Call of Duty players “aren’t hardcore gamers”, according to Infinity Ward

Monday, 21st October 2013 13:02 GMT By Dave Owen

Call of Duty developer Infinity Ward believes that the audience most committed to the mega-franchise lean more to the casual side of the gaming spectrum by virtue of the fact that they play few or no other games. Therefore the arrival of a new crop of consoles shouldn’t have much impact on Call of Duty’s audience.

That’s according to executive producer Mark Rubin anyway, who told OXM “Regardless of platform – people’s gaming habits aren’t going to change just because there’s a new platform.” We have an enormous amount of players who are more in the casual game space, but they play a lot.

“It’s kind of a weird, ironic thing to say; They aren’t hardcore gamers, or even gamers, but they play Call of Duty every night. And those guys are going to continue to play regardless of platform. So I think not only will we continue to engage with that existing player base, but we’ll take next gen and see how far we can go with it.”

Next up for Call of Duty die-hards is Ghosts, coming to PS3, Xbox 360, PC, and Wii U on November 5, with next-gen versions launching alongside their respective consoles.

Thanks, IGN.



  1. macronia

    Heisenberg says ‘ You’re Goddamn Right ‘ :D

    #1 1 year ago

    Yeah, me too. I’m not a hardcore gamer…

    #2 1 year ago
  3. monkeygourmet

    I view it as a casual title, along with FIFA.

    I would view titles like ‘Catherine’, ‘Wonderful 101′ etc… As more ‘hardcore’ titles, if you had to label things.

    #3 1 year ago
  4. DreadSabot

    This makes sense based on the VGChartz preorder numbers and I would say that in the US Madden players fall under the same umbrella.

    #4 1 year ago
  5. Panthro

    I agree…

    The avid call of duty players I know are my 9 year old cousins.

    The rest of the people who own call of duty I know are some of my older relatives (uncles, stepdad etc…) who only own that, Fifa and the odd AC game.

    I hardly know any people my age that play CoD anymore, I got a strong base on PC that’s probably why and it isn’t very popular on this platform as it is on the consoles.

    #5 1 year ago
  6. absolutezero

    All those kids doing trick shots on the youtubes will be very upset about this. They are the epitome of self-labeling hardcore gamers.

    #6 1 year ago
  7. Asgaro

    If you check the percentage of players that got a certain achievement on CoD Black Ops 2 on PC, you will be surprised:

    Reach Sergeant (Level 10) in multiplayer Public Match: only 39.0%
    Prestige once in multiplayer Public Match: only 13.1%

    Since CoD games can only be played on PC through Steam, these stats certainly have some weight to them.
    It also backs up an old article that states that a lot of gamers only buy CoD games for the intense Hollywood style singleplayers and never even touch multiplayer.

    #7 1 year ago
  8. yeoung

    The inherent ambiguity of the terms “hardcore-” and “casual gamer” allow for some flexibility in their respective usage, I get that. However, someone who fires up his dedicated gaming console every (other) night to play a couple hours of CoD, trying to improve his tactics or K/D ratio, simply cannot be classified as a casual gamer.

    A casual gamer whips out his phone on the bus and plays a quick round of Bejeweled or Texas hold ‘em. Conversely, having dedicated gaming time on a structural basis using a dedicated gaming console seems the hallmark of the hardcore crowd, no?

    Same goes for Fifa. A game in which you can create, train, design and coach your own team and guide them through championships, all the while trading, transferring and managing players. Granted, I myself play Fifa once every couple of weeks when my brother drops by, admittedly I’m a casual player of Fifa, but it is no casual game. It includes systems that allow for unique tailored approaches and a large variety of options and game modes.

    Player behaviour doesn’t influence the classification of a game one way or the other, in my opinion. That said, these terms are vague and pliable.

    #8 1 year ago
  9. tmac2011

    the direction call of duty isnt good, please take 2 or 3 years to make one call of duty game……… seriously every year is crazy

    #9 1 year ago
  10. absolutezero

    When “casual” became a genre in and of itself the definition changed less on what you play on and more about what it is thats being played.

