Just a quickie here, but I feel I had to say something. Having thought it through at multiple angles, I'm going to just be blunt. Call of Duty's team has just announced a new feature of their game. That feature is having the entire story available to you from the start. That means you can literally jump into the last level from the very first moment your game is installed and ready, and you don't need any prior context. Sounds like such a weird move, right? Well their logic was explained, but its more baffling then you'd think, and painfully ironic considering the franchise its coming from. Here's what was said (and source):
"The unlocking level system is an archaic mentality we've had since we did bedroom development back in the day - you do this, then go on to the next one.Consumers and game players in general are far more mature these days. There are so many things vying for our interests today. It's about, how do they want to consume it? Maybe they put it down on level two, and then they're in work the next day, and some guy says, 'dude, you've got to check out level four!' And he's like, 'okay, I'll have a quick look.' That's totally fine. I think it's their choice."
Better yet, I'll focus on the bit that irked the most of my reaction.
"The unlocking level system is an archaic mentality we've had since we did bedroom development back in the day - you do this, then go on to the next one."
Um... sound familiar? Like that entire skinner box clogging up the multiplayer? The thing that revolves around an entire leveling system that feeds off of primitive instinct rather than creative fun? That 40-60 level climb seems to be the elephant in the room here. I don't want to spend hours upon hours of repetitive grinding just to see what the last assault rifle feels like (and then hours upon hours to unlock its pieces). Not only that, but with every entry it seems like they get increasingly more absurd in stupid arbitrary requirements. Currently you not only have to level up to get tokens that buy stuff, but you have to also level up so you're able to even have a choice on what to spend that token on. Then you have perks to consider, streak rewards, and then there's 9 or more specialists each with their own two abilities you should get at some point. Then once again, there's the attachments for all weapons. Basically in the end the grind for even your first run (not even touching on prestige, which also holds content hostage and makes you want to repeat all of this again) should take around 40 hours or so. Obviously it differs by how good you're playing, but not by so much. Oh but that campaign? That 6 hour campaign with a chronologically ordered narrative focus was what was clearly taxing your time too much by daring to ask you to play it in the sensible order. Truth is actually progressing in campaigns holds meaning, where as actually progressing up the rank ladder in multiplayer is an arbitrary system implemented to suck up your time by giving you a carrot on a stick to chase after. This was so close to being self-aware, so close to fixing a problem I've had with the series for years, and yet they totally miss it and use similar language to say the campaign of all things needed fixing. Thankfully you came close enough that other people have already leaped out ahead of me to bring up the lame skinner box you took from Battlefield and together made into a multiplayer staple. Almost every game now requires around 20-40 hours or so of grinding in order to just try out everything in multiplayer, and its absurd. I'm not totally opposed to progression systems in general, you could easily build one off of cosmetics that could be fun, but that's just not how things have turned out.
However I don't want to just come off as tearing this out. Looking at the statement from a totally pure perspective, I can't say its that bad. Nobody should be trying to play the campaign out of order, but at the end of the day that's their own damn choice and nothing is wrong with giving them that choice. Meanwhile if something were to ever happen to my save data, and all I want to do after a rough day is come home and play mission 7 where you get to use some fancy super gun, then I'll be super grateful that I can do that from the base game itself. So this news isn't so bad, its just that it comes so close to making a big point, only to take a total 180 turn in an unpredictably naïve statement. To be honest though it might have done more good that it happened considering I'm not the only person triggered into this kind of rant, and maybe Treyarch will open their eyes. Of course, knowing how the industry works now, I think it'll just result in Activision pointing to some microtransaction short-cut DLC that pretty much confirms how F2P-ish the entire grind system was to begin with. Oh well, here's to hoping Black Ops 3 turns out well for those with good hopes for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment