PSIII
True Bro
Is a Contender
Posts: 275
|
Post by PSIII on Apr 29, 2016 21:12:34 GMT -5
Might as well have a separate thread from the Infinite Warfare one. As posted by another member: charlieintel.com/2016/04/29/clear-call-duty-infinite-warfare-poster-leaked/So what do you think? Separate release you can buy alone? Because only through Legacy is absurd. Ten maps on-disc though, so don't know if that indicates whether their cutting back other stuff or not adding much or if they're saving for small DLC add-ons. What the Hell am I saying. Those maps are probably going to be in BO3 Supply Drops.
|
|
|
Post by GodMars on Apr 29, 2016 21:44:47 GMT -5
We only need this thread. Who the Foxtrot cares about space CoD?
|
|
|
Post by hard1ine on Apr 29, 2016 21:52:07 GMT -5
If this is actually a remaster and not a port, will IW make some quality of life improvements like dedicated servers/host migration and better spawns?
Nothing gameplay related, that's a whole other thread, but some things that everyone can agree will make CoD4 better.
|
|
PSIII
True Bro
Is a Contender
Posts: 275
|
Post by PSIII on Apr 29, 2016 22:39:16 GMT -5
It's separate from the last gen versions, so new improved servers are a given. And we can only assume host migration will be added. No reason not to.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Apr 30, 2016 7:23:44 GMT -5
I assume this will actually be built on their modern version of the IW CoD engine and will have inherited behind the scenes stuff from Ghosts. It will be interesting to see exactly what they do with it, though. Will they keep the same simple killstreak formula or update it to the more modern pick your streaks thing that was started in MW2? I'm also concerned that the maps will get... modernized... which would probably destroy them since the modern CoD map design philosophy really kinda sucks. From what I heard, (I haven't really played CoD4) maps were mostly really good back then and I remember most of the maps being pretty decent in MW2.
It will be interesting to see how pure they decide to make it and what things they decide to modernize. Heck, will the redo the perks or do stopping power and Jug make a comeback? *shrug* Who knows...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 12:46:10 GMT -5
CoD 4 remastered?
swiggity swaggity im buying this call of duty
|
|
PSIII
True Bro
Is a Contender
Posts: 275
|
Post by PSIII on May 2, 2016 2:07:27 GMT -5
Before they release any more details about what the hell they're doing, I'll do a rundown of my picks for maps to keep and maps to drop. Leaving out the Variety maps obviously.
The keepers:
Ambush - Classic old school map with a decent balance of street level, rooftop, and a little underground combat. Kinda exposed to air support, but there are places to hide.
Backlot - An IW core map. Alongside stuff like Crash, Invasion, Strike, or Favela, it embodies the classic CoD map style. Lots of indoors, outdoors, and well placed vertical combat. Works on all game types.
Bog - While a long gone style of design, it plays well in CoD4. However, this is where the question of what they're gonna do with this version comes up in terms of content, as the general spawn points and lack of cover makes for lopsided matches. Throw in airstrikes and someone's getting smashed. Fun to attempt extended kill streaks near the middle though.
Countdown - Same situation as Bog. Like the map, but very centered around the chopper race metagame. Strong spawn trapping on larger team matches (but will those ever exist?).
Crash - Here it is. The definitive CoD map. The best CoD map period, after Toujane. My favorite in the game. Beats Backlot out in the positive traits, but adds the distinctive (and even iconic), downed chopper in the middle of the map, further strengthening the war-torn setting IW was so good at doing. The three story building is the other standout feature. Provides cover and cool vantage points. Fun to hunt guys within it. Rooftops around the map for sniping. Alleys for close range. Mid range everywhere as well. Classic spawn trapping moments (especially at the upper spawn) as well. Plenty of open space for air support and plenty of cover from it. Works in every damn game type, seriously.
District - Kinda expansive for 6v6, but a good alleyway-based map. Works better in TDM and S&D on team games. Excellent in FFA.
Downpour - In a way, much less prolific map in the game. I always liked it, though it's better on marches bigger than 6v6. S&D and some other objective games are good here. Watch out for sightlines though.
Overgrown - CoD4 as hell with the setting. Unlike Bloc, it's a sniper map that doesn't let them completely run the show. Works on all game types, but shines in S&D and Dom. Map knowledge puts you at a huge advantage, due to the four corners design, split by the dried river. Killstreaks are big here.
Strike - Large, but still works. Better than District with less blind corners and cramped spaces. Plenty of air and cover. Plenty of vantage points. Long range combat is the dominant style.
