CoD vs ET

(evilsock) #1

um, morning all - grab a coffee and get comfy as there’s some stuff I want to ask you.

Somewhere along the line things have gone bad. We first see RtCW (what nearly 3 years ago?) - great SP game (although heavily set-pieced) and absolutely fantastic MP capabilities imho - groundbreaking because for me it was the first MP game that encouraged non-clanned ppl to work together, have fun, but achieve the objective. The MP side of things is brilliantly balanced.

We got a GOTY map pack with some good maps that many ppl didn’t really bother with (not because they aren’t good, they are in fact very very good maps, but I’ve got a feeling that most ppl only need 6/7 mp maps to play in the life of a game and no matter what you do after that, the maps that shipped with the original game are the maps 99% of ppl will use for all time on that game - anyone still see mp_ufo on pub servers?)

So three years on (more or less) and we’re looking for a credible ‘upgrade’ to our fave game. What did we get? Well with the greatest of respect I think we’ve got ‘Dreamcast’ syndrome. A game that really could have, and should have been a retail game with an mp side just got ‘lost’ in the works. Forgive my ignorance, but what happened to Grey Matter and Nerve?

I don’t want to ‘knock’ ET because there are some major parts to it that I really like, but I can’t help but wonder why it was released at all? It can’t do SD any harm because as ‘free’ and in it current form it’s ok and does showcase a gameplay ‘direction’ but you just get this nagging feeling that there was another six months of work left to be done on this game - stupid problems with targeting systems (prone), unbalanced maps (fueldump), XP - effectively adding back a ‘deathmatch’ type of play to the gameplay in favour of ‘cooperative’ play which was the backbone of RtCW.

OK, here’s the deal; Am I a million miles off the mark by suggesting that SD needed ‘something’ out of the abortive retail ET venture to cover a years worth of development (or go to the wall)?

Could it be that whilst MP ET was given away for free (but SD got ‘something’ for it) and Activision got their return by creating an SP ‘WWII’ game which was basically mods that others had started for RtCW but were dropped (http://www.planetwolfenstein.com/russianfront/game.html)
became part of the CoD game which in turn appears to be the moneymaking side of a venture gone wrong. It’s none of my business like, and you’d be well within your rights to tell me to shut-up, but I’m curious to understand how this all came about. Whoever was responsible for the bot AI in CoD should be quite proud me thinks.

I guess what I’m driving @ is 'was CoD Activisions way of allowing ET to be released ‘as is’ for free whilst salvaging an SP game to recoup the costs? (and in doing so allow SD to produce something more epic using the new DooM3 engine?)

Just a thought…

-=peace=-

(Lekdevil.NL) #2

I think it was released because at this very moment, there are 8153 people who disagree with you…

(Ifurita) #3

ET and CoD are two very different games, developed by two independant groups of developers, and push the envelope in two different ways, IMO.

While everyone raves about the bot AI in CoD, it is glorified team DM bot code that has been around since Quake 3. The bots move along with you, yes, but there isn’t even the barest hint that they are anywhere close to handling the complex team-based interaction that is ET.

It could very well have been, that Activision and their other dev partner, found that the challenges of creating credible bot play was much more complex than originally envisioned and instead of further delays and investment, they released the already workable MP portion of the game.

Keep in mind that both Activision and SD are up on timelines. In order to keep pushing the SP version forward, SD has to be involved since their maps and game code might have needed to be integrated with whatever final version the bots took. Yet, at the same time, I’m sure both parties knew that SD would be involved in D3 and needed to be wrapped up with ET in time to get working on D3.

Just my 2 cents

(Stee) #4

I think SD would get paid for ET whether It was released or not so not much danger of going to the wall on that front, the one thing about the game becoming a huge hit is It has raised their profile.

I may have misunderstood u here but u seem to suggest CoD sp was “salvaged” from the aborted ET sp, If this is what u meant then I think your WAY off the mark. CoD was in development long b4 ET was released and maybe u see some similarities in the games but I can’t.
CoD and MOHAA are similar since the same people worked on the 2 games but ET and CoD. :???:

(evilsock) #5

You know, I do see similarities in both games and no, not for one second am I suggesting that the bot AI in CoD is anywhere near the experience of an online game. - I’m an online freak in so much as SP bots generally piss me off with the way they work.

As for CoD, I hear sounds from ET in it and it’s released by Activision from a devco they bought out, so I’m guessing that yes, parts of the CoD engine may well have been intended for SP ET.

(Stee) #6

What sounds? I’ve played CoD for a while and don’t recall hearing any sounds the same as ET.

(evilsock) #7

It’s subtle, but some of the background noises sound very similar to ET’s.

(Stee) #8

Interesting how u can think CoD was based on the leftover ET sp code due to similar background sounds.
I think you’ll find most ww2 games have similar background sounds, after all why would’nt they?

(lennyballa) #9

ET ofcourse ;).
But this is a stupid question:
ET or DTM race driver?
same kind of question :stuck_out_tongue:

(SCDS_reyalP) #10

Most likely the developers bought the same sound sample CDs, and nothing more than that.

(M.I.L.F.Hunter) #11

CoD’s sp was fun, much in the way MoHAA’s sp was fun.

CoD’s mp bores me to death, much in the way MoHAA’s mp bores me to death.

After playing ET for a while, it’s really hard to go back to other WW2/tactical shooters because after ET, the rest just seem like mindless deathmatch.

Sure other games have had “classes” for a while, but it’s usually just a different skin and gun for each “class”, in ET the job functions add such a huge level of depth to the game play that it just makes everything else seem so simple and boring.

Sure RTCW had the classes, but ET took strategy and tactics to a much higher level that has not been duplicated in any other FPS.

(Ifurita) #12

Agreed. Different guns does not make distinct and different classes. In fact, in Q3, each bot is already programmed with varying levels of preference for each weapon as well as preferences to camp, be aggressive, go for the quad, seek certain weapons, etc. I don’t see a whole lot different from the CoD bots

(evilsock) #13

You’re right about what you’re saying, ET does add more to the overall classes based action that I like so much in RtCW - my main point with ET is that it seems a little unfinished and perhaps it would have been better to hang on. I’m not dissing the game, as someone pointed out, 8000+ gamers can’t be wrong, but then free’s free - fucking hell, it’s even got PB support, something CoD MP doesn’t. I’ve played CoD MP and it sucks tbh - I’m not a deathmatch kind of person (connection just doesn’t permit it), which was prolly why RtCW mp hooked me in the first place (classes).

The CoD bots are the best I’ve seen so far. I know the q3 dm code your talking about has been around for ages, but these bots seem to have a slighty better understanding of their environment than I’m used to seeing - they also don’t get confused quite so often - btw MoH just pissed me off - all those bots hanging around cluttering things up when all you really want to do is get on with it - it’s not CS ffs - or it shouldn’t be - that’s what CoD MP is like - crouching and ‘proning’ your way round the maps :open_mouth:

(M.I.L.F.Hunter) #14

To be honest, I don’t think ET feels unfinished if you look at it for what it was to be, an expansion, not a full stand alone game.

Take what we have in ET Mp, add a Sp game of about the same size/content and I personally would gladly fork over the retail price for it.

Sure there are going to be game play flaws and things, I can’t think of any retail game that has shipped in the last five years that did not have some flaws/bugs found in the first few hours of play testing once it gamers started playing their retail copies.

And as for bot support, well yeah the CoD bots are “smart� compared to a lot of other games but it’s noting I have not seen before nor was it really mind blowing the first time I saw it.

Good A.I. in bots are one of those little “extra� things that can make a game nice, but it’s not going to amount to anything important in the games long term life, Sp will be played once or twice by most, and Mp with bots will be fun a few times, but that will grow old for most players really fast.

Then that leaves you with the core Mp and to me, personally I think CoD, even if not compared to ET, needs a lot of work for it to be anything more than a “one-hit wonder�.

(evilsock) #15

right, but you realise I’m not supportive of CoD in any way MP yeah?

(Vaticool) #16

I agree 100%.
CoD SP is fun but I liked RTCW SP much more. Where are the civilian ?
I find CoD MP so boring … compared to ET. What s really new in CoD MP ?
ET and Battlefield really changed the world of WW2 games but why CoD ?

I would have been so happy to buy a Enemy Territory SP for Christmas.
Where is the canceled Enemy Territory SP ??
I m still looking for a replacement for RTCW SP and there is none.
The mix between elite guards, sauerkraut and ubersoldat was really fun :D.
Even if we know WW2 was not like that.

(M.I.L.F.Hunter) #17

Yeah I know man; I also understand what you are saying in your initial post.

