Wirehead Studios

(CAUTION: Phoenix - You'll ignite like JATO Rockets)
In the past month, a troll that goes by the name of "IntelligentCODFanboy" spreads his idea of Call of Duty Supremacy, stating that CoD was the first FPS, that it utilizes the best graphics engine, that it's the only capable game to run at 60 FPS 1080P made by geniuses, and saying that it invented Deathmatch and CTF gamemodes. He also stated that the Xbox 360 is the most powerful rig available - that it's state of the art tech surpasses PC's and that PC gaming should be banished for crap graphics and it's poor selection of games, and that the mouse and keyboard are unrealistic and the clunkiest thing around.

Summary: He says the Call of Duty franchise makes the best video game ever every year.
Since ICODF posts tons of comments I'll just link his  Youtube Video. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuHqDeyjXc4&feature=plcp)

No Way! This is bullshit! I hate Call of Duty!!! By the way did you looked at the number of dislikes? Has 145 dislikes and 6 likes. Let's take a look at his video:
So if the games he showed have glitches, doesn't mean that CoD has glitches too? I mean, I hate when people claim something that isn't even true!
Do you want to know which is the BEST GAME EVER?
Yep, you guessed it right. But this is just my opinion so anyone can have different opinions but IMO the classic old games remain my favorites. Surely at my school every boy from my classroom loves CoD and other modern games, in fact they hate the old games. For GOD SAKE, what happened to the kids of today? Why is this happening? Why there aren't many old-games fans like me? Who else agrees?

This guy is whack! Everyone knows that Halo is the best FPS out there.  :omfg:

I reject your opinion and substitute my own, but it's a great FPS.
I HATE how says Call of Duty was the first FPS, an obvious troll.
 :rage:
~Va^^pyrA~: Yes, but he's actually a smart troll- to an extent.

I don't burst into flames over obvious trolls like this, especially on YouTube.  He has exactly one video (that one) and all his comments on other threads are just repeating what he says there.

I really don't even have anything against the original CoD as a game.  What I dislike is the effect the series has on shooters and gaming as a whole due to developers copying some of its mechanics.  I also dislike the player base that holds to the same sentiments as the idiot that posted that video.

As for multiplayer in MW3 and the CoD series in general... here's the definitive take on it.  GK-Deacon linked me to a video of a clanmate of his that plays MW3 with a gaming keyboard and mouse absolutely dominating using nothing but a knife, and apparently this is routine for this guy.  He's an old-school Quake player, and it shows in his movement and attacks.  I think that pretty much ends any discussion about multiplayer superiority.  We know which games require real skill, and which ones don't.  :ninja:

I tried BF3 multiplayer, And I probably never will play it again.

Say what you want about today's graphics but you can't say that the game play is even comparable to older games.

I'd love to see that video!
Hmm I guess everyone has there own fuse.

jesus this crap again. I tell these little shits at work all the time, unlike them i was at E3 in 2003 when call of duty made its debut, and alot of its features were really somthing impressive at the time. What is not impressive is that the game has not been changed since then, except to make it more dumbed down for the pathetic unemployed pothead that call themselves gamers today. Everything we true nerds love is taken from us when it becomes mainstream. God how i loathe young people, even when i was one.

While I was not present at E3, my feelings towards CoD are the same.
The first game was great for what it was.

What annoys me are console gamers that think all PC gamers are elitist snobs for being critical over the kind of games that are popular.  I don't mind playing games that are considered by others to be mediocre so long as I'm enjoying the game and didn't pay much for it, but I think PC gamers have every right to be more critical.  Consoles cost a few hundred dollars, but a high-end gaming PC with a multiple-monitor setup can cost into the thousands.  Anyone that serious about gaming has every right to be demanding.  What's upsetting to most PC gamers is that too many games try to be the same thing and there's little innovation going on, and it's consoles that are to blame.  Why?  Console gamers follow a formula of buying the same crap repackaged without anything really new or different.  It is making a few companies a lot of money, so other game companies see the following formula:

Step 1:  Copy what Company A is doing.
Step 2:  ???
Step 3:  Profit!

It's like expecting Fillet Mignon and being served stew meat while the chef whistles all the way to the bank with your cash.  Idiots like this troll embody the mentality of the people responsible for substandard games pretending to be AAA titles being the rule now.

Like what? I'm not being snide, I'm genuinely curious as to what you think.

I recall already being bored with the WWII setting by the time Call of Duty came out. It already felt generic byway of the exploitation Medal of Honor saw. The game looked alright, but failed to impressed in contrast of older games on the same engine (like RtCW, for an apples-to-apples comparison). I played through it, but the only thing I can remember nowadays is that there seemed to be a lot of particle effects and scripted events. The amount of scripted events were novel for the time, but outright killed all replayability due to set piece sequences that never changed at all.