    #10 1 year ago
  11. UuBuU

    Games like Call of Duty actually cover both ends of the spectrum.

    ~ A group of students drinking beers and taking turns playing COD on an xbox in a dorm room = a very casual gaming experience.

    ~ A man named Bob sitting in his salmon pink living room playing the singleplayer campaign of COD because that’s the only reason he buys the game for = a very casual gaming experience.

    ~ A serious gaming clan competing on the PC in highly competitive leagues = more hardcore than pretty much any other gaming experience and the closest gaming gets to being like a competitive team sport.

    The only way it gets more hardcore than the latter example is in an FPS game with greater skill gap, tactical realism, etc. etc.

    Admittedly ~ most COD players generally fit into the former two examples ~ but it’s wrong to say that ALL are casual or that COD does not have the capacity to offer a very hardcore gaming experience

    Also ~~ I think it’s wrong to define hardcore gamers as gamers who simply play a wide variety of games. There’s nothing “hardcore” about that. Those are just what you call “avid” gamers.

    #11 1 year ago
  12. Ireland Michael

    @11 “~ A serious gaming clan competing on the PC in highly competitive leagues = more hardcore than pretty much any other gaming experience and the closest gaming gets to being like a competitive team sport.”

    Hardly. There are dozens of games out there that completely trounce Call of Duty as a competitive sport, and are vastly more complex. The skill ceiling for CoD is incredibly low, and realises far more and exploiting poor game design than any actual level of skill or dexterity.

    Well, at least “Infinity Ward” are honest about it.

    #12 1 year ago

    If the skill ceiling for CoD is so low, Michael, how come you’re so bad at it?

    Don’t think that just because you get whooped by 11 year olds that it’s an easy game.

    Some of the best RTS gamers are just kids too, and those guys play with over 100 CPM.

    #13 1 year ago
  14. UuBuU

    @12 The basic game of COD is designed to compress the skill gap through gimmicks such as killstreak rewards, random spawns, small maps, etc. But if you play something like COD4 with all that crap turned off and play for a clan at the highest level of the game, it’s extremely hardcore and competitive. I guess that’s difficult for you to grasp though unless you’ve actually experienced it.

    #14 1 year ago
  15. polygem

    if you play cod regulary you will more or less automatically get good at it. if you play A LOT you will become very good. if you don´t practice you will suck against players that do practice. i learned that myself. i haven´t played cod for quite some time and it showed (i got pwnd like i´ve never played it before) but the time i played it regulary i was always on the top 3 spot. ít´s all about finding the playstyle that suits you, getting into the flow of the game, knowing the maps, using streaks effectively…
    i don´t think shooters in general really need skill – they need practice.
    that said, the genre lost all it´s appeal to me, especially the military shooters. only thinking about having to play another cod, battlefield etc. makes me shiver. bored to death, played those to hell and back. maybe destiny? maybe…

    #15 1 year ago
  16. Ireland Michael

    @GIGA, I’ve never cared to put that much time or investment into the genre to play at that level. It doesn’t interest me beyond.

    That doesn’t mean I’m not capable of researching the mechanics or the competitive scene.

    I never said it wasn’t competitive. I simply said the skill ceiling was lower than a lot of other games. The very developers of the games just admitted that they’re designed at a casual level.

    Do *you* need to be an expert at fighting games to be aware of the high level of skill involved in the genre? Frame data, countering, combo timing, defence, positioning. No, you don’t.

    Do *you* need to play RTS games all the time to be aware of the insane amount of strategising you need to do every minute to win against someone of equal skill?

    Younger people can process information faster, and repetition improves muscle memory. Basic facts of science. I struggle in levels in many games now I could blast through as a kid with my eyes closed, because I don’t have as much time to play them, and even if I did, the same quick reflexes as I used to have to do so

    I don’t need a pathetic bully like you mocking me for the fact. Grow the fuck up. Try coming up with a point for once in your life that doesn’t involve you directly insulting people, you little child.

