part of it online (I'm a very competitive person, which is why I love PvP in WoW) is very lacking compared to Call of Duty 4, especially Free for All...but that's not what I'm getting into.

Instead, I'm talking about this; trying to force people to download a map pack that costs money.

The game has a map pack of three or four maps that costs approximately $10, which is 800 Microsoft Points. 10 dollars for a few extra maps? No thanks.

However, here's where it gets sneaky...and greedy.

In Call of Duty 4, it had a map pack that you could buy as well. However, if you don't have the map pack, the game won't put the new maps in the playlist rotation. Meaning, simply, you won't play the new maps, and you won't have any issues.

World at War? It puts all the new maps in ALL of the playlists, while having a separate playlist for people who have the map pack. If you don't happen to have the maps when they pop up in the rotation, the game will kick you out of the game room, and CONVENIENTLY pop up a window where you can download the map pack.

Call of Duty 4 didn't try to shove map packs down people's throats. Why does World at War? Treyarch is a lame company, is why.

The only way to avoid getting kicked because you don't have the map pack is to veto the map...and even then, that's no guarantee, because it could bring up another new map in the rotation, and you will be kicked out of the game, or forced to leave. Very annoying when you find a group of people you enjoy playing with while doing Free for All.

They COULD of fixed it so that it doesn't try to force you to download the map pack to avoid this inconvenience...however, that would cut into their money! Treyarch can't have that!

"Then why don't you just play CoD4 instead of WaW, Glass?" Because I've played CoD4 back and forth, and I'm just kinda bored with it at the moment, Saving up my energy for Modern Warfare 2. However, this is absolutely no replacement.

The World at War community already seems very aggressive and angry, and this seems to only fuel it. It's an annoyance that they could fix, but, as I said, they won't. They want to try to force people to download the map pack so they make money.

Go to hell, Treyarch. ;/

I might make additional rants from time to time if this gets a good feedback. I'm not sure how many of you play console games and such...I haven't met that many who do in WoW, but if you have any feedback, please, don't hesitate. =D

Swerto
05-07-2009, 07:11 PM
I will not be purchasing another Call of Duty game, my next WW2 game/shooter will be Wolfenstein.

I will play it religiously.

Raziel
05-07-2009, 07:19 PM
Play Team Fortress 2.
Problem Solved.

2fort for DAYS AND DAYS AND DAYS AND DAYS AND DAYS

Medduren
05-07-2009, 07:36 PM
They COULD of fixed it ...



^ Could've

Emmons
05-07-2009, 07:38 PM
Console FPSes are the shittiest games, but seem to have the most rabid fanbase.

I still think it's hilarious that you can become unstoppable in the PC Live games by plugging in the Xbox controller and using the mouse. The game turns on the console auto-aim because it senses the Xbox controller, but since you're using a mouse, you have the more precise aiming.

Glassclaw
05-07-2009, 08:10 PM
I will not be purchasing another Call of Duty game, my next WW2 game/shooter will be Wolfenstein.

I will play it religiously.

I hate WW2 games now. Too overdone.

That's why I'm excited for Modern Warfare 2.


Play Team Fortress 2.
Problem Solved.

2fort for DAYS AND DAYS AND DAYS AND DAYS AND DAYS

Tried playing Team Fortress, one I got kept freezing on my PC, wasn't able to play it.

I was sad.


^ Could've

Can be typed either way. Pointless post is pointless.


Console FPSes are the shittiest games, but seem to have the most rabid fanbase.

I still think it's hilarious that you can become unstoppable in the PC Live games by plugging in the Xbox controller and using the mouse. The game turns on the console auto-aim because it senses the Xbox controller, but since you're using a mouse, you have the more precise aiming.

This, I strongly agree with. Console FPS games really aren't that bad per se, but PC ones usually blow them out of the water. And wow, you can do that with Live games on PC? That's kinda bad, imo. =p

I frequently visit a LAN center, and contribute to it as well. If you tell someone that you think some console FPS is a bad game, you'll get a counter rant for fanboyism reasons.

Xiphus
05-07-2009, 11:29 PM
I never quite got into the idea of using a controller for a FPS. The Keyboard and Mouse offers swifter response and greater precision.

Karkarov
05-07-2009, 11:52 PM
CoD has always historically been better on PC, I would never even think about playing it online on the 360 however I have seen some friends do it and .... lets just say the interface for it and the player base in general didnt impress.

Either way WaW isnt that good, for some reason it would never run on my pc but when I did get to play it the feel just wasnt there. I cant put my finger on it other than to say that CoD 4 was more enjoyable and definately plays better online. Also Treyarch was not the makers of CoD4 that was Activision.

Medduren
05-08-2009, 12:35 AM
Can be typed either way. Pointless post is pointless.



http://grammartips.homestead.com/couldof.html

You don't need to meme me, I'm just trying to help. You did ask for feedback, after all.

Turth
05-08-2009, 11:03 AM
I'll start with a game I kinda hate, at least playing online; Call of Duty: World at War. The multiplayer part of it online (I'm a very competitive person, which is why I love PvP in WoW) is very lacking compared to Call of Duty 4,



lol wut?
COD has always been a very competitive line of games compared to their competition, trust me if the game came out then I played it.
CODWaW can't really compare to COD4 because of the huge leap in... everything CoD4 was to the rest of the genre
CODWaW seems more like a WW2 mod for COD4, but it is still extremely competive.
Go join a clan and play in some scrims. I assume you are speaking from a console standpoint?...which I know nothing about..I play it on computer(tried it on my friends console a few times though... I also played it on the Wii..what a joke). It can get really intense.

Game companies have been trying to squeeze money out of the consumers for ages..since we all play WoW here..I think we can agree on that point.
I do agree the way they make you buy the maps is a bit wonky and horribly thought out.

COD4 does get pretty boring... I got bored of CODWaW before COD4 oddly enough. But I always go back to either when I am getting my ass handed to me in WoW, so I can feel that rush of ownage for a while...and vice verse lol.

I wish the COD franchise went the way of more future combat instead of Modern Warfare...2. But also I hope they don't churn out a gimmick happy game like Battlfield 2142, which is easy to do if you turn to future combat.

Glassclaw
05-08-2009, 02:50 PM
There's a lot of reasons why I think WaW is really inferior to CoD4, but...I'll leave that for another time.

Just a bit of an add-on to my previous complaint. Was playing some Free-for-All (favorite game type just so I can talk to other people), and then the rotation went to Station, one of the maps in the map pack. I think we vetoed the other map, but it went to Station...so most of us leave.

Now the game won't let me join another Free-for-All game, and keeps forcing me to join the same one.

Somewhat annoyed. ;/

Turth
05-08-2009, 03:15 PM
I might make additional rants from time to time if this gets a good feedback. =D

Well keep ranting about games, I love debating about em.

I still think the one thing that could've made WaW better than COD4 is porting over Captain Price and his fab mustache.

Karkarov
05-08-2009, 06:15 PM
Well from the single player campaign I will say this. WaW felt that it had already been done from the first second I started. Just didnt grab you and the WW 2 thing has been done to death. Also it was very cheap at points. I remember times throwing a nade to clear a bunker hearing screams only to turn the corner and 3 banzai's were two inches from my face only on the replay I throw the nade hear the screams and the banzais are..... gone? No bodies just never there....

CoD4 on the other hand never felt cheap though it was challenging enough. The story also played up to many different parts of the gameplay and was very well paced. Not to mention many scenes literally gave you a rush that you just never got in WaW.

Multiplayer... WaW just isnt that fun to me and the weapons feel more ... imbalanced than they did in CoD4. Also having to unlock hardcore mode? Why normal mode online sucks. Also there is the way they are handling map packs in a much more in your face cram it down your throat way.

Resinous
05-08-2009, 06:37 PM
EA has done a good job with free map packs for Battlefield bad company. Although that game ruined other fps games for me because of the destructible terrain. I mean if I detonate some c4 on the wall of a house and it just leaves some little burn mark on it instead of blowing it down, I'm not pleased. I haven't played world at war though so I dunno if they have that or not.

Glassclaw
05-08-2009, 07:37 PM
Well, quick mini-rant on the WaW campaign.

I WILL NEVER BEAT IT ON VETERAN BECAUSE IT IS NOT WORTH THE LOSS OF BRAIN CELLS TO GET THROUGH "DOWNFALL".

It is the epitome of broken BS in video games.

That is all.