The "shellshock" effect was neat and that was about all. :P

That was more than two minutes of my life.

People who explicity refer to themselves as "intelligent" rarely never are.

I hate the Internet. All it ever does is give gormless erections like this ijit a platform to get up people's noses.

And that GTA4 glitch is the single best thing about the game.

As for "best game ever made", well, there's only one possible answer to that :doom_thumb:

I never really understood this "fanboy" shizzle, i mean wtf i enjoy games! If its good it's all well if it's not then i simply won't play it :)

Reminds me of the Mac vs Linux vs Windows fanbois.. my god! Thought i still enjoy fanboys having their flamewars :)

I never understood why people use the penultimate step as question marks before the word "Profit". Seriously, I've seen it so many times. What means that? Sorry for being a noob but there are some things I can't understand!
Haha, good one! Not really but everyone has their own opinions, I mean that I enjoy classic old games, other guy enjoys modern games, someone else enjoys both, etc.
Now it depends on person. Not everyone can like a single game.

Underwear Gnomes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_%28South_Park%29)  :doom_thumb:

Underpants Gnomes Clip (http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/151040/the-underpants-business)

Thanks very much guys! All it was; was just a small joke from South Park! Now I get it. :slippy_thumb:

With an attitude like that, you deserve to be called an "elitist".  You are oversimplifying a complex issue and trying to propose an "us" versus "them" solution.

What sort of innovation do think is possible on PC and not on consoles as well?

The most common argument I see levied against consoles is that they are holding back technological progress.  But why is that?  Hardware manufacturers could produce newer and faster stuff if they wanted to.  So why don't they want to?  Perhaps it is because it is not in their best interest financially.  And why would that be?  Perhaps the majority of consumers are happy with the current level of technology.

Stemming from the innovation question, are you aware that all major platforms now feature digital distribution systems which enable small studios and independent developers to develop original IP with a smaller budget and therefore, less risk?

Believe it or not, Microsoft helped to pioneer that with their Xbox LIVE service.

As for "...buying the same crap repackaged without anything really new or different..."

Do you not see how the same argument could be applied to PC gaming?  How many Wolfenstein and DOOM clones were there?  How many companies jumped aboard the 3D bandwagon after Quake was released?  How many Diablo clones did we get from Blizzard's success?  You are using consoles as a scapegoat when your actual problem is with those who develop and support these kind of games.  And you know, I do think game developers should know better.  But consumers?  They just want to play what they want to play which is no different from you or I.

Last argument, not really in direct response to anything but a good summation of what I'm ultimately driving at here:

Do you enjoy using Steam to play your games?

Think about why that is.  Now think about why people are attracted to consoles.  Are the reasons not similar?

Actually, no... I don't enjoy Steam much at all. It is increasingly becoming an outright necessity however.

I think you misunderstood my complaint.  I said "console gamers that think all PC gamers are elitist snobs".  I did not mean to imply that all console gamers have this opinion.  I was referring to a very specific minority group within the console gaming crowd that I have had the misfortune of encountering on other message boards.  I can see how the wording might have not been entirely precise.   :surprise:

Right now on the PC there's multiple-screen gaming, as well as 3D gaming.  There's also the ability to mod games.  If any of this is going on in the console market I'm not aware of it, or at least, it's not been widely publicized.  Perhaps future generation consoles will have this ability, but at present this is something that is not on the radar.

I've not made that argument, nor would I.  Technological progress is occurring.  Most of it is in the mobile sector right now, but there's plenty of advancement still going on in the CPU, GPU, and in storage.  As for what makes people happy... I can only speak for myself.

Yes, though I believe digital distribution has more to do with reducing production overhead and skipping retail distribution channels, as well as acting as a form of DRM.

Wolfenstein and Doom were the pioneering games of the FPS genre.  Prior to that, first person shooters did not really exist.  It was uncharted territory.  We could nitpick similarities between games using similar engine tech, but that leaves out a critical piece of the picture, which is the hardware capabilities of the time.  Quake pushed the FPS genre into full 3D, yes, but it was only natural that a transition from sprite-based rendering to full polygonal rendering would take place at some point.  My issue is not with the technical aspects of how gaming has progressed, but what developers are doing, or rather, what they are not doing with the tech.

