Sledgehammer confirmed to be making 2014 CoD!

[Chopper]

Trayarch bit off WAY more then they could chew this year… Their maps were too big to iron out all the bugs in time for DLC. The new buildables feature makes things more tedious and the game starts to rely more on that (even though it shouldn't). With trayarch this panicked about everything the storyline dropped like that "du-du-duh" which trayarch should't have dropped… 

 

Next year, by which I mean next year and a half, trayarch has no excuse to iron out these misfortunes and bring us QUALITY maps, not QUANTITY maps. 

 

If they concentrate on the story more than the maps, they will win.  I don't even care about it, but I've heard a lot say that it doesn't make sense, or doesn't have the depth of BO1.

 

It seems to me that they had an idea of a map, and buildables and then forced the story around that.  If they concentrate on the story this time, they will be on the right path IMO.

[Stop Mocking Me0]

Exactly! 

 

Well the story and the requests of the forums… 

[DeathBringerZen]

It seems to me that they had an idea of a map, and buildables and then forced the story around that.  If they concentrate on the story this time, they will be on the right path IMO.

 

Agreed. Maps like Die Rise and Buried in particular seemed to be completely built around an idea for a map as opposed to be made to support a storyline. Being in China for Die Rise seemed to make absolutely no sense towards the story at all, and the garbage and irrelevant comments to come from Maxis and Richtofen did not help any. Buried may have had the rift present, but the whole concept of the map was terrible. Did not help that the map was also a tragic mess also.

 

I also feel Origins was built around an EE, but was still a decent map nonetheless. The bugs and glitches on it are completely unforgivable. I cannot tell you how many times I have been on round 50+ only for a Panzer to spawn in and glitch the game out completely. Death Barrier in the tank has ruined co-op games for me also.

[Stop Mocking Me0]

No no… The only map in BO2 built around a story, was Mob of the dead. The map that everyone loves, was a huge success, and had an ambiguous, yet very followable and entertaining storyline…  

 

Tranzit:Built around the idea of a giant map, build ables, and stupid EMP grenades… 

 

Die rise: Built around verticality and falling to one's death...

 

Buried: Built around… I don't even know… It's likely how it is, all scrunched up together, to help with the time bomb's effects. 

 

Origins: 100% built around the staffs, a horrible choice I should add, 90% of the map is based around either obtaining a staff, or upgrading a staff, a process that in every map before BO2 as simply: Get the WW out of the box, kill with it. The soul chests and tablets are the only things not focusing on the staffs…. 

[DeathBringerZen]

No no… The only map in BO2 built around a story, was Mob of the dead.

 

I actually pretty much agreed with that by claiming all other maps to be built around ideas as opposed to storyline. MotD was very non canon though. Sure there is some things that relate it to the main storyline, but it never proved any of those things... just hinted towards them.

 

Tranzit may have been built around an idea also, but the setting definitely resembled what you would expect the Earth to look like after the rockets hit, so it felt right, even if the map itself was poor. I only say poor though because of how they executed it. Lack of perks, wall weapons, wonder weapons and decent things to use within the map itself. All the buildables are terrible... even the Jetgun, though it can obviously be put to good use, it was still an awful idea.

 

I think MotD was a good map and looked the part too. Most other maps were completely devoid of proper though or attention. It is a shame looking back on it, but it is what it is. Any thought of micro transactions and additional DLC drops for BO2 is completely out of the question, so we have to hope that the next outing delivers or it could definitely spell the end for the game mode. That or several poor attempts at reboots that will strangle the life out of it completely and eventually see us resenting it.

 

Hope that is not the case though... I truly do.

[Stop Mocking Me0]

Maybe we'll get the mod tools…. 

 

 

 

 

Yeah don't expect that either...

[The Clay Bird]

If they concentrate on the story more than the maps, they will win.  I don't even care about it, but I've heard a lot say that it doesn't make sense, or doesn't have the depth of BO1.

 

It seems to me that they had an idea of a map, and buildables and then forced the story around that.  If they concentrate on the story this time, they will be on the right path IMO.

Disagree. They have to focus on the maps. It's actually a minority of people that care about much less know the story. Gameplay has to be first.

[Stop Mocking Me0]

Disagree. They have to focus on the maps. It's actually a minority of people that care about much less know the story. Gameplay has to be first.

Nonsense, you build a cool enough story within the map and you've got your gameplay mechanics right there...

