Carmack Rages Over Devs' “Snooty Attitude” Toward Call of Duty, Other Modern Shooters

36

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

bingojubes

i think that a good length for an FPS is maybe 10 hours. making a game that lasts 4-5 doesn't quite cut it for me. With the Call o' Duty franchise, the plots are sub-par, and focus more on visuals than making some sort of connection to the game. i'd rather feel connected to my game as i play, because it makes it more fun.

 

i think with a longer game length, they could flesh out some plot holes and let us take in more story and plot, which is not as common anymore.

avatar

Ghok

When I first played Bioshock I really enjoyed it, thought it was a fun game, and played it to the end.

When I first played System Shock 2 (not really old enough for the first one) I was AMAZED. I played through it several times. It's one of my favourite games to this day.

While I enjoyed Bioshock, it was nothing new. It had some improvements over similar games I've played in the past, but it never could reach me the way System Shock 2 did.

That's kind of how I see it. Tried and true formulas are great... but it's the games that innovate that really please me. They're why I'm a gamer.

 

avatar

chipmunkofdoom2

Well, it's quite a startling admission when you think about it. This clown is admitting he's a complete sell out. He's admitting that so long as there is an audience for boring, repetitive crap, there's no incentive to innovate. And honestly, I can see why he would think that way. What's easier to get done, same-old that you know people will buy, or actually try to program some substance into a game? Definitely the same-old, no matter how OLD it is.

What this article fails to address though, is that just because this guy admits he's the whore of video gaming doesn't mean that his game is actually good. Yes, people buy it. Yes, people play it. That doesn't mean that it's not repetitive and boring. Sorry chump, you don't get creativity points by admitting you're a money loving whore. You actually have to create something of worth to be snobby and indignant when people call your product crap.

avatar

MightymacCHS

What a poorly written article. 

avatar

schneider1492

Second that, I had to keep going back and re reading because its harder to follow than Gordan's rant translated into German.

avatar

J.Durden

I luv the first couple COD's, but hate BOPS. The CoD 2 hacks drive me crazy & what really makes me mad is they promised no hacks!

avatar

MightymacCHS

Everything is susceptible to hacking. The sooner everyone realizes that there isn't a 100% hack proof system the better. I guarantee you they only said there would be no hacks so they could build confidence in the game therefore making more money.

 

avatar

Mastro Antonio

Yep, he's right. He's usually right about this kind of stuff. Call of Duty's just another Activtheif game that will pop out so many sequels and still produce the same damn thing over and over again. There is no new formula, fighting the same type of enemies, (Russian grudge huh?) and in my mind has achieved nothing like Doom or id's other games have. I look at my shelf today and still get excited to play some Quake or Doom and I'm really not sure why. Maybe because it's the monsters and the wicked guns and places that you'll never see before and well we see that again in hit game Bioshock too.

I boycott Call of Duty games now, ever since I got Black Ops and learned that they are just going to pump map packs with no quality out at me now like MW2. Which then I can't join server because I don't have the damn maps. I don't know what Call of Duty should do, go to another planet and maybe fight some aliens or something. Hell or just fight on another theater of war for jobe's sake and do something original. 

Now Battlefield 3 and it's series of games, that is a game that will show you the true meaning of warfare. It will hit you emotionally as explosions impact all around you and the player next to you is hit in the head by a sniper. Then in-game voice of your player yells to take cover and it's just intense. That's an experience you don't get in COD and so the kids think it's all about fun and games doing all the tricks. Battlefield Bad Company 2 was a grand Opera of this kind and Battlefield 3 will come to make a grand encore and instill that fear of combat in people once again.

avatar

bling581

"But we're creating value for people - that’s our job! It’s not to do something that nobody’s ever seen before. It’s to do something that people love so much they’re willing to give us money for."

Can't stop laughing.

avatar

D00dlavy

Frankly, id Software, as keen as I am on their engines and games, contributes the same sort of gaming experience to gamers regularly.

