Pre-Order Call of Duty:Black Ops 25 % off Gamestop with $100 Purchase

blitzbllmstr

blitzbllmstr

CAGiversary!
Feedback
2 (100%)
Okay folks I have been waiting all day for this and Gamestop finally got of their butts and opened up pre orders for Call of Duty Black Ops. Simply add Call of Duty and another item 40.01 or more into your cart and use the 25OFF coupon and get Call of Duty for 45.00 dollars at launch.

This deal is only good for today 4/30 as the coupon expires today. You should be good to go for any pre-order bonuses and cash-backs they offer leading up to the release.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
[quote name='ChineseRcool']Yo it's produced by treyarch, its gonna suck man

[/QUOTE]

I believe it will be the complete opposite. Zombies rule! As long as they don't make it too similar to MW2...
 
[quote name='chrollo']its in stock only isnt it[/QUOTE]


no it works on pre-orders, I just pre-ordered Starcraft 2 and Call of Duty both came to 44.99 after the coupon.

[quote name='ChineseRcool']Yo it's produced by treyarch, its gonna suck man

[/QUOTE]

and you are ignored...
 
[quote name='ChineseRcool']Yo it's produced by treyarch, its gonna suck man
[/QUOTE]

Yup. Never understood why the Treyarch titles sell so much.
 
[quote name='blitzbllmstr']no it works on pre-orders, I just pre-ordered Starcraft 2 and Call of Duty both came to 44.99 after the coupon.



and you are ignored...[/QUOTE]


Lol nice comeback, anyway, what i meant to say is that the game will suck compare to MW2. The only reason COD WAW is a good game because of the zombie.
 
[quote name='ChineseRcool']Lol nice comeback, anyway, what i meant to say is that the game will suck compare to MW2. The only reason COD WAW is a good game because of the zombie.[/QUOTE]

Both games are still fantastic fun. Preference wise, I always play the most recent one or the ones my friends play. I couldn't care much if IW or Treyarch do them as Treyarch proved themselves able to totally mimic and even beat IW at its own game with WAW. I didn't trust Treyarch before on CoD games, I do now.
 
Just my two cents, WAW just has a slightly different feel that makes it inferior, imo. I can't even pinpoint what the difference is; something just feels off. Plus the weapon selection annoys me. Should be noted that I only played multiplayer.
 
At least I'll know, with Treyarch, if there is a glitch in the multiplayer it will be fixed in a couple of weeks instead of a couple of months- just sayin'.
 
Get used to crappy CoD games... now that infinity ward's dead (well dying quickly i guess) we won't be seeing a good CoD for a while...
 
[quote name='Darknuke']Get used to crappy CoD games... now that infinity ward's dead (well dying quickly i guess) we won't be seeing a good CoD for a while...[/QUOTE]
The CEOs are forming another company and I believe that upon breaking from Activision that they managed to keep the intellectual rights to all COD games after the Vietnam War.

Call of Duty needs to take a break and we all know that Kotick is starting to have a lot of backlash from his stupidity. He must be really wanting to get his hands on Blizzard at this point.

Also, Ill just state this and shut up.

Infinity Ward's multiplayer was HORRIBLE, in all their CoD games. Treyarch made an excellent multiplayer game but failed on the story, making a grenade spam the only viable way of winning the game. The companies are polar opposites. I enjoyed MW/2's storylines, hated WaW's story, despised MW/2's multiplayer and loved WaW's multiplayer.
 
[quote name='Unaki']The CEOs are forming another company and I believe that upon breaking from Activision that they managed to keep the intellectual rights to all COD games after the Vietnam War.[/QUOTE]

That's the subject of pending litigation, and personally, as a lawyer, I think their claims are probably going to be fruitless. Activision's lawyers aren't dumb enough to write a contract with West and Zampella giving them any rights to the Call of Duty intellectual property. We'll see how it plays out in the litigation, but I doubt West and Zampella will win that issue of their case.

[quote name='LinkinPrime']Yup. Never understood why the Treyarch titles sell so much.[/QUOTE]

Honestly, I've never understood the disdain for Treyarch and the constant hyping of Infinity Ward. Treyarch isn't fantastic, but they're not half bad. And Infinity Ward (I guess you could now call them Respawn) is put on a very high pedestal, imho, one that they don't deserve at this point.
 
I think I'll wait this one out. Who knows how long they've even been working on the game. Plus, there are possible future pay-to-play concepts floating around, which would completely kill it for me.
 
[quote name='Darknuke']Get used to crappy CoD games... now that infinity ward's dead (well dying quickly i guess) we won't be seeing a good CoD for a while...[/QUOTE]

With Bungie now part of Activision, I have a feeling we will be seeing a Bungie developed CoD later on.

EDIT: Also don't forget about Sledgehammer, they're supposed to be working on one as well, which could go either way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='LinkinPrime']With Bungie now part of Activision, I have a feeling we will be seeing a Bungie developed CoD later on.[/QUOTE]

:drool: "Would be epic"!
 
Interesting... but I think I'll wait on this one to see more details/real trailers of the game. I'm sure there'll be good deals in terms of credit, gift cards, etc.
 
[quote name='BingoBrown']That's the subject of pending litigation, and personally, as a lawyer, I think their claims are probably going to be fruitless. Activision's lawyers aren't dumb enough to write a contract with West and Zampella giving them any rights to the Call of Duty intellectual property. We'll see how it plays out in the litigation, but I doubt West and Zampella will win that issue of their case.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps. Then again, they never signed a contract concerning ownership of the COD brand. They did, however, sign a contract that gave them full IP control of the Modern Warfare brand, and they have the contract/documents to prove this.

[quote name='BingoBrown']Honestly, I've never understood the disdain for Treyarch and the constant hyping of Infinity Ward. Treyarch isn't fantastic, but they're not half bad. And Infinity Ward (I guess you could now call them Respawn) is put on a very high pedestal, imho, one that they don't deserve at this point.[/QUOTE]

I also agree that Treyarch doesn't get as much credit as they deserve, but as a developer myself, make no mistake about it. The IW/Respawn guys have earned that high pedestal accolade. When it comes to what they do (1st person combat shooters), no one, and I mean no one, does it better in this industry than they do.
 
[quote name='SonictheHedgehog1337']It's just gonna suck when they announce the limited edition I'll want to change my preorder[/QUOTE]

yeah but if you really think about it MW2 Limited Edition was okay, I only ordered because I had the 1/2 coupon code from Amazon for it. Art Books and toys bundled with games really aren't selling points for me. I'm more willing to be drawn toward in game bonuses.

WAW had I believe a canteen and an early unlock for the FG machine gun as well as the carbine. Which was a little better.

You're sure to get any pre-order in game bonus or credit when they eventually attach them to the game
 
[quote name='SmileyMcSmiles']Perhaps. Then again, they never signed a contract concerning ownership of the COD brand. They did, however, sign a contract that gave them full IP control of the Modern Warfare brand, and they have the contract/documents to prove this.[/QUOTE]

Activision owns the Call of Duty brand, so I'm not sure why they would ever have to sign a contract with West/Zampella stating that Activision owns it. It's not a subject for debate. And giving creative control would clearly be contingent on West/Zampella working for Activision, which isn't the case anymore.

All I'm saying is that, unless Activision's lawyers made giant mistakes in drafting the contract with West/Zampella, there's no way they'll steal the brand from Activision. It could happen, but is incredibly unlikely.

[quote name='SmileyMcSmiles']
I also agree that Treyarch doesn't get as much credit as they deserve, but as a developer myself, make no mistake about it. The IW/Respawn guys have earned that high pedestal accolade. When it comes to what they do (1st person combat shooters), no one, and I mean no one, does it better in this industry than they do.[/QUOTE]

I think it's debatable. Sure, CoD4 was awesome, but I think MW2 was almost a step back. Personally, I thought the single-player, while good, was a little contrived and not entirely coherent. And multiplayer has been full of hacks and cheats that IW has either been very slow in fixing, or refused to fix at all.

Honestly, I think you could argue that Bungie does it best (granted, they may not fit your definition of FPS of the combat variety). Nobody has the robust online stat tracking system like Bungie (I'm still angry IW didn't include that in MW2, a huge oversight on their part), and nobody has the great theater/online video sharing feature that Bungie has. Certainly, I don't think everything Bungie has done is great, they have their faults as well, it's just that their faults aren't as glaring. For instance, they've never had a game with the myriad of hacks or cheats that MW2 is going through, and their games have been some of the most popular FPSs of all time.
 
Infinity Ward hasn't made a good CoD game since CoD2 and I enjoyed WaW more than either MW. I'm interested in this since it's the Cold War era (something new), but I'll hold off. It'll be on sale before Christmas for $35 or less.
 
[quote name='BingoBrown']Activision owns the Call of Duty brand, so I'm not sure why they would ever have to sign a contract with West/Zampella stating that Activision owns it. It's not a subject for debate. And giving creative control would clearly be contingent on West/Zampella working for Activision, which isn't the case anymore.

All I'm saying is that, unless Activision's lawyers made giant mistakes in drafting the contract with West/Zampella, there's no way they'll steal the brand from Activision. It could happen, but is incredibly unlikely.[/QUOTE]

The issue isn't about the Call of Duty brand. There is no question that Activision owns the COD brand. The issue is the Modern Warfare brand. It is a brand unto itself. Which is why IW originally wanted to label MW2 without the COD title...but ultimately caved in to Activisions request.

West/Zampella have a contract that states they are the owners of the Modern Warfare brand. Activision can make all the COD games they want...they just cannot use the Modern Warfare name without the consent of West/Zampella.



[quote name='BingoBrown']I think it's debatable. Sure, CoD4 was awesome, but I think MW2 was almost a step back. Personally, I thought the single-player, while good, was a little contrived and not entirely coherent. And multiplayer has been full of hacks and cheats that IW has either been very slow in fixing, or refused to fix at all.

Honestly, I think you could argue that Bungie does it best (granted, they may not fit your definition of FPS of the combat variety). Nobody has the robust online stat tracking system like Bungie (I'm still angry IW didn't include that in MW2, a huge oversight on their part), and nobody has the great theater/online video sharing feature that Bungie has. Certainly, I don't think everything Bungie has done is great, they have their faults as well, it's just that their faults aren't as glaring. For instance, they've never had a game with the myriad of hacks or cheats that MW2 is going through, and their games have been some of the most popular FPSs of all time.[/QUOTE]

MW2 was a step back...and you can blame Activision for that. West/Zampella have thoroughly stated they are disappointed with MW2 and wasn't the game they really wanted to make. They were forced to release the game as is due to Activision's strict release date of November 2009. This one is a complex situation, but to fully understand it, one has to have industry experience to grasp the constant struggles internal developers have with publishers that are never made public.

As for cheats, hacks, exploits...they exist in all games. The problem is that MW2 is an extremely high profile game (and so is Halo, sure)...but a lot of the COD community were ticked off concerning the lack of dedicated servers (PC community that is). And as a result, the backlash of underground programmers to create as many hacks and cheats to effectively destroy the online aspect of the game as a form of retaliation ensued. Those hacks were then applied for the consoles as well. That's the reason why MW2 is plagued with hacks...not due to any lack of programming talent.

IW/Respawn guys are some of THE most talented people in this industry. Their games reinvented the shooter and how it should be played. Looking down the iron sights of a gun is now a staple in most shooters today, and you can thank them for that. Implementing light RPG aspects into it's MP, driven by experience points, classes, perks and customizable loadouts (all combined) was a huge step in a new direction. Not to mention the quality and polish of their games.