 

Mob of the dead: centered around 4 actors battling the undead in a frozen waist land to help the regular characters, trapped in a freezer. 

 

Shangri la: centered arround using time travel to help brock and gary. 

 

Moon: On the faking moon. 

 

You must do this in layers, build the gameplay around the story, and then the map around the gameplay. 

 

Fool-proof. 

[ZombieOfTheDead]

While building the map around the story can be cool, I can honestly only think of three maps where it actually affects gameplay. Those being Moon, Origins, and Mob of the Dead, all having unique ideas in their own right. Most of the other maps have their own little easter eggs (or the big easter eggs), but the effect on gameplay is so minimal

 

I guess you could count Tranzit as having story affecting gameplay, too... after all, the earth blew up. How well did that work out, built around story? It's just in the way the map is set up.

 

What's wrong with tranzit? Fire everywhere, little visibility, a little too big, denizens, the bus not coming around fast enough, no way to control teleportations.

 

What's wrong with Die Rise? Only maybe that you have to go forward throughout the map, you can't climb up what you've fallen

 

Buried? Too easy because of the big guy and other minor details

 

Origins? Apparently takes too long to set up (IMO the set up is the best part of the game, what the hell is anyone complaining about?)

 

Not counting NTZ or MOTD because the complaints are few, but none the less, they haven't done a horrible job. They've done different things to try and make the game more fun. Honestly, their only real failure was tranzit in that regard. One of the problems you guys seem to have is that you want another BO. It's nothing to do with the story related to the map. It's that you prefer the basic way BO was set up: Der Riese clones. An easy set up that allows you to gets far. That's good for solors, but it gets boring after awhile.

 

Point is, BO2 is underrated, very highly, and has more maps that integrate story and change up gameplay than BO, so really you guys just want BO again.

[lead_psychopath]

I'm pretty sure that's what we all want. Another Bo1. Just with new things in it.

[ZombieOfTheDead]

I'm pretty sure that's what we all want. Another Bo1. Just with new things in it.

The problem is, that is supremely boring. Have we all not played BO to death? I'm not usually one to advocate change even, but I'm bored of zombies in general. BO1 is mostly boring but for a select few maps, BO2 I'll play Die Rise, MOTD, and Origins (or the others if my friends are up to it). Those maps continue to entertain, because there's a different style to them. It's funny, you guys are some of the few in the game community who, when they get alot of change in their game while still being recognizable as the same game, to reject that change. It's kinda weird.

[DeathBringerZen]

 

Point is, BO2 is underrated, very highly, and has more maps that integrate story and change up gameplay than BO, so really you guys just want BO again.

Not counting NTZ or MOTD because the complaints are few, but none the less, they haven't done a horrible job. They've done different things to try and make the game more fun. Honestly, their only real failure was tranzit in that regard. One of the problems you guys seem to have is that you want another BO. It's nothing to do with the story related to the map. It's that you prefer the basic way BO was set up: Der Riese clones. An easy set up that allows you to gets far. That's good for solors, but it gets boring after awhile.

 

This is your opinion... and one I completely disagree with. Of course we all wanted another BO1... it was great. BO2 started off poorly. Tranzit and NTZ were awful (majority opinion), and it did not improve greatly as things went on.

 

Die Rise was OK, but was not thought out well when it came to co-op. Zombie spawn balance was completely messed up and revives were impossible if players were situated in certain areas.  MotD was actually really good, but the design was a little uninspiring and unbalanced for certain players depending on the strategy used. Map also severely lacked longevity too it. Buried was trash from start to finish. Nothing good to say about that map at all. Throwing as much as you can into a poorly designed map does not make it entertaining.

 

Origins for me was the only map that was designed well and had a great balance, but the storyline and features within the map were really bad in my own personal opinion. The punches are trash and were shown to be so by the awful knifing dynamic that comes with the dated engine. Staffs were also unbalanced. Whoever got the Lightning Staff got a raw deal for sure.

 

The EE's were also awful throughout, with no thought into them, the steps and definitely the weak rewards that were all more or less overshadowed by easily obtainable in-game features. Tranzit power up drop (obtainable easily in-game), Die Rise perks (obtainable easily in-game), MotD (weaponary obtainable without finishing the EE), Buried (perma perks... persistent Tombstone!?), Origins (apparently opening the crazy place was our reward... that and the end sequence!... must have been this reward beyond out imagination Sam promised us!).

 

BO2 is underrated? lol... good one man.