    Explain the depth of the mechanic, educate people about their opinions, instead of turning into a bratty kid every time someone says something even remotely negative about your precious teddy bear.

    #16 1 year ago

    I don’t need a pathetic bully like you mocking me for the fact. Grow the fuck up. Try coming up with a point for once in your life that doesn’t involve you directly insulting people, you little child.

    Do me a favour… Stop overreacting.

    Read the comment again. There’s no insult in there. I’m not going to tip toe my way around you, or speak to you differently than anyone else.

    In fact, you should take it as a compliment, because I’m being honest with you, and telling it to you straight. Believe me, Michael, I have no need to hide my insults.

    Absolutely no insult in there, whatsoever. No mockery. People come on here and talk about getting whooped by 11 year olds, themselves. We all know your stats, and how well you do at FPSs. It’s just a fact, so don’t overreact.


    Anyway, the real issue is that people misunderstand how to play the game.

    They think that it purely involves walking around in the open, or in an obvious spot, and being able to shoot faster, or more accurately, than the opponent.

    That’s not the case.

    Lets face it, in CoD, it’s difficult to miss the guy you’re shooting at.

    The whole point is that it’s about much more than that.

    That’s why someone like me can come along, on a laggy connection, playing in Saudi, against a team of Americans, and still end up with the most kills and fewest deaths.

    It’s about movement, anticipation, understanding the flow of the game, reading the psychology of your opponent, knowing the map, choosing the right weapon/killstreak/loadout, and even more than that.

    You have to think in both first person, and top down view at the same time, multitasking your weapons, ammo, equipment and killstreaks, while putting yourself in the right position to get the kill/capture the flag/plant the bomb/etc.

    Sure, anyone can pick up a pad and shoot somebody, but to do that and win game after game, with a positive k/d and high accuracy isn’t easy at all.

    #17 1 year ago
  18. UuBuU

    @15 “i don´t think shooters in general really need skill – they need practice.”

    This is so completely untrue ~ I’ve played in a gaming clan for 8+ years and there’s a clear skill hierarchy amongst our players just as there is in football or any other sport. The players who weren’t that great 8 years ago have improved through practice ~ but they’re still a million miles away from being on the same level of skill as the best players.

    Some players will always be mediocre regardless of how long they play the game for ~~ because they just don’t have the natural skill to be the best. You can teach them tactics and make them moderately useful in a team, but they will never be brilliant.

    #18 1 year ago
  19. Hcw87

    The reason CoD is popular is because pretty much everyone can be good at it. The skillroof really is so low that it doesn’t take much to be good at the game.

    And the fact that 60-70% of the kills in a match comes from killstreaks speak volumes in itself. Got 8 kills in a row? Great, here’s 10 more coming up for free. This is also why KDR means absolutely nothing. It’s a dated formula with a huge need of reinvention.

    #19 1 year ago
  20. zinc

    I can’t wait till November :)

    Haven’t played CoD for months, so I’m gonna get pwned!

    Then I’m gonna get my mad skillz back & own those noobs!

    *happy Snoopy dance*

    #20 1 year ago
  21. Ireland Michael

    @18 They need both, but numerous mechanics in CoD, especially the magic sticky bullets, significantly reduce how much skill that actual requires, and using a mouse and keyboard just makes its even easier.

    Of course, you still need to know the best routes to take, areas where you’re exposed and vulnerable, prioritising kill streaks, teamwork and communication, and solid hand eye coordination. Saying that doesn’t require any skill whatsoever is definitely untrue.

    Doesn’t make it a *high* level of skill, but still skill nonetheless.

    #21 1 year ago
  22. UuBuU

    @16 It’s obvious that you’ve never played an online FPS game at a high enough level to understand the level of tactics and skill needed to be the best team and win leagues and tournaments.

