not to mention all the soldiers have some weird ass "tacticool" look to them. No regular soldiers to be seen anywhere, I hate how AAA developers have this "new take on ww2" it sucks balls
I remember saying this back at the halfway point of releases that I couldnt see COD being relevant much longer because they were just pushing out game after game after game and they were all the same, but come now 10 years later and they are still doing the same thing and people are still buying into it like gangbusters. I underestimated the casual gaming public and their need(?) for a consistent (redundant) experience. Hardcore gamers will stick around for a few releases and then dip out and maybe come back a few years later, but the general public fills the holes those people leave behind with their turnaround and keep those brands thriving. The only reason COD persists is because of the casual market and how insatiable they are for content, even if it is just the same thing reskinned year after year. A great example of this is sports games like FIFA or NFL games. Its basically the same game for like a 5 year cycle where they just change team rosters and jersey numbers and update stats, but little else changes. They may add in cosmetic purchases or something along those lines but the game is always the same and you have huge, HUGE groups of people heavily invested in this sort of thing. COD is the same but just for fans that are more geared toward FPS games instead of sports. I honestly dont get it, it just doesnt connect with me on that level in anyway and I havent played a COD game since MW2 on XBOX360, but just like sports games, there is a huge population of casual gamers who will support this sort of thing, and sadly, it wont go away. Until there is some huge sea change moment in gaming that changes the landscape in a way we cant even think possible at the moment happens, there will always be this sort of thing happening in COD and sports titles that churn out the same shit year after year.
After COD4 MW2, and COD5 World at war, they started a dramatical fall until basically becoming games for 9 year olds. And the developers do not seem to care, because of profits. The same happened the BF series after BF Bad company 2, being BF3 and BF4 still quite fun to play. BFV was the worst BF ever in many people's eyes (I am surprised you just recommended it). In parallel, we observed Horrorized the decline of the MOH saga after MOH 2010, after having produced several pieces of art "Airborne" included. But let's be honest, many of us are very happy that kiddies and hackers continue playing these infantile games, so they do not disturb the rest of us while we play the good games.
I feel like cod is in a weird state where they’ve become so big that they won’t take any sort of risks when it comes to changing their core gameplay. Previous attempts to reinvent themselves have been extremely controversial (I know Modern Warfare despite being extremely popular alienated a lot of veteran players and ended up bringing in a lot of Battlefield players because of its more “tactical” style of gameplay). Then again, they don’t really need to take risks, since they consistently make the highest selling game lists each year.
I don't think they need to "change", I think they need to add options. If you look at the "combat pacing" options, they facilitate 6v6, 14v14 and even 24v24 is listed there in the options. Also, new game modes like Demolition, Patrol, Control, and big map "Assault" were added to the game (similar to Sandstorm Push) .. I think they just have to keep it up. Cold War was a really sad release, few modes, few maps, etc .... If Vanguard ends up as a collection of all the modes and maps, plus some new stuff, then this might end up being a pretty good game. I had 0 interest in a WW2 game, but frankly, with how the guns work, this could as well be a modern day shooter. Maybe, just maybe the lack of thermal/NV sights will balance the game out in a positive way too. Just my 2c. I skipped everything between MW3 and MW 2019, and I hated Cold War with a passion ... initially it was fun for 1-2 months, then it got boring, repetitive and gave up on waiting for maps/modes.
@@denesk2794 IF you've played the Vanguard beta you've just played a WWII MW2019.5 RESKIN as a for.er cod guy who quit when BO2 was a thing and switched to BF3 and really haven't looked at COD until 2019 I liked it for what it was I came in at 6 months though so got very little outta the game and IMPO they made a good stride in improvement UT the BOCW came along and really stripped it back I think COD has created a very interesting situation for itself with WARZONE,Modern warfare,Black ops all of these are now very separate play styles and they're really are really dividing their own pkayer base the MW guys liked the mounting the BO guys want "traditional COD" Tht WZ guys ONLY play WZ and thing the rest of the game is trash, 3 studios all kinda talking and and working on the same different project each adding their own "spice" to the soup all I'd say is the made a mess of the whole kitchen
I noped out of this game a soon as they said there'd be no factions. No factions on a WW2 game... yikes. Hopefully HLL and the BF1942 content in battlefield portal will scratch that WW2 itch.
@@battlefieldexpert I enjoyed it and it certainly ended up in a much better state than it launched in. It's now at least more realistic than vanguard because it actually has separate opposing factions as well!
30 seconds playing the game... 25 seconds of fiddling with your headset trying to figure out whats wrong with it... 5 seconds realising... no it's actually the game.
I literally played two spawns and unintalled the beta on one x. Thankfully got a Halo infinite beta invite unitl BF2042 comes out. Also Insurgency Sandstorm is coming out and looks great.