[ZombieOfTheDead]

This is your opinion... and one I completely disagree with. Of course we all wanted another BO1... it was great. BO2 started off poorly. Tranzit and NTZ were awful (majority opinion), and it did not improve greatly as things went on.

You know, if I recall, most everyone liked tranzit at first, and then people started complaining. It's almost like CoD every year now. Saying the majority of people is not a good thing to say, I got called out on that a few days ago. Most everyone I know that plays the game enjoys BO2. Except Tranzit, which we can all agree gets annoying.

 

Your argument for Die rise... spawns, really? I never even noticed it. Revives? That can be said about all maps. Buried is actually entertaining, it's just incredibly easy. I wouldn't say the design was bad.

 

As for origins, you keep talking about balance. WTH does that even mean in zombies? The map is hard any way you look at it, regardless of staves. The punch argument... I have never heard anyone complain about that before, so no comment.

 

Oh, and I agree with the EE, they were pretty terrible, and the rewards were meh. That's not always why we play the game, though.

 

So yeah, BO2 is underrated.

[Chopper]

The problem is, that is supremely boring. Have we all not played BO to death? I'm not usually one to advocate change even, but I'm bored of zombies in general. BO1 is mostly boring but for a select few maps, BO2 I'll play Die Rise, MOTD, and Origins (or the others if my friends are up to it). Those maps continue to entertain, because there's a different style to them. It's funny, you guys are some of the few in the game community who, when they get alot of change in their game while still being recognizable as the same game, to reject that change. It's kinda weird.

It depends on what you personally define as annoying.

 

On pretty much every BO2 map you have to build some stuff.  To me, doing that over and over is boring.

 

I imagine that if you have played BO to death, you are more than likely doing the same thing repeatedly.  Stage Kino, Pad on Ascension, Lighthouse on COTD etc.

I could be completely wrong in that and if I am misjudging, I apologise in advance.

 

People play for different reasons, and get enjoyment from different things.

 

For instance, I saw Jay made a post about PP, personal property the other day.  He was talking about the Thompson in Der Riese in a 4p game, and how he was in his area and people were coming through it.

I only play 4p with friends luckily, but the thought of each having an individual area, whilst making sense from a pure strategic point of view is boring to me.  Get together, get stuck in and it's always fun.

 

My point is, there are so many different ways to play, and things to do, I can't see how it can get boring.  Sure, I don't play every day, which helps keep it somewhat fresh.

 

Take Kino - ways to play for high rounds.

 

MP40 room only, Spawn room only, Electric Trap room only, Alley only, Dressing room only.....people have been to 50 in every location.

The principle of zombies in itself will lead to boredom....once you max your high round, what are you actually playing for?

 

But if you have the right mindset, and it suits you, then zombies in BO1 is infinite fun....at least to me.

 

BO2 is infinite boredom.

[ZombieOfTheDead]

@Chopper, well to be perfectly honest, the only one you HAVE to build anything is Tranzit, the map nobody really likes.

 

And no, I tend to avoid staying in one place in Kino and such, it just gets too boring, though if I'm playing with friends I'll tend to stay in their general area. Yhou see, I don't usually play for high rounds just to get how rounds. I like to see how far I can get with my buddies in the most challenging way, and mostly BO1 doesn't provide anymore.

 

That's sort of what I like about BO2, you're almost always on the move (not good in tranzit). You have to use teamwork to survive. I'm never really good on my own in BO2, it seems easier to die (especially in tranzit, not so much for buried).

 

To each his own I guess. We'll see where treyarch decides to go.

[DeathBringerZen]

Your argument for Die rise... spawns, really? I never even noticed it. Revives? That can be said about all maps. Buried is actually entertaining, it's just incredibly easy. I wouldn't say the design was bad.

 

The zombie balance is completely messed up on that map. More so than any other on BO2. In a 4 player game, if you train separately from others, players in the room with the hole or the Buddha room will get next to no zombies the entire game.

 

 

As for origins, you keep talking about balance. WTH does that even mean in zombies? The map is hard any way you look at it, regardless of staves. The punch argument... I have never heard anyone complain about that before, so no comment.

 

You really need me to explain balance in zombies to you? Well, for a start, the balance is that yet again, the map does not split zombies evenly between players, and then there is the fact that some staffs are ridiculously over powered when compared to others that are severely under powered.