I don't see it as using consoles as a scapegoat so much as identifying why there's a general lack of interest on the part of developers to break from the current pattern of military shooters that copy mechanics from COD and HALO, and the problem of bad porting.  I am not saying all console games are bad, nor am I saying games designed for a console shouldn't be ported to the PC, and vice-versa.  What annoys me is when someone ports a game and does a crap job of it and doesn't allow the PC gamer to be able to fine-tune their experience.  The PC lets you have amazing control over how a game appears and performs, and with the variety of hardware available it's rather important to have more than just "Graphics: ON" and "Graphics:  OFF" options as one video rather smartly put it.  This has everything to do with understanding your market.  Games designed for the PC have been largely customizable and configurable for a long time now.  So... we're not supposed to expect this from games simply because that's not how it's done on consoles?  What ever happened to the customer being right?  If I paid good money to build a machine and pay good money for a game I damn well want it to be able to make it perform as best as possible.  If it's elitist to expect a certain level of quality for hard earned cash, well slap a label on me I guess, but I'm not really asking for anything more than what has already been done in the past.  It wasn't a problem then... I see the lack of control as a huge step backwards.

Actually... no.  I did not like Steam when it was first introduced, and I still do not like it.  I use it to play certain games simply because there is no other option.  Maybe I'm old fashioned this way, but I prefer to have a box, with a manual, and a disk on which I can install the game on whatever machine I want, whenever I want, as many times as I want, without having to have my computer talk over the internet to some other computer in order for the "privilege" to use what I already paid for.  Steam is monopolistic and monolithic.

That's a tough one for me.  Why are people attracted to consoles, other than cost?  There's just so much more you can do with a computer that I can't see why someone would prefer a console.  I'm not being snide here either.  Remember, I am not from this modern generation.  I saw the first video games, the first computers, the first home video games, and the first home computers.  Seeing how a modern PC can do so much I genuinely do not understand the prevalence of consoles at this time.  As you are, it seems, inclined to defend the console market for reasons you have not yet entirely expressed, perhaps you could help to enlighten me about this phenomenon? :doom_?:

No, I do not. I will admit that Steam is far better now than it was way back when it was first released.. but that's besides the point. The ONLY reason I use Steam to play games is because it allows for messages to be sent to friends and such. XFire does the same thing, but meh.. why use that when I have Steam?
I buy (some) games on Steam because it's quick and (, for the most part,) easy, and I fully admit to being lazy, BUT.. that doesn't mean I necessarily 'enjoy' it either. The only times I let it slide are when the product isn't available in stores.. but, sadly.. I predict there will be a future where no games at all are bought in stores.
Like Phoenix, I prefer having an actual product in-hand and a manual to read while the game installs.. ..one that isn't a .pdf that ties me to the computer during that process.

I might also add that I like having collectible swag that comes in a box, such as my Doom posters.  :doom_thumb:

Just buy an Ipad and read the .pfd on that while installing ;)

Let's not even get started on the locked down, media consuming fad that are tablets. :P

Whould an pad with chrome os feel better for you ~Va^^pyrA~ ;)

Ah okay, I apologize for the misunderstanding then.  I get kind of heated whenever elitism comes into play, especially when it's about something I care about deeply.


There's been some of each on consoles.

You have multiple-screen gaming through hand-held games interacting with their console counterparts.  I don't think there is any native support built in though.

Both the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 are capable of 3D gaming.  Sony has also developed a 3D television geared towards playing 3D games and watching 3D movies.  The PlayStation Store also has a section dedicated toward new 3D releases.

Unreal Tournament 3 for the PS3 supports mods.  Aside from that, you have games which feature level editors, custom gameplay rules, and the ability to download user-generated content.  You can create a first person shooter in Little Big Planet 2 for example.


True, there are a lot of evils associated with digital distribution.  I was just pointing out that there are more opportunities for innovation now than there have been in the past.


Okay, fair point.  I will say that a handful of game companies have done some pretty interesting stuff with the technology available to them.  I am Alive, Watch Dogs, flower, and Journey come to mind.


Oh boy, you just brought back a lot of bad memories...

First off, I absolutely agree with you.  Secondly, I tried my damnedest to avoid that with every single game I worked on and most of my efforts fell on deaf ears.  Lastly, let me try to provide some insight as to why that happens (without breaching my NDA).

Simply put, PC ports get the shaft because of poor planning and because there are no real standards the publisher has to adhere in order to release and sell the software for that platform. 

Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo all have a list of requirements a game must meet before they will license it for their platforms.  No license means no retailer will touch the game.  Development studios, for whatever reason, tend to ignore these requirements until it comes time for submission.  Unsurprisingly, most games fail their first submission.  One of two things happen at this point, the developer and / or publisher uses their clout to make the problem(s) disappear (extortion, essentially) or they take their lumps, punish those not responsible, and try again.  The only thing is, re-submitting costs money, a lot of money.  It also takes time if you're not on a name-by-name basis with the console manufacturer.  (This is probably why a lot of Xbox LIVE Arcade developers complain.)