To be fair MW2019 felt fresh and had great visuals and sound and awesome weapon feel… it just had really bad design that catered to campy players. Really frustrating game after a month or so…
It didn't cater to campers, shooters never do, it's their choice if they wanna play like a bitch, and COD seems to cop the most of them I guess so other shooters don't. You could easily play campy on any other shooter, it's just people have respect for themselves and others on other shooters.
@@MrZodiac011 No, MW 2019 definitely catered to campers in almost every aspect of it Really loud footsteps Doors Fast TTK Porous map design No permanent dead silence All of this caters to newer and camper players.
Not surprised at all. When I saw the cosmetics at just a glimpse, it was a complete pass from me once again. The recycling format has to go if Activision wants to get back up the ladder anytime soon. I feel that only die hard loyal fans to the series are the ones sticking around and even they are thinning out. Time will tell if Activision will wake up to it and smell the ashes.
I'd consider myself a die hard fan, but I skipped WWII, ended up with a free copy from Activision though, but the Beta's usually peak my interest and I buy the game and get scammed essentially. I skipped Cold War but got it with my 3080 so I figured I'd play it. I enjoyed the Vanguard Beta as it's like MW19... Well, I enjoyed the working parts of the Beta
I truly stop caring about Call of Duty® when I saw that they started to implement gameplay elements that didn’t really make sense in their games, like Wall running for example, they only added that feature because Titanfall made it popular…. Or most obviously, when they made a battle royale game, just to copy a dancing game… So now I feel like they’re copying World War II games just because that’s what’s popular on Steam, and the worst part is I feel like they already had good World War II games
Yep. But Call Of Duty has been stealing other developers good ideas since day 1. I'm going to do a MOH: Allied Assault vs Call Of Duty video on this channel soon.
Game developers should simply not be releasing sequels yearly. Spinoffs with completely different mechanics and ideas are alright. See with other products, such as phones, at least they improve on them yearly and are not meant for people to upgrade yearly. With games, often yearly releases are not improvements. I stopped buying sport games altogether because they somehow make them worse year by year, removing game modes and adding micro transactions.
all of these cod games look okay on a small youtube/twitch window, but when i play them it looks like ass, low res textures, washed out look, and super gpu intensive for average graphics, and they re-use so many assets and voice lines, the death animation is so trash, i wonder why the even show you dying/rag dolling
u guys are paying HOW MUCH for these games?!?!?!? vanguard is $60USD... so is BF... i know it's 1.4:1 (roughly) but that still doesn't add up... getting ripped off for a download!!!
Have played COD since the very first before it went multi player and my favourite, and still is, is WaW . I still have all of my earlier versions on Xbox, PC and PS but I stopped buying them at Infinite warfare. I just saw that as trying to compete with Halo. Didn't buy anymore until Modern Warfare as I was told it was OK, not good just OK and then I had a brain fart and bought Cold War. Unfortunately I also was introduced to Battlefield 3 about 1 year into its 2 year cycle and then have had all BF since then. I play Xbox and found the amount of time waiting to get into a game and then the lag and the preference towards PS was utter BS. I stopped playing CW about 3 months into its release and mainly played zombies with my mates but very rarely did we go through a session without someone getting kicked which shows the true quality of the COD franchise. Once they started to introduce old maps, like how many times do we have to play Nuketown FFS, I just gave up on this franchise and vowed and told my mates I will never buy another COD ever again. I have pre-ordered BF as a crappy BF is still way better than a good COD.
Crickey $100-$160. Tell em they are dreaming. COD has been rubbish for a while now. With next to no single player game play & you are right it just a cookie cutter game. Looks like they are just milking it dry. Thanks for sharing 👍🏻👍🏻🙃🙃
I was a Call of Duty fan until CoD3, when I discovered Operation Flashpoint. I've been thoroughly into those kinds of games ever since. CoD can eat my farts, I haven't bought any of their titles since probably 2006.
So far if you ask me it's better than 2017's COD WWII, and Cold War, but once the audio, server issues and visuals glitches are fixed it'll at least be enjoyable, but yeah $100 is too much for this, is should be $40, and the $160 ultimate edition is just fucked, you pay an extra $60 for like the 1000 COD Point pass which is $10 by itself, and some blueprints that are worthless. COD won't change every year, at least we got MW19, but it'll probably stay the same for a while. I play every COD, and a few i've gotten for free from promotions or GPU upgrades to avoid wasting money. I enjoy them, but they are always flawed and could be a lot better, but Activision just force the devs to make the next cashgrab instead of fixing the current game and making it what it should be.
Dang at least bloody Cold War felt a bit more inspiring than Vanguard. Tbh when you talking about wanting the series to get evolved, what exactly kind of thing you think should've been done? Are you talking about they should evolve the franchises based on it's core formula or completely re-invented it?
So I refunded cod vanguard and bought Farcry 6. cus I came across 3 hackers 3 game in row... Can't see anything while playing on red star map and gustava .