 

Buried is a joke of a map. There is the church, courthouse, barn, tunnels etc that all NEVER get used. They are all wasted space and what you have left is the outside area of the building or the maze to use as playing area. The features within the map also make it ridiculously easy, so there is no difficulty balance to the map or real challenge.

 

Regarding the knifing issue... I have seen people complain about the knifing since the game first launched, albeit the MP side mainly, but the game runs on the same engine, and the punches are a hazard when not the host. They are not worth the time and effort it takes to obtain them, but unfortunately they need to be done in order to finish the EE.

 

I appreciate that you think the game is under-rated, but I think you are in the minority with that opinion, and I think Treyarch themselves know that the game mode was not well received this time around.

[ZombieOfTheDead]

@DeathBringerZen

 

Key word there: training. I don't think that map is designed for training. It's not exactly open. It seems more of a stick together type of map. Though yeah, I have experienced rounds where I've gotten next to no zombies when I'm separated from my friends.

 

Okay, the zombie balance, fair enough. The staves, well what did you expect, FOUR incredibly powerful WW? We normally get one. If anything, that is balancing.

 

Buried, You could argue that for most maps as well, some places you never go. Yes, it is ridiculously easy, but like all easy maps can be fun occasionally. That's BO1 for me.

 

The punch, Well, you could argue that the hit does an AoE, so when it does hit it blasts a few of them. That's what I'll argue.

 

I haven't checked any other zombie fansite, or the CoD forums, but I doubt it was that bad. Even if it was, how much hate does each CoD game get each year? That's called the vocal minority usually. It continues to sell.

[Hells Warrrior]

I agree with you Zen but I also disagree to an extent. Let me explain.

 

I've always liked zombies, but only in the last 12/18 months has it become a new experience for me. Tranzit was a map that I enjoyed, yes it's large and cumbersome and all over the place. Yes it promised so much and failed to deliver on that promise. I still like it though, it's a good map.

 

Die Rise, actually to be honest, didn't really like it but having played it more recently with boom and others and beginning to like it and I think I've found my new map.

 

MoTD, in all honesty. Perfect, nothing wrong with the map, apart from other players who haven't got a scooby doo what to do.

 

Buried, I like it, it has it's own uniqueness - very easy map, still got time for it.

 

Origins, brilliant, map layout is superb.

 

BOII is what got me into zombies more than ever before. I was a multiplayer person, mainly because all the mates played multiplayer and didn't play zombies. We started to play town a lot this year and we all got a bug for zombies in a way we didn't before. Unfortunately, they felt as though origins was to tough and kind of lost interest. I however loved origins, at the beginning I thought "tough map" but in reality, it's not that tough at all.

 

Now, as for BO, I wish I had played that game at it's peak for zombies, I only jumped in now and again for a quick blast, never accomplished anything and actually still got a lot to do on it. However, I can see how BO is more liked than BOII.

[DeathBringerZen]

There is more than just the unbalancing of the staves. Take the perk situation. Maps like MotD should have had Stamina Up... not Deadshot. Why was that perk even on that map!?! Why was it not on Buried instead?

 

Then there was the strange choice of having Tombstone on Tranzit and Who's who on Die Rise, when it is pretty obvious to most that it should have been the other way around. Buildables were for the best part awful. Tranzit electric trap and turret where so bad that no one uses or even builds them. Buried was a bit better, but also had some strange choices like the trample steam. Seems like it was put in to accommodate glitchers more than legit players.

 

The excessive use of persistent perks was also a sign on incompetence at 3arc. Whoever though of some of the ones they included should be embarrassed.

 

Like you said in an earlier post, most of us did like Tranzit at first, but it was the mystery surrounding the map that made us enjoy it. When it finally set in that the map was nothing more than a large, stock map with nothing good to do in it except get your perks and play it out, it soon became apparent that the BO2 journey was not going to be as good as many expected it to be.

 

I enjoy playing Die Rise on solo, but will never play it on co-op anymore. MotD I still enjoy, but Buried is really terrible in my opinion. I rate it as the worst map in zombie history, even below Tranzit & NTZ. It is stunning visually, but it is so badly designed. How many people even go into the barn, courthouse or church when playing? What about the saloon, the gunsmiths or the other buildings? It may have been a good idea on paper, but the execution was terrible.

 

Origins is the best map on BO2, and MotD is decent. 2 maps do not make the game under rated though, but I get what you are saying and I know a lot of people who enjoy the maps I particularly don't.