So if console development is serious business, what about Windows development?  HA! 

Game for Windows, not to be confused with Games for Windows LIVE, is more or less just a branding.  There are requirements, publicly available in fact: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ee417691%28v=vs.85%29.aspx, but there is no submission process.  You self-certify.  Valve is also pretty lax on standards when it comes to Steam.  So given that it doesn't cost anything to submit a PC build, the focus tends to fall on the platforms that do.  There is also the "fix-it-later" mentality that comes with the ability to easily patch PC games.

And speaking of patches...

One thing I forgot to mention above is that you need to go through submission again whenever you develop a patch, extra content, or an additional SKU for a console game.  And of course, failing submission means having to shell out more money and / or grease some palms.  Said things are either free or very cheap to do on PC.


Okay from that perspective, I get what you're saying and I agree.


You're right.  The only reason I can provide is that games have become much more complex but that still comes off sounding like an excuse.  I really think the development model most companies use needs to change (and soon) or else the industry is going to crash (again).


Well, poo.  I was in reference to its ease of use but I guess I shouldn't have been vague.  And I can't really fault you for bringing DRM into the discussion either.  I share your sentiment about wanting to have something tangible and to actually "own" the software you paid for.  I doubt it will ever happen, but I would fully support a law that required companies to preserve digital goods and services indefinitely.  For instance, I think it's bullshit that I can't play Xbox games across Xbox LIVE anymore.  I purchased the service because it was advertised as being "always on".  What the spork am I paying for if not that?


Truthfully, I go where the games go.  It just happens that a lot of the games I'm interested in are being released for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 now. 

That said, given the choice between console or PC, I will usually opt for the console version of a game first because I know it will run on the hardware I have.  (In the past, it was also because I didn't need to install or patch the game.)  There are also aesthetic reasons why I prefer to play games on consoles.  Controllers feel more natural to me, I can sit on my couch, etc.

Also, in regards to being able to do more on a computer, that's not really a selling point to me.  I generally prefer my electronics to do one thing and do it well.  That's not to say that I don't and won't play games on PC though.  (I obviously played Generations Arena at some point. :p)

As overpriced as they are, they sure do have some nifty games on them and the screen-size helps.  I also can't help but think that all of my older relatives now know how to use a computer due to their smart phone and / or tablet PC.

P.S.: I do not own a tablet PC but I bought an iPod Touch just to play Wolfenstein RPG.  :slippy_thumb:

The only decent games I see on tablet are proxies of real life tabletop type of games. Boardgames and card games work great because there is a sort of tactile response to be expected that is at least partially delivered via touchscreen interfaces. Beyond that, I find gaming on the platform to be little more than an annoying and hindering gimmick... the same problem I have with all of the "motion" crap that has come out on consoles the past few years.

My bigger beef with tablets is that they're not particularly good for anything outside of consuming media. They largely represent a dangerous sentiment of lazy minds in my opinion. It seems that no one is encouraged to create and tinker with anything anymore. Not just in terms of video games, but the computers themselves. Heck, even your car practically requires a college degree to work on nowadays. Tablets appear as an extension of that in my eye. You're not going to edit videos, write novels, or use Photoshop on one, but you can hop onto an app store and watch movies and read books. It's all about consuming at the expense of creating. Never mind that the devices themselves are built to be completely disposable and quickly obsolescent.

Maybe I'm just too old? I see people today using things like Facebook, and all I see is a portal site. They do their searches through it, their instant messaging, their e-mail, the photo sharing, etc. I remember laughing at people like that not too long ago... the difference was that their service was called AOL. The internet as a whole has seemingly shrunken as corporations have taken notice. It seems as though no one is willing to venture past Google, YouTube, and Wikipedia anymore. Hardly anyone has a personal website today... even businesses seem to rely more and more of simply having a Facebook page. It's kind of sickening that creativity is being drained away... even if a lot of it was just dancing hamsters and photo galleries of cats. :(

But um... :offtopic:

Kain:  Thanks for that very detailed bit of into.  That's a huge part of the picture I've never seen before.  The certification process clears a hell of a lot up.  As for the misunderstanding... is OK.  Everyone knows I'm hot tempered an opinionated, and I figured I came off sounding as such when I did not mean to.  :smirk:

Now as for tablets... I'm kind of in agreement with ~Va^^pyrA~.  I certainly don't have a use for one.  I can understand stuff like the Kindle for people cramped on space that don't have room for real books, but I suppose I'm so accustomed to doing everything without the aid of electronics that I can't relate to tablets at all.  A tablet cannot help me fly, navigate, find food, avoid detection, or clean my nest, so what do I need it for?