Vacant - Love this one. Especially in MW2. We'll see what they do in terms of kill streak rewards, but we all know the meta here. Indoors is trapped on big games. Outdoors is safer, except when air support is out. Older version of Terminal. TDM and FFA stands out.
The losers:
Bloc - An easy drop. God, 80% is sniping, 15% is worming about in on of the buildings, trying to be slick, and 5% is just dicking around deep in the spawn points waiting for stragglers or dodging the helicopters. I love sniping and sniping maps, but not when they dominate them. Think of this map or Blackbox (MW3). Overgrown or Wasteland does it right.
Crossfire - A controversial pick for sure. Yes, it's definitely the classic style. Yes, it's fun at times. But the action is quite imbalanced. The primary fighting point is on the left side from the bottom, just below the top spawn. Everywhere else is just straggler killing for the most part. It's at least fun to go for long streaks on the right side though.
Pipeline - This was the sixth drop, and I had to think about that one for a bit. I like it a lot, but it plays better on bigger games. There's a lot of cover, but the underground is a little unnecessary for 6v6. Then add the catwalks up above. Campers galore.
Shipment - If you think this is required, then slap yourself. Martyrdom and three grenades or tacticals? Sounds like fun. Don't worry, I like the map a lot, but this small map mentality where you have to vote for it has been poisoning the series for years. Leaving this out sticks it to you average sheep minds out there.
Showdown - Fun map, but restrictive. Lot's of grenade issues and it doesn't stand out on any type really except vanilla TDM.
Wet Work - FAGx3 of course. Spawn, move up and chuck um. Don't move forward and get an airstrike for the chopper. Breach the other side and spawns flip. Rinse and repeat. Always a douchebag sniping from the cabins at some point. Better to leave out obviously.
|
|
|
Post by illram on May 2, 2016 2:17:59 GMT -5
I remember many fun, utterly insane games of Sabotage on Crash on PC. I doubt they bring that game mode back, no one ever played it.
|
|
PSIII
True Bro
Is a Contender
Posts: 275
|
Post by PSIII on May 2, 2016 2:34:01 GMT -5
Loved Sabotage. Lasted forever a lot of times though. Too much of a deep IW core mode for console though. So much better on PC, where you know exactly what you're getting into for such endurance battles. They need to bring it back, just modified.
They also need to bring One Flag from out the ashes.
|
|
tiesieman
True Bro
mental lagger
Posts: 1,401
|
Post by tiesieman on May 2, 2016 2:50:44 GMT -5
10 maps for a remastered game is kind of dissappointing though, these maps better be visually improved significantly for that to be justifiable on their part
Otherwise hype, I'll get this just for reliving the nostalgia even if it turns out to be mediocre. Hard to believe it's been 9 years sice that release and me lurking here
|
|
|
Post by GodMars on May 2, 2016 5:56:30 GMT -5
10 maps for a remastered game is kind of dissappointing though, these maps better be visually improved significantly for that to be justifiable on their part Otherwise hype, I'll get this just for reliving the nostalgia even if it turns out to be mediocre. Hard to believe it's been 9 years sice that release and me lurking here Oh, you can pretty much count in there being more maps for more money down the road.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on May 2, 2016 14:10:30 GMT -5
I started playing during BO1, but have since gone back and played all of the prior releases through COD4. To respond to some of the things people have said in the other thread, I didn't have that mind-blowing experience when playing COD4 like those who played it new, but I certainly understand why they see it through those rose colored glasses. That said, I don't think they need to "modernize" the multiplayer with all of the bells and whistles that they've added to new games, because although their absence is noticeable, the gameplay experience stands on its own. In fact, I would prefer that they do not make changes to "modernize" it, because it would undoubtedly come with changes to monetize it, and they have of course stepped into an area that is detrimental to player experience in that regard.
Here's what I don't understand - what's the strategy behind this? Why this, and why now? First of all, what's the release date? Does it come out on 11/4 as well? It's concerning that they seem to feel the need to bundle this in with Infinite Warfare. All of the chatter right now is that it's space warfare and it's stupid, but honestly I don't think that's an issue - those are multiplayer players who say the same thing every year and then end up buying the game anyway, and the people that purchase for single player are still going to purchase. Extinction was great, and switching co-op to Zombies makes the game even more marketable.
Looking at the amount of money they have been making from the random rewards packages (which has been extremely profitable) and some of the extended post-launch support they have been doing, combined with how many players continued to play BO2 well after the release of Ghosts, you would expect them to continue post-launch support to they extent they can monetize it to closer to two years after launch. The COD4 remake seems to undermine the ability to properly monetize both BO3 and Infinite Warfare, and could fracture the playerbase in a way which makes it no longer the dominant FPS franchise. And if they release the same day? Everyone in the industry has learned by now not to release a big title the same day as COD comes out - why would they risk undermining themselves by doing the same thing?
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on May 2, 2016 15:46:40 GMT -5
CoD4 remaster looks to me like a bundled add on so it doesn't make much difference to them if they launch it the same day or not. In fact it avoids people whining that it's not available yet if they do. I will split the playerbase, which is already split by things like game modes and DLC packs, but then again a lot of other games get by on a tiny fraction of CoD's number of players so I don't think they'll worry too much about that.
It would seem like it would hurt the micro-transaction monetization, though. But there it's a trade off. It will hurt them in that a lot of players will only play the remaster and thus won't pay for supply drops or whatever in the new game. On the other hand including it will sell many more copies of the new game than it would sell alone. Basically, I think it's an experiment. They know a large part of the community is getting bored with the scifi stuff, but they aren't sure they can co back on advancements. I think they want to see what things in the old game still work well in the modern market and what things the community rejects.
Personally, I don't think the multiplayer will need a huge amount of modernizing. I for one think that if you do go and change the perks for example, that you will also wind up having to re-balance the weapons, and so forth. So you gotta be careful what you change. I don't think it should all be overhauled completely, just tweaked. But it would be good to at least adjust a couple of things and address a few things which were always a problem in the old game.
Again, you run the risk of feature creep if you get too ambitious with it. I do NOT want to see the old game completely modernized... That would just make it some reskinned version of Ghosts. We'll have to wait and see, though. If anything I hope they err on the side of minimal gameplay changes, but definitely modernize the under the hood kinda stuff.
On the other hand what if the remaster it-self is also an evil plot and they actually intend to sell us bits and pieces of MW2 and MW3 as add ons for it? mwahahaha!
|
|
bradman
True Bro
token old guy
Posts: 1,178
|
Post by bradman on May 2, 2016 17:36:38 GMT -5
I'm under the impression CoD4 is a download added to the deluxe edition of CoD Infinite. I also think the large majority of CoD players will actually ignore the remaster if it hews to the original in gameplay and options. Dudebros need arena-type movement and wild scorestreak rewards now. I think the remaster is an attempt at narrowcasting, and as an expensive add-on, will not cannibalize microtransaction $ for the main game.
|
|
Slick
True Bro
Taking the piss
Posts: 1,015
|
Post by Slick on May 2, 2016 17:41:20 GMT -5
The fact it is rumored to only have ten maps out of the original 16 excluding the 4 dlc maps is such a naked cash grab, Activision doesn't even have their skin anymore. Even still, I'll entertain the idea of actually getting it, but it is far less likely if it isn't sold standalone.
|
|
|
Post by imrlybord7 on May 2, 2016 17:49:00 GMT -5
Wet Work, Shipment and Showdown are easy maps to drop. Never playing any of them again has no negative impact on my utility. And the DLC maps were good, but none of them were favorites of mine. So for me this will be more like losing 3 maps than 10, which is a fairly insignificant downgrade. What I'm really worried about is if they'll change the game enough to make it reasonably balanced instead of having most perks and weapons be dogshit compared to a few incredible options.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on May 2, 2016 19:24:25 GMT -5
CoD4 remaster looks to me like a bundled add on so it doesn't make much difference to them if they launch it the same day or not. In fact it avoids people whining that it's not available yet if they do. I will split the playerbase, which is already split by things like game modes and DLC packs, but then again a lot of other games get by on a tiny fraction of CoD's number of players so I don't think they'll worry too much about that. It would seem like it would hurt the micro-transaction monetization, though. But there it's a trade off. It will hurt them in that a lot of players will only play the remaster and thus won't pay for supply drops or whatever in the new game. On the other hand including it will sell many more copies of the new game than it would sell alone. Basically, I think it's an experiment. They know a large part of the community is getting bored with the scifi stuff, but they aren't sure they can co back on advancements. I think they want to see what things in the old game still work well in the modern market and what things the community rejects. Personally, I don't think the multiplayer will need a huge amount of modernizing. I for one think that if you do go and change the perks for example, that you will also wind up having to re-balance the weapons, and so forth. So you gotta be careful what you change. I don't think it should all be overhauled completely, just tweaked. But it would be good to at least adjust a couple of things and address a few things which were always a problem in the old game. Again, you run the risk of feature creep if you get too ambitious with it. I do NOT want to see the old game completely modernized... That would just make it some reskinned version of Ghosts. We'll have to wait and see, though. If anything I hope they err on the side of minimal gameplay changes, but definitely modernize the under the hood kinda stuff. On the other hand what if the remaster it-self is also an evil plot and they actually intend to sell us bits and pieces of MW2 and MW3 as add ons for it? mwahahaha! The COD4 remaster is an asset worth a few hundred million dollars, and the revenue from the new COD will be over a billion before the DLC and supply drop money even starts. Kneecapping the COD4 revenue by bundling it with the new COD, while simultaneously risking a significant portion of the new COD's revenue stream seems like an incredibly risky experiment, particularly when the upside doesn't seem that big. I'm having trouble understanding why they would do it unless they expected the new COD to absolutely bomb otherwise. Yes, plenty of other franchises get by on a smaller playerbase. Nevertheless, part of COD's success has been how popular it is. Segmenting the playerbase will hurt the game in that regard, and make it easier to forgo for another game. Then you think about things like F2P, VR, other directions for the future of gaming - they are sitting on an incredible IP with a tremendous amount of assets. What does this say about how they'll be using them in the future? I haven't experienced VR - would waiting until VR is in more homes and dropping a remaster and VR version at the same time be a better move? Would using those assets for a COD Online style game in a few years make more sense? I just don't understand the strategy.
