My grown children, and I, use console games to continue our "gaming nights", even though they (my kids) are now scattered all over the world. We've played every FPS game that has come out, and we've played the whole COD line. While we've enjoyed playing them all, COD BO3-Eclipse suffers from the same faults as every other COD title: 1.Jerky, unreastic, movement (like watching an old 1920sMy grown children, and I, use console games to continue our "gaming nights", even though they (my kids) are now scattered all over the world. We've played every FPS game that has come out, and we've played the whole COD line. While we've enjoyed playing them all, COD BO3-Eclipse suffers from the same faults as every other COD title: 1.Jerky, unreastic, movement (like watching an old 1920s Charlie Chaplin movie), 2. Inconsistent lighting (if you dive into a dark corner, you might go dark - or you might, inexplicably, light up and be EASIER to see - for no concievable reason), 3. Inconsistent atmospheric effects - as the surrounding map details fade/blur with distance, your avatar remains the same, or becomes darker. The effect being that you become more visible so that an enemy, with no scope, can easily see/shoot you from distance. 4. As maps get more realistic, detailed, and multi-leveled, there's still a bewildering inconsistency with what terrain features (foliage, trees, ledges, roof-tops, etc) that you are allowed to access/use as cover.
There will always be the two basic types of players: the sniper/ambush - derisively called "campers", usually by those that get killed by them, and the "run-and-gun" crowd, who want to play a FPS as if it were a "sports" game, with "kills" being "goals", and who get REALLY angry when their sprinting around in the open gets them killed (as it would in actual combat).
I expected, as gaming consoles became more advanced (and military combat-style games became more realistic), that these two gaming styles would become less of an issue. But COD BO3 seems to purposefully cater to the "sports"-type players (and the Eclipse DLC was the more of the same).I used to think it was just the limitations of game technology, but that's obviously not the case. You have beautiful, realistically detailed, multi-player maps, but you can't use 98% of the available cover, or high shooting positions. There have always been the problems stated above, but now you have NO "camo" (as in "camouflage" - something that is supposed to help you blend into your environment, and be LESS visible). You have what is referred to as "camo", but is actually just the opposite: bright, avatar skins that CONTRAST with the environment (with bright red/orange/yellow/blue/pink, etc lights all over - wtf?) And, as you advance, you can earn even more "camos" that are even MORE flashy, and visible. "COD" should stand for "Clowns On Display". Don't get me wrong, I have no problem if somebody wants to look like Liberace on the field of cyber-battle, but why can't it go BOTH ways? Why not offer the option of getting "camos" that are actually HARDER to see (and lose those ridiculous lights), or allow everyone to customize their OWN "camo", however they want? Or - in the next DLC - introduce a "realistic" mode that caters to someone besides the "run-and-gun" crowd? Make each player's visual perception more like the "campaign" mode, with "hardcore" gameplay, and keep all your "gestures", "taunts", and fluorescent "camos", in "Core" mode for the 13-year-olds. Why not stop catering to the whiny types, and let the "realists" finally enjoy the "realism" that is possible with this game? If the others can't stay alive, and fight, effectively, in a battlfield environment that is actually more "realistic", instead of just LOOKING more realistic, then they can play "Core" mode until they ARE ready to play with the "grown-ups".… Expand
Call of Duty: Black Ops III - EclipseYour Score0 out of 10User Score