Doom.  Quake.  Wolfenstein.  Now, Rage.  It’s the same fucking shit.

id Software and Infinity Ward are long-lost brothers, so different yet so very much the same.  Infinity Ward is the slick, modernized one and id Software is the dark bastard brother who dresses in goth clothing.

Both are good.  Both developers put out what many people feel are quality titles.  Both developers are successful at what they do.  Both developers have pushed the medium forward.

And both are subject to the same criticism (creatively).  I think Call of Duty has generated more controversy and more revulsion because, quite frankly, a red-haired little troll has been throwing that party and gamers don’t like where’s he’s taking it.

avatar

Nimrod

you obviously havent actually SEEN raage or else theres no way in hell youed compare it to quake.

 

Q3 is over a decade old and is still played. A decade from now NO ONE will be playing or remember what CoD game came out this year.

avatar

Havokr505

This is my question to everyone here. imagine a world where call of Duty Modern Warfare 1 was release, but none after. would u be still playing that game if support and updates were kept up for that game? yes you would, so what the hell is the point to release another 4 identical games? its called a cash grab and every person buying these games is falling right into it.

saves yourselves some money and Play Proper FPS games that dont try and grab ur money. ex: Team Fortresse, Vavle made there money with it, so there now giving this game away for free.... 

avatar

Havok

I hate to pour jarate on your Valve parade, but the reason why TF2 is free isn't because it sold so many copies, but because of the microtransaction store, AKA the Mann-conomy. I love TF2, but to say tha Valve is making the game free out of the goodness of their heart is complete BS. You may not have purchased anything from the TF2 store, but millions of others are.

Instead of buying 'new' map packs, TF2 players buy hats. Myself included.

avatar

Wingzero_x

I don't have a problem with new, but it has to make sense to do so, and it has to work with what is already established. It doesn't take much to look back and see so many misteps in game development that either brought down, or nearly dropped down well established francises. Just look at Mortal Kombat?, and the last Splinter Cell IMHO was a slap in the face of all the games that came out before it, and FarCry 2...Uh, did I miss FarCry 1.5 or something.

   But in that regard there are games that innovate, but still carry on the established model. Dawn of War 2, was a great update to the Dawn of War series, as it brought new ways to play and updated graphics and story. Tom Clancy's Rainbow 6 series is another fine example. As is FEAR, as each episode brought us more and more into the story, and the grand pappy of this point is Half-Life, Half-Life 2 not only upped the graphics, and story, but they also innovated a new way of game development with the episodic format.

  Then there are those games that go even further, and these are normally the first games in their series like Crysis, FEAR, Riddick...

  So the point is we need both, and we will always have both. While some may say how they may not like a game these established games are what people buy. It's what those companies use to develop other titles, that are yet to find a following. You people admitting to stealing games, and trying to justify it by saying you didn't like it anyway, really need to think about that.

avatar

D00dlavy

You get points for your mention of Riddick.

avatar

Nyarlathotep

Agreed on FC2. I should have done more research before I bought it because it was nothing like the first one. I think the Battlefield series has done a good job innovating but still staying true to form over the years.

avatar

sojrner

“If they buy the next Call of Duty, it’s because they loved the last one and they want more of it,”

I agree in principal, but in practice most of these sequels have been less of "it." So gamers do want more of the first, but each iteration seems to hamstring the very thing that made it a success... or microtransaction it into obscurity. (like the new netflix changes, contemporary thinking is "less for more")

Now quake, doom, UT and others of the old-school variety have not done that in the past, instead giving more of what everyone wants that drove up what is now the reputation that id and epic currently trade on. (we can ignore the bigger Q regarding whether they are squandering that rep now or not...)

I think infinity had that kind of cred as well... not so sure they still have it though.

To actually answer your question about spawn-camping creativity vs different strokes... I think it's both. I also think that if they could release the sequel without giving less than the previous (see above) then filling both of those places is not a bad thing.

 

avatar

Xiongrey

I don't mind "tried and true." It adds refinement and polish. But don't expect me to buy every new release. I may wait 2, 3, or even 4 sequels before giving a franchise another shot. I love innovation. I am much more likely to gamble my money on a game that attempts to "change a genre." Sometimes you get burned, but sometimes you get a truely unique experience that you may have missed out on otherwise.

avatar

AnglicDemon00

After reading various comments, I am starting to see that the statement "So, what's your take? Are Call of Duty and 'splodey shooters of its ilk spawn camping creativity? Or is it just a matter of different strokes for different folks?" applies in its entirety. Each of us has our own person views on games and what we are willing to accept for those games. I my self am an adivid gamer and I play games from almost every genra but like other I my self sometimes like going back to the tired and true, but l also like new and challenging things to come around. As far as FPS goes even though the general concept of we have to kill you guy and vice versa. Each individual FPS does bring something new to the table and that is the key reason why each FPS title is never really the same as another this also applies to each iteration of any game but with sequals it is more so slight improvements that as us as gamers won't really take notice unless you beyond a die-hard gamer. 

avatar

Darkside

This might be stupid, but I honestly prefer a combination of "tried and true" and "the latest thing".  As in, I feel comfortable with seeing the same type of story that I can really lose myself in, but I want to see a unique way (or given multiple ways) of advancing the plot.  That's why I prefer ames like Crysis or Shattered Horizon: they're in the FPS genre, but they have their unique way of doing things that make them memorable.  As for CoD, there's really nothing wrong for doing the tried and true method.  But, CoD would be even better (at least for me, it would) if they introduced more mechanics or re-vamped them instead of just worrying about mkaing new map packs.

avatar

damicatz

John Carmack is a brilliant programmer but a lousy game designer.

"Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It's expected to be there, but it's not that important." - John Carmack

avatar

DDRDiesel

From my standpoint, I have no issue with them re-releasing a copy of the "Tried and true" games.  Call of Duty 4, and MW2 were both great.  Both Single Player and Multiplayer have their ups and downs (If I get hit with one more Akimbo shotgun or random grenade launcher, I quit).  What I would like is a more compelling story for campaign.  Something that has a bit more depth than jsut, "Oh, look!  Russians are attacking us!"  007 gave me enough of that as it is.  I don't mind the same scripts, but PLEASE get the bugfixes rolled out in a more timely manner!  Also, some better graphics wouldn't hurt, either :)

avatar

goku_dsv

let me ask all you tried-and-true haters. How upset would you be if you now had to hold the back button for w seconds press forward and punch to do a Hadouken? it would be crazy right? Ryu might as well get a spike-blonde look and an american flag tattoo. It just wouldn't fly. sometimes you have to stick with what works. Check and mate.

avatar

Peanut Fox

Your analogy is way too surface to work.  You're looking at such a small part of what that game is.  The game has changed a ton even though forward half circle punch will have a lot of the fighters new and old throwing a fireball.   

No all the fighters in general haven't had huge changes in their move set, but Street Fighter as a whole has evolved a ton since the original title.  They've added special meters, played with different ways to build them up, combos have been changed, a perry ability that was there and gone, now replaced with focus attacks.  The one Street Fighter to have the biggest change 3rd Strike (in it's character roster and move set) is easily one of if not the best incarnation of that game.  Guess what?  No Guile in that one either.

avatar

Wingzero_x

...and it's outta the ballpark!!

Hell just look at Splinter Cell Convultion er I mean Conviction. What's that old saying? "If it isn't broken, don't fix it."

avatar

Nimrod

And btw we should REALLY be honest here. Carmack is a great guy. But he MAKES MONEY from CoD as well. He stands to gain something.

avatar

headkase

Um, Call of Duty as a franchise is: Infinity Ward/Activision. Rage/Quake/Doom is id Software which is now owned by Zenimax. Carmack doesn't make money from Call of Duty, he doesn't. The two publishers/owners share some common intermediary developers but those are like contract one-off's and smaller niches between what are very separate companies. It appears you are commingling here.

avatar

alex911

It is an ID Tech based game engine that has been modified.

avatar

Nimrod

I think its great to have something tried and tru to come back to. The problem for is that the new CoD games are tried and FAILED.

