Have people not realized yet how Call of Duty = A Slot Machine?

#1 Posted by SpudBug (633 posts) -

That's what I've learned from MW3 and now Black Ops 2. The previous games felt a little more strategic and like you had more control over your situation, but the newer games are trending towards this "slot machine" type addictiveness.

What I mean is that in a slot machine you have a very low chance on each attempt to get a big prize. In every match of call of duty, you have a very low chance of getting a big scorestreak or a big k/d ratio. The game is fully designed to be near-impossible to survive. Between the maps being designed to allow people to sneak up behind you, the completely and totally random netcode never knowing where the game is going to register your position or if it'll even care that you pulled the trigger on someone, and the scorestreaks killing you without any chance at reaction or defense.

Pulling the lever and getting Bar, 7 , Cherry is just like spawning and a hunter killer drone drops on you 3 seconds later. You had no chance. There was no skill involved. The same way when the game starts choosing to pick your shot over the other guy's shot to be the winner and kill someone and you start getting scorestreaks and send a helicopter over the map mowing the entire other team down. You just hit 7,7,7, and there still wasn't any skill involved, and it was the other guys who had no chance.

I think that with the unstable nature of internet connections and latency it was decided at some time that it was just simply better to inject a huge dose of random chance into the game because they have no way of knowing what's actually going on at each player's local machine most of the time in a match anyway. So the addictive nature of gambling and adding the random chance of success replaces what used to be the addictive nature of leveling up your character and getting new items. People will keep hitting those reels or going for another hand of cards because of the chance of getting a win. Call of Duty works the same way, and is so popular and addictive because of it.

Anyone else feel the same way? Maybe blackjack is the better comparison - there is an element of strategy, but it's not the deciding factor on if you win or lose. I feel like this was never the case in CoD4, WaW, and even MW2. The maps were designed to allow people to spawn and then enter the map. Since then the games have made maps smaller and smaller, and spawns closer and closer, all while adding more and more unstoppable overhead killstreaks that can see everything and kill people instantly.

#2 Posted by MikkaQ (10268 posts) -

Nope I don't feel like this at all. I played a lot of BLOPS 2 and I never got killstreaks and I still did quite well and had a great time. Also everything you list is claimed to be based on chance isn't so I don't really get where you're coming from. Maps designed for people to sneak up on you? Yeah, watch your back that's the whole point of playing these games.

#3 Posted by DarkShaper (1321 posts) -

I only get that feeling in the deathmach modes. I feel like my ability to play the game well has a significant impact on most of the modes I play. 

#4 Posted by redbliss (647 posts) -

I have stopped playing CoD online, but I know people who can get the big killstreaks every game.

#5 Posted by SpudBug (633 posts) -

I will say that I do love how this game focuses much more on objective gametypes like Kill Confirmed and Domination, and it hands out tons more points for people playing the objective. I love that.

#6 Posted by Demoskinos (14563 posts) -

Um...no. I'll give you that Call of Duty seems to be a game where you really benefit from having a good bit of momentum a.k.a when your hot your hot but it all boils down to skill and good decision making. Some times yeah latency can bite you on the ass but blaming all of your losses on that is just lame.

#7 Posted by Hunkulese (2648 posts) -
@SpudBug So basically you're bad at COD and don't want to admit it.
#8 Posted by SpudBug (633 posts) -

I'm not blaming all of my losses on it - I know i'm not a perfect player. But the game is designed so that no matter what, there is always a perk or a weapon or an attachment or an equipment or a scorestreak that you can run into that will leave you little chance to succeed. The latency issues and the way the game just flips a coin most of the time to figure out who did what first just makes it worse.

Team Fortress 2 is similar, but it also does a much better job of being a team focused game than Call of Duty. Nobody on this game plays as a team. Nobody gives a shit about anything except their own personal K/D ratio in pub matches.

Maybe if I played as a coordinated group I would feel better about the game.

#9 Posted by SpudBug (633 posts) -

@Hunkulese: I'm not terrible but I'm not great either. maybe like 1.3 or 1.5 K/D?

I can also partially blame this on playing a lot of the WiiU version lately. It's low player count makes for much crappier connections and matches. Maybe if i get back to the 360 version at least there will be a decent connection and where I aim and where I shoot might actually happen in a match.

#10 Posted by laserbolts (5311 posts) -

What a ridiculous comparison. If you are good most of the time you will get good scorestreaks. Not saying connection wont cause a death here and there though.

#11 Posted by Sjupp (1910 posts) -

Sorry, I came first 95% of the time.

#12 Posted by kmdrkul (3476 posts) -

I fuck shit up nearly every match all these recent Call of Duty iterations. So, no.