Few studios ever reach the status these guys have attained. It takes a pool of people with A LOT of talent, that work extremely well with each other, little to no internal ego issues, hard work, and many, many late night hours of sacrifice (including weekends). Many studios have these ingredients and still cannot reach their level, sadly. Sometimes it requires that special spark...and they've got that in spades.

I'm just sayin'. ;)
 
[quote name='SmileyMcSmiles']
West/Zampella have a contract that states they are the owners of the Modern Warfare brand. Activision can make all the COD games they want...they just cannot use the Modern Warfare name without the consent of West/Zampella.[/QUOTE]

I don't think that is true, and I have never seen any source of information stating that. I'm sure that's what West and Zampella are alleging in their case, but that doesn't make it true. Activision is dumb, but not dumb enough to hand over a franchise to a developer.
 
Gonna preorder this and Medal of Honor since I have GS credit.

I don't really care who makes or publishes COD as long as it's fun.
 
[quote name='LinkinPrime']With Bungie now part of Activision, I have a feeling we will be seeing a Bungie developed CoD later on.

EDIT: Also don't forget about Sledgehammer, they're supposed to be working on one as well, which could go either way.[/QUOTE]


Bungie's not part of Activision. Activision just gets to publish their next game. It's kind of like the how Microsoft publishes Gears of War for Epic.
 
[quote name='nightmare452']Both games are still fantastic fun. Preference wise, I always play the most recent one or the ones my friends play. I couldn't care much if IW or Treyarch do them as Treyarch proved themselves able to totally mimic and even beat IW at its own game with WAW. I didn't trust Treyarch before on CoD games, I do now.[/QUOTE]

So do I. Enjoyed WAW a great deal. Each installment they've done has improved on the last, no reason to think this one won't be even more solid.

As far as IW goes, I didn't enjoy MW2 anywhere as much as the first MW -- and the single player campaign had one of the all-time dumbest storylines ever, not to mention failed to last six hours. Big-time letdown there.
 
[quote name='MrBeatdown']Bungie's not part of Activision. Activision just gets to publish their next game. It's kind of like the how Microsoft publishes Gears of War for Epic.[/QUOTE]

Same difference. It's a partnership and if they wanted to, they could make it happen.
 
[quote name='advanced']For the pre-order, when do they charge my credit card? At time of shipment?[/QUOTE]

Yeah. It's a good deal. Even with tax it'll be more than $10 off the retail, so no need to wait for Amazon to add a $10 pre-order discount for a future purchase. You can get it immediately at GS.
 
[quote name='LinkinPrime']Yup. Never understood why the Treyarch titles sell so much.[/QUOTE]


The Treyarch titles IMHO are almost as good as the IW ones and they are getting closer to being the samething each time they bring a new one out.

IW might do certain things better here and there, which people will point it out and say because of thats it's 100% better, but its not.

The gap is closing and although its sad to see IW as we knew it go away, I am happy that Treyarch keeps at it and look forward to playing there games for years to come.
 
I hope i'm not the only one who thinks Call of Duty should just "give up" already! They are milking the series beyond dry! I loved MW1 and WaW, but MW2 was nowhere NEAR as good so I don't expect much from this title.... WWII > Vietnam. Also, BC2 destroys MW2 in every aspect!
 
[quote name='IronsideGrunt']The Treyarch titles IMHO are almost as good as the IW ones and they are getting closer to being the samething each time they bring a new one out.

IW might do certain things better here and there, which people will point it out and say because of thats it's 100% better, but its not.

The gap is closing and although its sad to see IW as we knew it go away, I am happy that Treyarch keeps at it and look forward to playing there games for years to come.[/QUOTE]


I guess for me it's the antique weapons that make the game unenjoyable for me. Though I did like CoD2 a lot, but CoD3 was like night and day compared to 2 and it just didn't sit well with me. I rented WaW and after 5min I had to quit, I just couldn't get used to it, and its weapon selection.
 
[quote name='SmileyMcSmiles']MW2 was a step back...and you can blame Activision for that. West/Zampella have thoroughly stated they are disappointed with MW2 and wasn't the game they really wanted to make. They were forced to release the game as is due to Activision's strict release date of November 2009. This one is a complex situation, but to fully understand it, one has to have industry experience to grasp the constant struggles internal developers have with publishers that are never made public.[/QUOTE]


http://www.develop-online.net/features/669/Interview-Infinity-Ward

Was there ever a moment where you thought “Oh no, we’re not going to make it?”
[Laughs] No, we are very confident in the game right now. We’ve got everything we wanted to get into it and we are at a point where we are happy with it.
Click to expand...
I guess Hans Zimmer doesn’t come cheap and I imagine the development budget for a game of this magnitude is pretty high. How has the budget helped development?
We are pretty tight on our budgets. Early on – when we decided to make a sequel – Activision estimated out a ridiculous budget. And we were like: ‘No, we don’t need that.’ Much like we don’t let ourselves get distracted by hype, if you have excess you feel like you should use excess. So we said ‘let us design a game the way we’d always design a game. And let us focus on that.’ So we didn’t let the budget affect our mentality. We would only put stuff in the game that is right for the game, and not because we can.
Click to expand...
You’ve been working on Call of Duty for ten years. Have you ever been tempted to move onto a new IP?
We take it game-by-game. We never worry about the future too much. Right now we wanted to make a sequel, so the entire team is hands on deck for making Modern Warfare 2. Then once this is done, maybe we’ll see about doing something new. If we do want to do something else, then we will do it. We don’t feel tied to making Call of Duty games. We still make Call of Duty games because we’re having fun doing it. And when it stops being fun, we’ll move onto something else.
Click to expand...
Robert Bowling isn't exactly known for pulling punches.
 
[quote name='LinkinPrime']I guess for me it's the antique weapons that make the game unenjoyable for me. Though I did like CoD2 a lot, but CoD3 was like night and day compared to 2 and it just didn't sit well with me. I rented WaW and after 5min I had to quit, I just couldn't get used to it, and its weapon selection.[/QUOTE]

The old weapons is why I like CoD2 and WaW more. I hated CoD3 for the unskippable cutscenes. Using an iron sight is more challenging than just moving a red dot over your target.
 
[quote name='ChineseRcool']Yo it's produced by treyarch, its gonna suck compare to MW2[/QUOTE]

WAW had much better muiltiplayer than MW IMO. Sure, the campaign was crap but I tend to get much more mileage out of the multiplayer anyway. Haven't played MW2 though because I oppose how they crippled the PC version--I'll probably get it in a year or two when it hits the bargain bin. In any case, nothing I've seen of MW2 has really convinced me that I'm missing too much.
 
[quote name='ChineseRcool']Yo it's produced by treyarch, its gonna suck compare to MW2[/QUOTE]

All FPS' pretty much suck imo. It's either you vs 1) zombies, 2) Nazis, 3)aliens, 4) genetically mutated freaks or 5) a combination of 1-4.

So boring, so overdone, yet suckers keep buying them.:roll:
 
[quote name='LinkinPrime']With Bungie now part of Activision, I have a feeling we will be seeing a Bungie developed CoD later on.

EDIT: Also don't forget about Sledgehammer, they're supposed to be working on one as well, which could go either way.[/QUOTE]

bungie stated they are starting a new IP and activision would just publish and let bungie own the rights and such. so, highly doubtful, but we can dream :drool:
 
I loved WaW and was disappointed IW didnt add the gore like Treyarch. I was hoping IW would have added and expanded on the gore. Killing in MW2 is not as satisfying as WaW. MW2 single player was pretty bad. I felt like I was playing most of the game with that bloodsplatter on the screen. It was so annoying getting shot from so many directions, I was happy when it was over so I could get back to mp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top