 

The SP aspect of CoD has been shit in my opnion since the franchise launched. Now when you kill enemies in single player they just keep repsawning in the same place over and over again. Fuck that theres no god damn point.

 

I pirated the last one they made. Never bothered to play it past about 10min or so. GLAD i didnt buy it cause i wouldnt have been able to return it.

 

This game sucks ass. And with every game they release it gets said more and more what a crap rerun it is. Their using THE EXACT SAME GOD DAMN scripts and sceens from CoD2 STILL. They were gay back then, they are gay now.

 

CoD is now the Wallmart of the gaming world.

avatar

Wingzero_x

So you stole the game and you complain about it? Seriously, how do you even know whether you got a good version of it or not? Hell you could have gotten some type of test platform, a virus or even something else entirely.

But seriously admitting it?! You do realize MAXPC has your IP address, and if one of those law firms ever wanted to they could subpoena that information.

avatar

D00dlavy

I've been watching your posts here and I just wanted to find out where you get your drugs.

Or how old you are.

avatar

ymichaelx

The difference between games of the tried and true, people love it, so lets give them more varity and the games of the its never been done before, let's try something different varity is the difference between console and PC gaming in my opinion.

The console player wants to be able to pick up a game and almost know how to play it instictively because they have played that type of game before. While PC gamers want those new features or new ways of doing things for the challenge that it represents.

Creating games that are tried and true is good for business, until someone comes up with something new that everyone jumps to. That is the cycle of game development today. So as gamers, we should just enjoy the fact that no matter what type of gamer you are, console or PC, you can have your fill of the tried and true and soon or later there will be something new as well.

avatar

XoRn

I'm with Carmack 100%. It's nice to have something tried and true to look forward too. Just because a game doesn't deliver earth shattering originality doesn't mean it's a terrible game. The COD series has a great formal and they've continued to tweak and update it into a better game every time.

Also Rage is a far cry from being comfort food just because it takes place post apocalypse and has guns.

avatar

headkase

It is a valid point.  Look back at the History of Video Games.  There have been two significant "crashes."  The 1983 one is the one I'd like to focus on more: that one was brought about by poor-quality software.  I don't believe such a crash just in video games could happen today unless it was part of a wider economic crash just because the market is so diverse now compared to then.  But, in segments within the video game market: yeah, Carmack is right, if everyone just gets "sick of it" then that segment will crash.  And until then it's just business serving what customers are buying.  Simple as that I guess.

 

avatar

Nickompoop

Liking quality is not being snooty.

Duke Nukem Forever sucks.  Whoops, I can't say that, I sound like an elitest.

avatar

Holly Golightly

The problem is, a super majority of these games have some sort of war taking place. It is annoying. I believe it all started with Halo. After the first one, it seems First Person Shooters have been coming out left and right, leaving very little room for innovation. So when I see games like Call of Duty, which is supposedly to be the Mac Daddy of all First Person shooters, I just get annoyed at the same damn thing, and look for other more artistic games. Sure, there was a time that First Person Shooters were innovative, but now it is all the same thing. You are the good guys, here to defend America. Smash all of the enemies, dude-bro! It is like these games are preparing players for World War III, which is unacceptable. I play a game to have fun, not get stressed the hell out. Since all of these games are pretty much similar, it is hard to see which game was the original WWIII simulator these days. Since Call of Duty happens to be the most popular game, competitors will looks like sloppy seconds, but me personally, I feel that it is more comfort food since a little competition can never go wrong. It is like what Mortal Kombat is to Street Fighter. You need that competition, and it feels that Call of Duty continues to go unchallenged, simply because of its popularity. Anyhow, Call of Duty gameplay is more linear than the competition I am sure. Maybe Id Software should release adventure games instead of competiting in a brain-dead genre.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.