|
|
hebbnh
True Bro
Cacodemon expert
Posts: 2,688
|
Post by hebbnh on May 2, 2016 19:44:21 GMT -5
I just read that the remaster is a full digital download, but it's only available to those that buy the proper version of Infinite Warfare first, which is beyond fucking stupid. I probably would've dropped full release money on the remaster if it was available separately, and now instead I won't be spending any because I have zero interest in that Infinite Warfare nonsense and refuse to pay extra for it when all I want is CoD4 remastered. Thanks for nothing, Activision.
|
|
|
Post by imrlybord7 on May 2, 2016 21:13:32 GMT -5
$60 for IW, $80 for IW + MWR, $120 for IW + Pass + MWR.
|
|
|
Post by imrlybord7 on May 2, 2016 21:42:27 GMT -5
Canadian
|
|
|
Post by GodMars on May 2, 2016 22:19:29 GMT -5
$80 to play MW remaster? Pass. This franchise can eat a bag of dicks.
|
|
|
Post by UrbaneVirtuoso on May 3, 2016 1:03:52 GMT -5
You weren't expecting a catch?
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on May 3, 2016 2:07:12 GMT -5
the thing linked in the OP says that its $80 for the standard edition and $110 for the legacy edition with MWR I'm looking at the PS Store. $60 for IW, 1000 CoD points and a theme $80 for IW, MW,1000 CoD Points and a theme $100 for IW, MW, 1000 points, theme and a season pass Edit
|
|
|
Post by argyle antiques on May 3, 2016 3:08:02 GMT -5
I hope they leave cage match in the game (1 v 1) and shipment. They just need to fix the spawn killing spot from the middle cargo crate. I doubt they will put either in the game though.
|
|
|
Post by GodMars on May 3, 2016 9:59:59 GMT -5
You weren't expecting a catch? Seriously, fuck these people.
|
|
|
Post by Aphoristic on May 3, 2016 10:11:20 GMT -5
At least it's Raven doing the remaster and not IW.
|
|
Gamma
True Bro
Posts: 127
|
Post by Gamma on May 3, 2016 11:41:53 GMT -5
Do you really think they'll alter weapon/perk balance? I thought it unlikely; the changes might be purely cosmetic. Perhaps glitches like the M40 acog would be altered - if it actually was a glitch and not deliberate.
|
|
|
Post by illram on May 3, 2016 12:38:04 GMT -5
I share the concern about player counts between the Remaster and IW.
They should release remasters halfway through the "season", I.e. June or May or something. Although I guess that would suck up DLC purchases.
So is the new expectation for "success" that gamers spend >$100 annually on each "new" game? Yeah this sucks for us in a way but I kind of feel sorry for the dev teams contracted by Activision. This conveyer belt must be a slog. "Make us a kajillion bajillion dollars every year by selling the same game, but for more money, justified with bullshit no one wants or you're fired."
|
|
|
Post by illram on May 3, 2016 14:25:38 GMT -5
I feel like the in game currency/microtransaction trend is relatively new though. Since the expectation only continues year after year, I fully expect it to only get worse and put more and more of the good stuff behind Activision's in game currency as they continue to demand more and more profits per release.
|
|
eLantern
True Bro
"Oh, cruel fate, to be thusly boned! Ask not for whom the bone bones, it bones for thee!" - Bender
Posts: 10,761
|
Post by eLantern on May 3, 2016 14:53:58 GMT -5
Hmmm... I wonder what I might expect for IW if I bought the $80 version just for the MW(remastered) and then traded IW back-in or attempted to sell it? $50?
|
|