    Is it more competitive than an RTS game or fighting game at the highest level? That’s like asking if professional football is more competitive than professional tennis

    #22 1 year ago
  23. deathm00n

    @18 And this is why you don’t need to have too many stretegic skills to play call of duty, this natural skill you are talking about is actually reflexes. This comes from someone who doesn’t have a good reflex and tried playing call of duty a lot of times. Now if you take for example a game like Dota (I don’t play it, but I know how it works) that’s a game that require skills, you just can’t grab a different character and go play with it, you need to learn how it plays, what strategies are fit for it. There’s a difference between good reflexes and skill.

    #23 1 year ago
  24. UuBuU

    @21 Magic sticky bullets?

    Don’t bring consoles into this. The FPS genre is a PC genre. The console experience is so overwhelmingly poor in comparison to the PC experience that I don’t even consider it adequate for serious competitive gaming.

    #24 1 year ago
  25. UuBuU

    @23 To play an FPS game at the highest level, you can’t just rely on sharp reflexes. That’s enough to give you a great K/D ratio on public servers, but not enough to win the most prestigious leagues and tournaments. It takes hours upon hours of training and tactics before every match. You have to analyse every aspect of how your opponents will play and literally plan every movement the team will make as a unit accordingly.

    #25 1 year ago
  26. Blackened Halo

    Clap clap… The cod-only players are really casual

    #26 1 year ago
  27. Ireland Michael

    @22 I’m well aware of the level of tactics and skill needed to play FPS at a high level. I never said it didn’t require skill. I simply said in comparison to almost every other competitive title on the market, CoD is a low level one. It always has been. Even the devs admit it.

    @24 I’m not talking about auto-aim. Even on the PC, CoD has “sticky bullets”. It’s the worse thing about the franchise, and removes a huge amount of skill.

    #27 1 year ago

    I don’t remember reading that any CoD dev ever said that CoD takes a low level of skill.

    That’s far too much paraphrasing there, Michael, and you’re factually incorrect.

    #28 1 year ago
  29. UuBuU

    @27 COD is low level compared to other more tactical FPS games, yes, but it can still be modified and refined in a way that makes it far more suitable for competitive play than the default online experience would suggest. This is especially the case for the COD games before MW2.

    #29 1 year ago
  30. Ireland Michael

    @29 So then we basically completely agree with each other.

    Bringing modifications into the mix is something else entirely. We’re talking about the core games, as they’re designed. The competitive scene tends to stay as far away from modifications as possible, for obvious reasons.

    #30 1 year ago
  31. polygem

    i absolutely do believe many many hardcore shooter players mix up the term “skill” with “playing a game daily – for hours”

    if you do that you´ll get good at it of course – at almost everything you do, if i try to put on my clothes while in a handstand, i will become awesome at it if i practice for 3 hours every day for a year…but it´s not like painting, singing, writing, where you need talent and skill to become truly good.
    games will never really need something like skill. the medium is way too limited by nature for something like that.
    every game is.

    i stand by that. the more you play, the better you become. no skills involved here. only practice counts.

    it´s a bit pathetic – this fps scene. do you guys really think you are a talented and skilled player because you are good at cod?
    no, you play more than the guy you just pwnd – up to you if you think you should be proud about that or not – i wont judge that.

    #31 1 year ago
  32. UuBuU

    @30 “The competitive scene tends to stay as far away from modifications as possible, for obvious reasons.”

    Yes and no. Competitive leagues will have very strict rules on players using custom mods, but at the same time, it’s extremely common for leagues to impose mandatory server-wide mods that adjust the game’s realism to make it more suitable for competitive play.

    #32 1 year ago
  33. noamlol2

    casuals and noobs

    but mainly casuals

    #33 1 year ago


    Not at all.

    You’re wading into the nature vs nurture argument, and that’s another topic entirely.

    There are football players like Messi, boxers like Tyson, and golfers like Woods who were beating the pros in their teens, with little or no training, because they had an ability that was instinctive to them from a young age, rather than learned.

    You also have people like Frank Lampard, Lennox Lewis and others who were never that good at a young age, but became amongst the best in the world through years of training.

