Can we all agree that the strike force missions are terrible?

#1 Edited by Hef (1110 posts) -

I'm glad they're trying something new but man are these guys not rts developers. I am a long time PC gamer and the controls for these missions are awkward and terrible. I get that consoles are the focus but they could have some so much with the PC version to make this mode actually playable. And you can't just stay in top down rts the mode the whole time which I tried because your allies are retarded and just get mowed down by the infinite respawning enemies.

I just finished the first one and very happily read that you can skip the rest.

Did anyone actually enjoy these missions?

#2 Edited by Witzig (327 posts) -

They are fucking terrible.

#3 Posted by Soap (3575 posts) -

They are pretty bad, and very difficult to control on the consoles as well.

The last one towards the end was so ridiculous, I think I was actually fighting 20-30 guys at the same time and they just constantly kept spawning in. Very annoying.

It doesn't help that your A.I buddies are so thick, I actually watched one die without even attempting to fight back or hide, he just stood there and took it. I guess he was fed up with life or something.

#4 Posted by living4theday258 (679 posts) -

take control of the crawler until it dies then grab a dude and go at it until the clock is over.

#5 Posted by Levius (1096 posts) -

Do the missions effect the branching story in any way? I think seeing a whole squad been smoked by one soldier broke me today, I think story is the only thing that would pull me through them.

Online
#6 Posted by BillyMethers (149 posts) -

Yes. they do affect the story. Some characters from the main story are in the strike force missions.

#7 Posted by Lord_Xp (602 posts) -

These missions should be done even though they are terrrible. They are linked directly to the story line and how your ending will come about. I did all of them and passed but I had to do them all by myself basically. It was terrible but I did what I had to do for it. If you don't do it then there will be a different ending for you.

#8 Posted by Napalm (9020 posts) -

What are the odds on these being patched to at least have functioning AI? I'm kinda waiting to play the story until they fix them in some capacity.

#9 Posted by laserbolts (5317 posts) -

I'm going to say there is a 0% chance they will patch it for the AI.

#10 Posted by buft (3315 posts) -

god awful, nothing works right and the computer controlled team mats don't fight back, which is infuriating especially since they are constantly standing back towards enemy shouting "engaging enemy"

#11 Posted by super_machine (1930 posts) -

Terrible! I have this glitch where it wont let me skip past the tutorial part, and when I finish the tutorial (I did it twice without major glitch) it says "objective complete" but never moves the game forward. Its fucking bullshit!

#12 Posted by SuicidalSnowman (396 posts) -

They are terrible, but if you played any of the Combat Training bot matches in the original Black Ops, you can beat them easily yourself.

But I agree, a huge, huge missed opportunity. It probably would work better if they just went whole hog with it and made your guys function like RTS units and gave up on the jump in/jump out stuff. Or, in the alternative, they should just let you pick loadouts for all your guys and play the entire thing in regular FPS fashion. Its really frustrating if you die and you can't find the right weapon on another soldier.

I do thinks its great how they tried to work the multiplayer side into the story, including the objective based gameplay on a closed map. The two have been moving further and further apart, this is a nice idea to help keep them connected.

#13 Posted by Zaccheus (1792 posts) -

YES

#14 Posted by RWBladewing (117 posts) -

These were all terrible but the last one in particular was a spectacular wtf moment. Headed towards the objective alone, managed to take down a bunch of enemies before getting killed...and then discovered that in the meantime every single allied soldier had somehow managed to die and there wasn't even one left on the map. It's entirely possible that the single red blip I saw heading towards my spawn along a different path killed them all. Sad.

I am really glad they allow you to take control of the VIP yourself in the escort mission because otherwise I doubt I'd have ever beaten that one.

#15 Posted by RazielCuts (2943 posts) -

This is what has put me off even going back to Blops 2, let alone the campaign. The past few games (MW2, Black Ops 1, MW3) I'd have the game day 1 and would spend all day finishing it in one session, then I'd move on to multiplayer. I really liked the campaign in Blops 1, the twists and turns with the story I thought was pretty interesting so was hyped for this. Starts off great, a few missions in, yeah cool. Then BAM pump on those breaks, son. Strike Force mission out of no where with a crappy tutorial and fumbling controls. These 'expiring' in campaign progress and being tied to the branching story to what ending you get I'm suffering some sort of analysis paralysis where I just don't want to play the game because I don't feel confident I can execute in what I want to do. I just have no urge to go back to the game at all because of this.

#16 Edited by Ulquiorra (64 posts) -

@Witzig said:

They are fucking terrible.

I concur it was a glitchy experience, I was escorting 4 vehicles at which point one of my A.G.R's proceeded to get lodged underneath one of the vehicles thus preventing any progression. I ended up shooting the shit out of the A.G.R then the mission progressed. Whatever, take away the strike force missions and it's still a decent campaign.

#17 Posted by Svenzon (718 posts) -

Yes, they are. Way too hard and the RTS elements do not work at all. I eventually just gave up on them. No ending is worth putting up with that crap.

#18 Posted by MarvinPontiac (111 posts) -

I played one and put the game down immediately. I like that it gives you a warning when you have to play another one, like they're aware of the fact that it's a chore. Tedious garbage.

#19 Posted by ssj4raditz (1125 posts) -

 I did them all, but wouldn't want to go through 'em again.

#20 Posted by Twisted_Scot (1175 posts) -

Yup.

#21 Posted by MikkaQ (10277 posts) -

I kinda really liked them. There wasn't any point to the strategy view though. You just tell all units to go to the target then possess whoever is best with dealing with the situation.

#22 Edited by Khaaaaaan (3 posts) -

I really don't like games where you have to control more than one character, if I was into those types of games I would have got a Tom Clancy game or an Operation Flashpoint type, but I got a FPS not to have that sort of mission. They are awful even if I was into that type of gaming and having Command and Conquer type controlling of movement would be great if it worked.

#23 Posted by Quarters (1664 posts) -

I enjoyed them, so...no?

Online
#24 Posted by vaportra1l (270 posts) -

Yes, playing on hardened and it was fucking awful. I'm tempted to just skip them and get the "worst" ending.

#25 Posted by ep_driver (441 posts) -

I truly appreciate the effort Treyarch put forth in doing something new, but while I wanted to enjoy these missions I found that broken AI made that difficult. I was glad to hear Jeff talk about it, because I thought I was just doing something wrong. When times got tough I ended up taking over one of my infantry on the ground and mowed baddies down as I sprinted to the objectives. So, I wouldn't say terrible, but they could have definitely used a bit more polish. Good thing the rest of the campaign is actually pretty rad!

#26 Posted by MiniPato (2727 posts) -

I only enjoyed the drone escort mission in afghanistan cause you could control a dragonfire thing. And you didn't have to tell them where to move.

Other than that, the missions were terrible. Your allies go down way too easily, even when in a strategically superior position. So you have no choice but to take control and just mow down enemies till the clock runs out on whatever it is you're supposed to hack or protect. Playing as the infantry is unsatisfying and not exciting because the missions lack the production values and set pieces of the campaign. I know the main draw is that strategic view and shit, so set pieces aren't a priority. But when that part of it doesn't work, all you're left with is a shitty multiplayer bot-match.

#27 Posted by Divina_Rex (351 posts) -

They absolutely and unequivocally atrocious! I'm playing my campaign on veteran and this is just impossible. The AI just sits there and if you take personal control you get lite up by 50 drones and men. WHAT THE HELL WERE THE DEVELOPERS THINKING?!

#28 Posted by Phatmac (5724 posts) -

Imagine that the game didn't have it. I'd prefer it over Halo 4's campaign, surprising I know. One thing people can't call them on is that they don't try anything new. I'm impressed by what Treyarach continues to do with the CoD franchise. Anyway, the missions suck. I wish they weren't there. it just doesn't belong in a COD game.

#29 Posted by Rasmoss (452 posts) -

I've just reached the first one, and it's putting me right off even continuing the campaign.

#30 Posted by murisan (1119 posts) -

The AI is seriously abysmal. I TOLD YOU TO GO TO A LOCATION, FUCKING GO.

#31 Posted by NapTimeSleeper (330 posts) -

I really didn't like them. I appreciate them trying something different but they just didn't work. They also broke the flow.

#32 Edited by Zidd (1841 posts) -

the last one is the worst. Its also the one thing they could have put on the gamepad on the wiiu but never actually bothered with.

#33 Posted by Rhaknar (5939 posts) -

heh funny thread, only because I just did (well failed) the first one of these and I thought to myself "that was horrible, surely Im not the only one that thinks that". Like everyone already said, way too many enemy units, your guys dont do shit, just a awful idea and execution all around, it actually completely put me off continuing the game, and I was actually enjoying it as I tend to enjoy the COD campagins. I guess Ill just continue the game (it asked me if I wanted to retry and I didnt, now I dont think I can retry again and Im not starting the game over) and get the bad ending, assuming Ill probably fail the others if they are even harder.

#34 Posted by MHumphreys89 (712 posts) -

@rhaknar said:

heh funny thread, only because I just did (well failed) the first one of these and I thought to myself "that was horrible, surely Im not the only one that thinks that". Like everyone already said, way too many enemy units, your guys dont do shit, just a awful idea and execution all around, it actually completely put me off continuing the game, and I was actually enjoying it as I tend to enjoy the COD campagins. I guess Ill just continue the game (it asked me if I wanted to retry and I didnt, now I dont think I can retry again and Im not starting the game over) and get the bad ending, assuming Ill probably fail the others if they are even harder.

You can complete these if you're quick-on-the-draw but as others have already pointed out, these missions do not function as intended, there is basic problems with your AI partners. It hasn't been patched and won't be at this point.

This isn't uncommon for Activision, they abandoned COD4's online multiplayer which degenerated into hack-fest.

P.S. They still sell new copies of COD4, the servers are still active and people, including myself, pay for X-Box Live to play the game online, this shouldn't be acceptable but hey, just buy the new game!

#35 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

I felt like it could've been a lot better if it was set aside as its own game. The ideas aren't the problem; the execution is.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.