 

Still, I do believe the majority of people hate BO2, and that is not just me basing it on statistics. I don't know very many people who enjoy BO2.

[swappingspit]

Aside from the feeling of nostalgia I get when playing the BO I maps, I think BO II zombies is better in almost every conceivable way. 

[ZombieOfTheDead]

I agree that their perk choice was... weird at times. Buildables were hit or miss as you said (they were testing out alot in tranzit, that's for sure). Persistent perks I just don't even pay attention to. It never seemed worth it.

 

I won't argue with you on maps, you have your opinion. However, buried's design, while not everything was used, as I have said before That is the case in other maps as well. Especially MP maps, but we won't get into that.

 

I know many people who don't care for BO2, but it was mostly not caring for MP. Most people I know still enjoy zombies. You do have to understand most people are casuals. For all we know, it could go either way for how people liked it.

 

Also, agreed with swappingspit (that sounded kinda weird, lol)

[Chopper]

Tranzit - I don't know anyone who liked that map.  I'm probably biased on that point....I had the game 4 days before release, and had already done 40 coop and 50 solo on it pre launch.

 

All the people I know, thought it sucked.  Like hard.  Even the guys who got WRs on it thought it sucked.  None of us though care for the story, just the game play.  I've never known how much difference it makes on that one.

 

ZOTD - Die Rise needs the liquid, although that's not really a big deal.  MOTD needs a shield really.  Buried needs big sub thing and generator, and Origins really really needs the staffs.

Out of those, only Origins is really difficult I suppose.  However, MOTD and Buried just seem such a drag to start, it's just not for me.

 

The great thing about this thread is seeing just how different people's opinions are.  I have no intention of changing anyone's mind, just letting the game makers know of my personal opinion, and seeing if others can make me see things slightly differently.

[ZombieOfTheDead]

Shit man, way better than I am at this game. I know alot of people who used to like the map, including me. After awhile though, all the issues got to me.

 

None of those really were required to play the map is moreso what I meant. You could play and have fun without them. I understand that it can totally be a drag to set it up, especially if you play it alot. There's so much crap in buried that you have to break to even move around. MOTD just takes a long time to get to anywhere. That's reasonable.

 

I know, right? This thread is pretty fun, overall. Even if I don't change anyones opinion, it's still nice to talk about these things.

[DeathBringerZen]

@ZOTD - Yeah, I suppose it is down to peoples preferences. I play with a lot of people who have been hardcore since WaW and they do not enjoy BO2 very much. Some of them don't even play it, which I think is madness. lol. I may not enjoy the game that much, but it is still zombies at the end of the day, so I will still play it nonetheless, but like Chopper said, Tranzit is really bad and is heavily hated on. It lacks anything worthwhile to do on it except tool up then train it out in 1 of 5 of the easiest training spots in zombie history.

 

Going from Moon where we had a lot to do and a pretty decent map concept to Tranzit was disheartening. That is why Tranzit was popular for some time... people just refused to believe it was this empty and worthless. Turns it it was (probably), and what is left is a map that does not have much more to it than a WaW map but in a larger scale. A small, worthless EE. A poor WW, and a severe lack of anything to do or use to your advantage. The map itself is actually OK in terms of design, but silly decisions like the PaP, non controllable teleporters and lack of rewards or story development did not help it's cause.

 

Still, I accept that not everyone is going to share my opinion on the game or the maps. I see MotD getting a lot of hate, and I don't get that one myself. I like the map and think it had a great story to it, even if it held no strong relation to the main one. I still think they got the perks all wrong on that map, but the weapons you obtained and the ones on the map itself were really decent. Set up was a chore, but was not required. You could easily play a long game on that map without the spork or redeemer. Lack of Stamina completely killed it for me though.

 

I don't know many who like Buried though. You are actually the first person I have really noticed who is in favor of it.

[ZombieOfTheDead]

tbh, Tranzit can be fun every once in awhile. That's the thing about some of these hated maps. They are fun every now and then, at least it seems that way to me. It actually was an interesting concept at first. The whole moving from place to place, etc. The problem is, that's not what zombies is really. At some point you just can't use the bus anymore in a game. It's either boring or too hectic. That's about where I started not liking it, because it just slowed the game way too much. That, and other BS.

 

Honestly haven't seen much hate on MOTD at all. That one surprises me, too, though it has it's problems like you mentioned.

 

Really for buried? I actually know a few who like it. Its sort of in the same boat as tranzit, good every now and then.