    Some people just don’t have twitch reflexes. Some people can’t even get their head around a real map, much less a mini map with little flashing dots on it. Some people just have zero anticipation ability whatsoever.

    No matter how long or hard they practice, they might get better, but they’ll never be as good as people who can do all that stuff, because their natural talents lie elsewhere.

    I can draw you a picture, but show me a screen of code, and it means zero to me.

    Maybe I could spend years at learning how, but why bother, when my mind is made to be artistic?

    #34 1 year ago
  35. Ireland Michael

    @31 Playing a game constantly develops your muscle memory and coordination, which is the basis of learning almost any skill a person possesses. Nobody is just magically good at something. Its how the brain is designed.

    Its why footballers have constant practise sessions, it’s why bands rehearse constantly, it’s why a singer trains their voice all the time, and it’s why professional gaming clans play their games constantly. Practise is a *necessity* to develop skill.

    “games will never really need something like skill. the medium is way too limited by nature for something like that.”

    Absolute bull. How is it even remotely “limited”? Chess has very simplistic rules, but it’s the range of those moves that makes it so complex and challenging. Does that not require skill? A video game is no different, as long as rules are in place and it is balanced fairly.

    #35 1 year ago
  36. UuBuU

    @31 If I play football every day, am I guaranteed to be as good as Messi?

    The football players competing in the second or third national divisions probably practice just as much as those competing in the first divions. They’re simply not on the same level of ability and many of them never will be ~ that’s the same in FPS games in my experience.

    I really think you need to look up the definition of a skill and then try and grasp the fact that it’s not all down to practice.

    #36 1 year ago
  37. absolutezero

    Theres no way in hell you can watch a high level Quake match and claim that natural skill has no influence. Practice as much as you like you’ll still get wiped out.

    #37 1 year ago
  38. Ireland Michael

    @36 “If I play football every day, am I guaranteed to be as good as Messi?”

    No, but you’re guaranteed to be a lot better than if you didn’t try at all.

    @37 Its a collection of all of them. Some people can think faster than others, but they only got as good as they are because they kept playing. Everyone’s brain is wired differently.

    Nobody just starts something and is suddenly magically good at it. The suggestion that practise isn’t a huge and integral part of developing skill is flat out ignorant.

    #38 1 year ago
  39. UuBuU

    A combination of natural ability, practice, and group tactics will determine your effectiveness in an FPS game.

    When playing fairly casually on a public server, either natural ability or experience (practice) alone may suffice in giving you a good score, but to play at the highest level for a clan that plans on winning competitions, you need a combination of natural ability, experience (practice), AND group tactics.

    #39 1 year ago
  40. absolutezero

    “Nobody just starts something and is suddenly magically good at it.”

    Apart from the people that do you mean? Like the child chess savants for example?

    Uh huh for normal people yadda yadda I know.

    #40 1 year ago
  41. bradk825

    @7 wow that is really interesting. I never would have guessed it to be that low. I wonder what it is for console.

    #41 1 year ago
  42. Panthro

    Jesus Christ… ^

    #42 1 year ago
  43. absolutezero


    #43 1 year ago
  44. Ireland Michael

    @40 You’re talking an extremely rare circumstance that doesn’t apply to 99% of people.

    You cannot say that practise isn’t crucial to development of skill just because an incredibly tiny portion of the population are born geniuses with abilities they far outweighs the rest of humanity. Even then, those people still had to learn and study those things.

    Analysis, visualisation and coordination are completely different skills anyway. Different people excel at different things.

    #44 1 year ago
  45. absolutezero

    See the second part there, where I pretty much admitted that it was stupidly rare and not really worth counting?

    uh huh.

    #45 1 year ago

    It might be rare, but it reenforces the point that people are naturally of different skill levels for different things.

    1% are able to compete with the best at a young age, if you look at football as an example, then maybe 5-10% become the best at what they do (top level professionals), and the majority are basically ‘also rans’.

    On the other side of that, you’ll also have a small percentage who are just useless, and no amount of training will help them.

    It’s the same with something like playing an FPS.