WW2 Shooter and no actual Axis enemies? Weird when shot by another player with the same character skin on, confusing as fek. Weird in Activision World War 2 had only allies killing each other.
Call of Duty has been irrelevant for a very long time now, the only people why buy the new CoD are the same people who bought the previous one. The only good thing about the franchise are the videos that come out afterwards and trash the game.
I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt... the devs have said they're taking steps to address it. I won't be playing it after this weekend though. I've had enough already.
@@BillyEatWorld Agree. To me COD’s micro PVP approach in this day and age feels like kindergarten compared to Battlefield’s all-out-warfare PhD multiplayer.
So ... I wanted to skip Vanguard, but then BF 2042 got delayed and I dropped $60 on this.... How I see COD today is this: if there are enough maps, and some new game modes, then it is worth getting the game, regardless of what era it is in. Cold War was not in this category. Bad maps, few modes, stupid movement. I see Vanguard as Modern Warfare with different guns. That's all. About content: this game is supposed to release with 16 maps. That can keep you entertained for quite a while. Also, there is 1 new mode already in the beta which I happen to enjoy a lot: Patrol is kind of like a Hardpoint, but it is moving. I think it is a pretty entertaining mode. If this releases with Hardpoint, Demolition, Patrol and maybe even Headquarters, then it is a collection of all the good things COD has to offer (to me). No intention defending Blizzard/Activision as I am sure this game will have some issues, but comparing this to Sandstorm....... Don't get me wrong, I play(ed) Sandstrorm a lot. No new game modes, 1 map every 3-4 months. Modded servers are completely empty. I mean let's see if the console release brings a bit more life into Sandstorm, but ... right now I think it is stale as hell. As for how Vanguard looks. I think it looks OK. And it is a beta. The thing is how it moves. I want to Like HLL and Ground Branch, and Squad ... and I understand that those games shouldn't move like COD or BF. But they frankly handle like @rse. I get it, it is tactical, and you shouldn't be able to jump up a 2.3m tall container. That's fine. But getting stuck in a bush, and not being able to cross a 50cm wall and moving like a sloth. I get it ... tactical ... I think there could be some balance between superman speeds vs a 60 year old carrying 80Kg sandbags...... like ... a fit soldier can climb over a 50cm wall and doesn't clip and get stuck in a bush :O .... so "tactical" .... Also, when I play AAA titles, then load up HLL and I get 5 FPS on the Stalingrad map ..... on a pc that pretty much plays everything in ULTRA, then I know I am in "tactical land" :) .... Just my 2c ... and again ... I wanted to skip this... but then ... $60 ... if it sucks it sucks .... I buy games for that much that don't give me more than 4-5 hours of entertainment ....
Love how the big selling points to this game like micro destruction are literally things battlefield has had as bare minimum staples for like the last 8 or so years..
@@GluttonousLmg not really relevant to my post.. and let’s be honest the skins in vanguard are gonna look just as bad. The guns already have terrible unrealistic attachments.
@@ToxicPancake88 not really unrealistic unlike other cods, I find it a great way to have more ways of a playstyle over the normal over used ones It's boring following everyone else like their your master seriously I use only LMGs in Most games that have them, also I use the Avto as well I never follow meta
I feel Vanguard has a lot of changes, 10 attachments = more play styles and advantages and disadvantages, better movement and better matches from what I had also that skin is for Cold War lol so misinformation there
Looked like u missed what the community was actually talking about when it comes to how to evolved the franchise. We want Activision to evolve COD based on it core formula, which is an arena fast-paced shooter. We don't want them to turn COD to another tactical-shooter to appear to the other FPS players. If they can't even value their hardcore players opinions then you think will they ever listen whatever the new players have to say?
@@OlderThanAverageGamer "I want a reskinned version of the exact same 3 lane, mindless garbage we've always has!!!" sounds like an direct insult to me and many people that like 3 lanes map philosophy. Just because it's 3 lanes doesn't mean it the same bloody map, there also asthetic and elevation changed aswell. It's not mindless in anyway whatsoever, just required different type of skill compared to tactical shooter. The community want COD to evolved on what makes COD great, which is an fast-paced arcadey FPS. Example if you're a big fan of the God of War franchise, what're you gonna thinks if one day the God of War sequel is gonna be the next Dark Souls in term of gameplay?
@@OlderThanAverageGamer No way in any chances I want this buggy game filled with absolute noobs-catered gameplay mechanics and SBMM. I just want to say that if COD gonna be evolved, it should been evolved on what makes COD great.
"Nothing ever changes....." did it really take you that long to realize Billy? Thanks for video to seal my deal on not buying yet another COD trash. Gave yah a thumbs up cuz i like you, not for the rubbish u made me watch to help u.
![Vanguard | Pay $160... get the laziest Call Of Duty game in years [Review]](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