I was just going off topic a little to praise splashdamage on the kick ass work they did and kind of rant on the let down CoD mp was for me.

I’m really not sure what the true story is on why this game (ET) never went retail with SP/MP and ended up as free mp only game.

I just hope id/Activision/who ever takes a good long hard look at what a great job these guys did on breathing new life into an already existing game concept (RTCW class based game play) and hire them to do the retail version of RTCW 2 or w/e it’s called if it’s ever made.

(colic) #18

Im sure if you took a look at Activisions profits for the past year they can certainly afford to release a game for free :wink:

Activision is one probably my fav game companys out of them all, not bringing out the same game out year after year always trying new things. Of couse EA would never do this lol

(Kendle) #19

I got COD for xmas, and have been playing it everyday since (not that I’m defecting from ET mind you). My take on the key factors of each game are as follows:-

Where ET scores over COD

Objectives
Apart from LMS, ET is about Objectives, whereby one team has a mission to complete and the other has to stop them. COD has 2 objective modes, but because it’s OLTL (one life to live, no respawn), eliminating the other team is the easiest way to achieve the objective. So almost every game mode is effectively Team Deathmatch, whether it’s called that or not. I’m not a fan of TDM because there’s little or no teamwork involved. I imagine it would be very different in Clan games, but for public play I can’t see me playing COD regularly, or for long periods at a time.

Classes
ET has mulitple Classes, COD has one (soldier). No Medics, no Engineers, no Field-Ops, no Covert-Ops. It’s all a bit bleak. ET has something for everyone, and everyone can make a contribution to the team effort irrespective of their ability to shoot straight, or not, as the case may be. In COD the best aimers are the teams best players, simple as. Again, having poor aim myself, COD doesn’t do much for me in that respect.

Where COD scores over ET

No XP system
Yes, I know the XP system is much beloved of the majority of public players, but playing a game where one persons skill is all that differentiates them from another, and their skills only change with practise not the length of time they’ve spent on the server, is a liberating experience, and is a much fairer way to play IMO. ET would be the perfect game IMO if it didn’t have the XP system, but heh, I know I’m in a minority in this respect.

Maps
COD has 12 (yes, count them, 12!) MP maps out of the box. All of them well designed, perfectly balanced (from my limited experience of them) and small-ish in scale. Perfect for Clan matches. Lack of balanced maps is ET’s biggest drawback. Big sprawling epic maps may be fun on publics, but no game survives for long unless it has a thriving Clan community, and ETs lack of small, well-balanced maps is a big threat to it’s future as a Clan game. COD has all the well-balanced, Clan-friendly maps it needs already.

So, to summarise, ET is great for public play, which is what it was designed for I guess, whereas COD is more Clan-friendly (true teamwork is inherent in Clan matches anyway so COD’s lack of teamplay elements on publics is not an issue). For that reason I suspect COD will still be going strong when ET has faded away, although I don’t expect that to happen for a while yet either.

I’ll be sticking with ET in the short term because it gives me everything I want from a public game. Hopefully it will evolve, with the XP and poorly balanced map problems being addressed in due course. COD is a nice game, but it doesn’t cut it for me as a public game.

(evilsock) #20

Nicely put - I agree with what your saying :slight_smile:

I really do like the expanded bits of ET (especially the engineers role although tbh, pub play on RtCW was always better for having engineers that could exploit the nade advantage (8), and towards the end of things - certainly with RtCW - shrubbed servers were/are great for engineers because of tripmines and proximity mines - it really opened up the class).

GUID’s should be issued once and then fixed for all time - you shouldn’t be able to simply delete your GUID key and re-register. Had it been retail you would probably be looking forward to some GOTY maps, patches and longterm support.

I just hope for SD’s sake there are plans in the works for RtCW2 based on the DooM3 engine - now that really would be something to get a AMD game basher upgrade for :open_mouth:

One last thing - please - ditch pathfinder based bots - they’re dumb and irritating. Please please please begin to sort out SP games with online content - like proxy bots! Give a bot the full resources of a host - give it a wider field of vision so it ‘see’s’ it’s environment better and has a clue as to how to decide if one thing is more important than another in the heat of battle - make it so that they have access to lots of different battle / comabt styles - make it so they learn from their mistakes and the data is saved / stored and made available to other ‘proxy bots’ - and do it soon!