    People are of different levels of ability, and training, whilst it might make the poor players better, won’t make them better than, or anywhere near the same level as, the gifted ones.

    This is interesting:

    #46 1 year ago
  47. DSB

    No duh. It would be pretty impossible to take 20-100 million people and lump them together into any one group.

    He’s not saying it isn’t for geeks, just that it’s probably not defined by them.

    Some of the best pro FPS players on the planet are playing CoD, so I think it would be slightly ridiculous to say it’s only bored housewives and Frank Underwood playing.

    And that’s obviously not what he’s saying. I wish people would read shit before flipping their shit :P

    #47 1 year ago
  48. Ireland Michael

    @46 “It might be rare, but it reenforces the point that people are naturally of different skill levels for different things.”

    Barely. Those people brains are wired so completely different to that of everyone is, often at the expenses of other abilities, that any comparison is pointless.

    Practise is an essential part of developing these kind of coordination based skills. When a person constantly repeats the same repetitive actions over and over again, the brain creates its own synaptic pathways that allow them them to process the information faster than they would have done otherwise. People don’t practise just for the hell of it. Doing so *will* significantly develop your reflexes far beyond what they “naturally” would be. This is a verifiable fact of science.

    I’m not saying a degree of natural talent isn’t involved. It helps. Some people are claiming that practise is utterly meaningless, which is the point I’m arguing. Someone with “natural talent” will not be good if they don’t practise. And any comparison to people with higher IQ is pointless – skill and intelligence are exclusive from each other. One is not required for the other.

    #48 1 year ago

    Barely. Those people brains are wired so completely different to that of everyone is, often at the expenses of other abilities, that any comparison is pointless.

    It’s not pointless at all, since, once again, it reinforces the point that we are all wired differently.

    I’m sure you have absolutely no idea who Messi is, but I can tell you that he quite easily and very consistently does things with a football that 99.99999% of people probably couldn’t do in 1000 attempts.

    He was doing them since he was 16, against players who were playing professional football before he was even born.

    Yes, we know that practice makes you better. That’s exactly what I said in comment #34.

    However, there is a base level, and one person’s base level is another person’s plateau.

    Messi’s base level (without training) is a place where the average person will probably never be able to reach after years and years of practice.

    His brain (which controls his body) is wired differently to ours, just like the chess players’ brains are, just like people such as Tiger Woods and Mike Tyson’s brains are, too.

    You cannot say that every single person who practices will be as good as the best.

    You cannot say that everyone who plays a twitch shooter will develop reflexes as good as the best players.

    Besides, they would also need other abilities, such as the ability to think and move in both first person, and from a top down perspective, at the same time.

    Something that has absolutely nothing to do with skill or muscle memory.

    #49 1 year ago
  50. Ireland Michael

    @49 “I’m sure you have absolutely no idea who Messi is…”

    And this is when you know not to waste your time continuing a discussion with someone. I had plenty to respond with, but I know better than to waste my breath on egomaniacal Internet bullies.

    #50 1 year ago

    Yeah, good excuse to back out, because you’ve got no response.

    Carry on with the bully nonsense, why don’t you…

    It’s a silly get out card that you play, when you can’t respond in a civilised manner.

    At the end of the day, like I said before, CoD is way more than just reflexes.

    You can have slow, bumbling reflexes, and still get a ton of kills, because of the auto aim, and the low damage it takes to take someone out.

    That was my point, long ago.

    It’s the ability of the brain to think in different ways that makes the difference between a consistently good player, and one who stops playing at level 10, because all he does is die repeatedly, and can’t figure out why.

    The skill of CoD isn’t in the reflexes, but in the ability to adapt and think quickly.

    That’s what you simply don’t understand.

    #51 1 year ago
  52. reask

    OK I am going to wade in here with my tuppence worth.
    I have played a pretty decent amount of cods online so on a personal level I have some experience.

    I never managed to do really more than average at best.
    Sure I get plenty of kills but more deaths for the most part.
    I average about 0.85 overall say.

