no, see, here’s the difference. medkits and repair tools have been a part of the game series since it’s inception. they helped create BF’s identity.
but BF’s identity has long since been established. its an arcadey FPS with those gadgets serving as the basis of the class system. they also dont do anything to make it mil sim like anyways given how unrealistically they work, but hey.
as for suppression effects…people already RIGHTFULLY opposed the concept on the gorund that it was pushing the game towards mil sim conceits. unfortunately, DICE didnt listen to them. soyou, you’re right, people would argue against it for that reason if we didnt have them. but they also alreayd argues in that vein since the concept was introduced. Suppression is also not a part of BF’s base identity.
and as far as it’s executed, you cant use the mil sim argument, because its so unrealistic in it’s implementation that its a joke either way. but conceptually, there is nothing wrong with opposing it on philosophical grounds because the mil sim argument is about preserving the basic identity of the game. arguing for something on the basis of realism has no mention of the effects on gameplay. arguing against something in the effort to preserve the identity of the game as arcade implicitly suggests that the change would damage the identity of the game.
and every FPS “simulates” a battlefield. you can play with words all you want, it doesnt change that “mil sim” describes a very specific sub genre of shooter that isnt even closely related to Bf.
From call of duty black ops to what there is now, there is very little innovation. Each year’s new game is a reskin. There is new maps and new weapons/equipment. I’ve personally seen no innovation in 6 years. You can’t blame them because it sells.. why fix something that’s not broken. But I think everyone agrees no innovation.
Jump pack is new equipment that makes you jump higher.. This is not innovation. This is just simply jumping higher.
Call of duty is basically laser tag, a bunch of kids running around shooting each other while threatening to hook up with each other’s mom. So yeah, why wouldn’t it be a top seller? Until they innovate, this is what it will be
Completley changes the game? So now you can jump on the roof or through a window instead of just being able to use the stairs.
That is a fair assessment. I’m not getting paid to knock call of duty. I’m calling it what it is. No depth. It’s like checkers, instead of let’s say chess.
@Sir-xer21 You still haven’t described how sprint has a gameplay basis. To move through large maps faster is not a valid gameplay reason. If it was, then why sprint specifically? Why not just let players walk at what we now know as sprint speeds? Why not have two speeds of moving, one what we know as “walk” and one what we know as “sprint,” but not have different animations for moving?
And CoD honestly hasn’t innovated much at all. They only changed some things in AW and BO3 to try and cash in on popularity in arena-based shooters and things like Titanfall. But they did not retool the core game, hitboxes, player speeds, etc. around the new movement, and the games end up playing like complete garbage supreme. I honestly cannot take you seriously for defending CoD in any sense. The franchise is SO bad in every conceivable way.
And you still don’t understand that it has NOTHING to do with sprint as a feature in this game and WHY it’s a feature.
It’s a HYPOTHETICAL situation. You should look up the definition of that term.
He wasn’t arguing as to WHY sprint is in the game AS A WHOLE.
He was using a HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE to show two different reasoning as to why you shouldn’t be able to sprint INFINITELY in the game.
One reason was because he wanted the game to be slower - something not tied to the “realism” argument at all
The other reason was because in “REAL LIFE” you can’t infinitely sprint - implying that this game is and SHOULD be realistic - which it’s not, and shouldn’t ever be.
It has nothing to do with WHY sprinting is in this game at all, it’s an entirely hypothetical situation.
Arguing why sprinting shouldn’t be in this game at all has NOTHING to do with realism or the “Battlefield is realistic” fallacy of an argument.
This is all going completely over your head - I don’t even know why I’m trying to explain it.
Also, I play Black Ops 3 every single day and have owned literally ever CoD since the first one - and CoD has innovated (within their franchise) with every passing title.
What you’re suggesting is that EVERY single CoD title is EXACTLY the same. Or do you know the definition of “innovate” just as well as you know the definition of “hypothetical”?
Adding an advanced movement system including boost jumping and wall running IS innovation because it’s never been done in the franchise before, at least not in the way Black Ops 3 does it. Hell, look at the Specialist system - never been done before Black Ops 3 - that’s innovation. The move from the modern warfare setting to future warfare with Black Ops 2 - that was innovation - never was done before that within the CoD franchise.
“Innovation” is not a subjective term that means whatever you want it to mean.
Oh, please expound upon that. I’d love to know how you’ve come to the conclusion that I sound like an “awful” person because of text on the internet - most of which was explaining things to two people in this thread that can’t grasp a simple hypothetical example, and one of which acts like the concrete definition of a word he’s using is subject to change depending on what he personally thinks the word means.
Well I can’t be answering myself as to how I “sound” awful, because in my personal opinion NOTHING I said would equate me to being an “awful person”. I explained a simple hypothetical concept to two guys who had it flying straight over their heads and were trying to stem off of it by starting a pointless and unrelated argument about why sprinting is in the game, and explained to a guy, who says there has been “no innovation” in the CoD franchise, what the term “innovate” actually means.
You’ve literally explained nothing about your logic as to how I’m an “awful person” for anything I’ve said in this thread.
The guy’s hypothetical explanation went right over your head and you branched off in to an argument that was completely unrelated to it in all ways. I responded in a way that tried, in detail, to explain to you what he was talking about - and that nothing he spoke about pertained at all to why sprint, as a whole, is a feature included in BF4.
I also explained to a guy what the word “innovate” meant, because he was literally implying that the Call of Duty franchise has been EXACTLY the same the entire time it’s existed. Apparently he doesn’t know that “innovate” means to bring new ideas and make new changes to something that’s already established (the Call of Duty franchise, for instance).
Again, how does any of that equate me to being an awful person? Because so far you haven’t explained yourself at all. And now you’re claiming I have the logic of a 14 year old, when you’re the one that literally let an incredibly simple hypothetical explanation go right over your head - and started a completely unrelated debate about it. Unless, of course, you’re trolling (not saying you are) - in which case, who’s the 14 year old again?
Hostility? What hostility? I never threatened you or anything of the sort. Nor did I use any belligerent language or blatantly insult you. Or are you suggesting that I’m an awful person simply because I’m opposing your point of view, and you believe you’re objectively correct?
And they’re not accusations - Sir-Xer was trying to explain the exact same thing and that was also going right over your head. I’m assuming my explanation did as well.
Your logic is where in all this?
It’s up to you to interpret what I’m saying as “hostile”, I can’t change the way you think and comprehend what people say on the internet - but I’m telling you that you couldn’t be further from the truth. The only thing I’m accusing you of is misunderstanding a guy’s hypothetical example.
If that makes me an awful person in your eyes - that says more about you than I. It’s obviously not going to change, and you’re obviously never going to understand this guy’s example, so we may as well leave it at this.