#13 Edited by falling_fast (2187 posts) -

irritatingly condescending thread title.

and yes, of course people realize that these games are dumb and not challenging. but sometimes you want to be able to sit down and play this kind of game. because it's fun every once in a while.

#14 Posted by Fearbeard (824 posts) -

While I set all my scorestreaks relatively low, I have a friend who consistently pulls in the big scorestreaks almost every single match. He's not luckier then me. He's better then me. Maybe it's better reflexes, maybe he just plays smarter, maybe both.

What it definitely isn't is a slot machine.

When I first started playing, my k/d ratio was around .8. Now it's up to around 1.3. I'm not getting luckier, I'm getting better. Yes, latency can sometimes cause problems and unfair advantages, but not enough to make a bad player good or a good player bad.

Online
#15 Posted by FirePrince (1763 posts) -

I agree. I have been playing CS:GO for some time now and it's almost shocking how fucking wild COD games feel now. There is no strategy. The spawning is beyond any logic or reason. Kill streaks fuck up everything. Map design is chaotic. Weapons lack any balance, same with perks. It's just bedlam, I swear. I can't believe there are COD tournaments, and that people play COD on a "pro" level.

#16 Posted by xaLieNxGrEyx (2605 posts) -

Sounds like you suck.

#17 Posted by Turbyne (98 posts) -

I don't knock anyone who plays it on a regular basis but if you think you're hot shit for being good at a console CoD game you're kidding your self.

But if you're good at the pc version of CoD2 that's cool yo.

COUNTER STRIKE IS PRETTY COOL TOO.

#18 Posted by PixelPrinny (1030 posts) -

I haven't played them, so I can't speak for myself, but my brother is amazing at them, sooo I'mma hafta disagree with you on the whole, "it's hard to survive / get killstreaks" thing. He wrecks people consistently; it's not just a stroke of luck, there's definitely skill involved.

#19 Posted by Napalm (9020 posts) -

I can understand a bit of your opinion, but I don't necessarily agree. That's why you hear, "wanna get paid? Move it!" every round. You have to constantly be moving and checking your six, three and nine (basically left, right and behind you). I do agree that some of the maps feel a little funnel-y in that they're funneling you down a pathway just to get shot to shit, but I think there is enough diversity that it rarely ever feels like the same every game. I personally play the objective games, and killstreaks aren't my goal - kills, the objective and leveling up my guns are the goal.

Black Ops II is built around speed and reaction times. That doesn't necessarily mean you always have to have the fastest gun to win, but you need to keep moving and repositioning the stay alive. Most people don't stay alive longer than two or three kills, anyway. Only the ridiculously skilled guys/girls are able to reach whatever their level three killstreak is.

#20 Posted by xMEGADETHxSLY (446 posts) -

After at least 500 hours of MW2 i am done with Call Of Duty. Ive absorbed all the Call of Duty i will ever need

#21 Posted by BillyTheKid (484 posts) -

I agree that a lot of it has to do with skill and a lot of it has to do with luck. That and sometimes the auto-aim is super generous and other times seems to be all but absent. Though I think get into stuff like kill confirmed and it has a bit more to do with skill.

#22 Posted by Vinny_Says (5687 posts) -

I don't think you quite understand the psychology of videogames. They are all designed with the "slot machine" system of conditioning.

#23 Posted by TheHBK (5463 posts) -

My god, he is right. That is why I still stop playing games like COD, anything with loot chests likes Skyrim, and most of all Arcade machines that just want my money! In general, Fuck video games.

#24 Posted by amir90 (2154 posts) -

You should play Search and Destroy more.

#25 Posted by OldManLight (828 posts) -

actually Call of Duty feels pretty consistent.

  1. The spawn system always sucks
  2. There are always several weapons that feel just a bit overpowered and become the most popular.
  3. A lot of the people in the community are irritating teenagers, loud mouth assholes, or people who struggle to keep up.
  4. For Blops and Blops II. Dick Emblems.
#26 Edited by spartanlolz92 (511 posts) -

I felt mw2 was horrible with its killstreaks, out of all of the cods I Played thats was by far the most BS in terms of balance.

they shouldve kept cod4 killstreaks and let you accesss a power weapon for a limited time. the maps were also far better in cod4 im looking at you overgrown :'( so many good memories

#27 Posted by skooks (85 posts) -

My fiancee consistently gets high scorestreaks and positive k/d ratios in Blops 2, whereas I am woefully average, bordering on poor. Do I feel that some element of luck is involved, that my fiancee is just luckier? No. She's simply better at the game than me. Maybe her reflexes are better, maybe her strategies are better, who knows. But I do know it doesn't have much to do with luck.

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.