    On the other hand I can hand the controller to my 15 year old and she will most likely end up in the top 3 straight away.
    When I look at that I know my age has a lot to do with it as her awareness is so much sharper than mine even though she seldom plays it now.

    Whilst I do not totally disagree that some would be naturally better My honest opinion is that quick reflexes are the main key to the game.
    Once you have that it is easier to hone your other skills as you are spending a lot less time looking at kill cams. :)

    On the killstreak thing there is a bare bones option which I quite enjoy.

    I know I have said it here many times before but the pairing system is very cruel in this game.

    You would imagine with the amount of stats they gather such as accuracy and your k/d ratio they would be able to pair players a little better so everyone has a chance.

    I know some argue that this will impede players progress but the better you get the game will pair you with better players.

    I mean not too strict to make it boring but how many lobbies I go in to with 2 or 3 players dominating is very common.

    Not knocking game but just a point really.

    #52 1 year ago


    Reflexes matter, but they’re not that important, reask.

    Once you learn that as soon as you see an enemy aiming at you, you’re basically dead, you realise how important movement and positioning is.

    I can’t tell you how many headshots I get by flanking people, then casually walking up to them and giving them two taps to the back of the head.

    You have to know where the other team is, when they’re likely to come around a corner, or through a door, and be ready.

    Sometimes (yeah, I admit it), you even have to start spraying before they walk around the corner, because the P2P system gives them host advantage, and no amount of quick reflexes is going to help you shoot someone who you don’t see until half a second after they’re standing in front of you.

    #53 1 year ago
  54. reask

    That,s interesting on the p2p Giga.

    #54 1 year ago

    Yeah… You have no idea how much I’m looking forward to dedicated servers.

    #55 1 year ago

    Old, quick video from MW3:

    I pretty much only have to out-shoot someone once, because of movement and positioning. My eye was on the mini map almost permanently.

    #56 1 year ago
  57. reask

    Ha Nice one.

    #57 1 year ago
  58. antraxsuicide

    P2P is the bane of MP gaming. It’s one of the biggest factors in me getting an X1. Nothing is more annoying than host advantage.

    #58 1 year ago
  59. Erthazus

    Yeah. They are whiny 12 year olds that don’t know how to play FPS games.
    It’s true.

    Infinity Ward is not even trying but at least they ancknowledged their shitty community.

    #59 1 year ago
  60. DSB

    ^^ Has played BLOPS for 500 hours.

    #60 1 year ago


    #61 1 year ago
  62. TheWulf

    There are different kinds of people who play games. Imagine that. Thanks, Infinity Ward.

    I’m not even sure what ‘hardcore’ means any more, to be honest. I’ve liked games like VVVVVV and Blood of the Werewolf, both are completely fair and tremendously difficult at the same time. I’m terrible at them, but that’s half the fun so long as they don’t make me replay entire levels over and over (I’m looking at you, Mega Man), or worse, entire games (I’m looking at you, Castle of Illusion).

    Does that make me a ‘hardcore’ gamer? Or am I just a retro or kitsch gamer? Am I a casual gamer? I feel like a casual gamer, especially since I’m not a huge fan of realistically violent games, but I’m probably not a casual gamer.

    How about this? I am a person who plays games. There are probably a lot of those, and a lot of people who like different kinds of games.

    I never understood the hardcore label, or the casual label, or… well, any of the ridiculous gamer labels that seem to have become so prevalent within the last ten years of gaming. I remember back in the ’90s we were just people who played games. It’s silly. You’re silly, Infinity Ward.

    #62 1 year ago
  63. TheWulf


    Being a consistent source of nasty snark doesn’t actually make you better than Erth, it just makes you look every bit as aggressive as him, just for different reasons.

    #63 1 year ago
  64. TheWulf


    That’s what old Quake gamers used to call situational awareness! I think situational awareness is the right term, anyway. I’m glad to see it’s still alive in some FPS gamers. Good for you.

    #64 1 year ago
  65. kensredemption

    Heh heh heh…

    #65 1 year ago

Comments are now closed on this article.