Social networking, to me, is the most useless thing to ever come about.  It's one thing to instant message people when you're online and participating in something, like organizing a game, or discussing a project you're working on, but Failbook to me is just a way to indoctrinate the populace into willingly divulging all their personal details.  It's training people to voluntarily throw away their privacy rights.  Why worry about the government spying on you when you've already spied on yourself for the whole flocking world!  A way to keep in contact with your friends someone might say... sure, but texting, tweeting... seems awfully lazy.  Twitter is equally useless to me.  "I'm somewhere! I'm doing stuff!  Pay attention to the mundane details of my life!"  People used to actually CALL each other and SPEAK to each other about important things, not post text scraps about every little thing they're up to.  Technology can allow people to connect in ways they otherwise couldn't, yes, but it can also become a... dare I use an anthropomorphism... dehumanizing barrier between people.  Not only that, but people spending all their time tied up with social networking and as ~Va^^pyrA~ said, just consuming media... it makes people dumb and easily led.  So many people do not think anymore.  They're too busy being spectators at life.  It's sad, but it reminds me of Wall-E, where everyone's got computer screens (Google Vision?) in front of their faces and the one guy falls out of his chair and says, "We have a pool?"  All that time letting the machines run their lives and not seeing what's going on around them.  That's where society seems to be headed, at least in the short term.

Well we're really off-topic now, but oh well.  We don't get good discussions going very often.

Remember the good old days when the ones spending all of their time in front of a computer screen were the ones with NO friends? Now you're a geek if you're NOT on MyTwitFace :P

[RANT]
I see tablets Ipad/crome/windows whatever not as a tool which id replace my computer with or laptop, it's just perfect for reading stuff, digital books, movies, news whatever and it really does it job good. So why not use it? :)

If i want to play games i use my pc/xbox
If i want to see an film i use my dvd and blueray
If i want to read a book i...uhm read a book?

And regarding social networking  if you join an social community on the web you have to expect the personal information which you provide will be made avail to the public.
But for me i've got connected with old school mates, old friends which i havent talked to for a long time.
So id say not all is bad atleast there are something usefull with social networking.

However never to forget companies like facebook, google etc. wants to earn moneys like any other business and it can be of the expense of privacy for pinpoint advertisment and so on.

Privacy on the internet is long gone at the start the internet was a free place but it's not that anymore.
Nowdays we have business monitoring what you do, we have countries monitoring what you do.

It's sick we are getting fed with commercials which should make us buy more, everytime you watch tv you watch more commercial than actual content buy buy spork im getting so sick of it!

Welcome to the big brother society it's a sick world we are living in and i doubt it will get better!

[/RANT]

Full disclosure, as I have seen it mentioned a few times in relation to my comment.

 I do own one of Barnes & Nobles' old, first generation Nook eReaders. It's not a tablet though, as it is e-ink. It's very specific in its use, and does a great job of filling the role. I still have three large bookcases overflowing with books however. I still buy physical books, even. Nothing will ever trump the feeling and ease of use of an actual book. For me however, I greatly enjoy the idea of having hundred of titles at my fingertips while traveling.

I wasn't sold on the idea until I saw one at the store. It's amazing the effect that e-ink can pull off. It really is like reading a printed work. The newer models are even better. They're crisper and faster to refresh between pages. They have built-in reading lights for those of us who stay up past bedtime, reading beneath the covers.

To me, that is something that is perfect for reading. There is no way I would want to sit and read a novel on a tablet though. The battery life is terrible. The screen produces glares off of everything. The backlighting on the LCD strains the eye after awhile. Sure, it can be done... but I don't see it as being particularly well suited for the task. Perhaps that was my original point?

Side note: This conversation got off-topic by underwear gnomes, nice. :P

Step 1: Derail topic.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!

That'd be a good job. ^_^

Just reading some old posts ...

... and ages later, that linked video has 30,583 dislikes  :D

Eww 2012 J3E.

I actually like steam, i can buy good games for good prices and I don't have to worry about finding the disk and then the disk being destroyed by my kids when i do find it.

Two years later, and I can say that Steam has helped me stay connected to individuals I might not have contact with anymore otherwise.  It's still not my preferred method of playing games though.  I'm also kind of peeved over what they've done to Team Fortress 2, but if you want to read that rant check my profile's reviews.

I suppose I'm fortunate in that I don't tend to lose install disks?  Maybe not having to worry about nestlings has some advantages in that department.