I do miss those days. Town, me, a ray gun mk2 and a DSR. Nothing could stop me, besides the eventual zombies health increase that was impossible to overcome
Remember getting so existed to the point I nearly died in game when I hit round 30 on mob, within a week of getting bo3 I got to round 40 in der eisendrache
I remember it took me forever to get to round 50 on Shangri la on BO1. When I finally got there it felt like a genuine achievement. Meanwhile on BO3 I literally got to round 100 on Der Eisendrache on my first attempt, whilst barely paying attention once I got my setup. I’ll take training in a tight room over sitting in a corner pressing the fire button every 5 seconds or so.
Hela the system for rounds worked different and had exploits in WaW firstly and those aren’t the only maps to be remade. Plus compare waw to bo1 versions then compare bo1 version to bo3
But that goes back to the zombroz episode where they discuss what’s really a good measure of difficulty. BO3 stops at 255 and you speed through the rounds. The only real thing about BO3 offline that could make the game inherently easier is Widow’s Wine m+Shield combo but you start running out of Widow’s during later rounds. Der Riese in BO3 doesn’t have Widow’s at all, you’re just forced to run a tight ass train in the spawn to progress through the rounds quickly
Kurokami Najimi agreeable but the problem and erosion of challenge isn’t adding the systems in because we had new gradual systems added and included back in the day but they weren’t to the level of Perkaholic and specialist weapons that kill everything right next to you give you armour etc etc. I think excessive added systems and features imo only started with Jason Blundell Maps
Definitely agree. Another point as well is the feeling of progression was completely lost in BO4, you basically started with Jug & a wonder-weapon (specialist weapon), then the perks you could get weren't even that good (compared to double tap, jug, speed cola, etc). I remember every time I played Shadows of Evil I'd always have a struggle picking my 4 perks. Widows wine was god tier, but so is jug, speed, double tap, and stammin up - as well as the fact that on solo most people get quick revive. Making these difficult decisions, as well as the heavy elements of luck (mystery box weapons) & trying to survive against those odds you've given yourself is what makes zombies fun in my opinion.
TwoHats yeah you started off as a semi-god in bo4 and only needed to achieve one tier above (which is god status). But for bo3 you started off as a puny mortal and it took MUCH more to eventually achieve the god status.
That’s an interesting point comparing how useful perks felt. Maybe I’ll explore that on another episode! There are super strong perks in BO4 but they don’t feel as good as BO3 perks. That’s so strange!
@@Radaustin27 Yeah I'm not sure why that is the case. Maybe because they were new, or because of the "modifier" slot it was hard to understanding when they'd actually help you. Compared to something like jug that is obvious what it does and has saved us all countless times over the years probably. Dying wish is the only perk I'd prioritise in BO4 imo, or maybe modifier slot stammin' up.
I always felt the removal of World at War’s “grapple” mechanic where zombies slow you down was a mistake. It actively made zombies more hazardous and encouraged players to avoid getting close. Now you can just push them aside like they’re nothing
Amazing video. What you talked about around the 10 minute mark about the "dominant startegy", this is EXACTLY why the "don't like em, don't use em" argument has never worked with me in terms of Gobblegums. Sure, you can choose not to use Gums, but you can also choose not to buy Jugg, or PaP a weapon, or open a certain door. That doesn't mean Gums don't break the game. If you had a map, where you could go through a quest to get a Thunder Gun as a reward, would you bother doing it if you could also buy it off the wall for 10 points? This is also one of the reasons why I love WW2 Zombies. It feels like a great mix of classic and modern Zombies, with loudouts that don't make or break a game, but slightly changes how you play (the Mods and the Special Abilities).
I don’t see the difference, if the point of playing zombies is to feel accomplished after doing something difficult why does it matter if that difficult task was one you made up rather than one the devs made default? In fact what’s the difference between someone saying I want to get to x round in zombies so I’m gonna play the easiest map and then saying all other maps are bad due to the existence of the easier map that allowed them to reach the goal?
@@KurokamiNajimi Because getting to high rounds on an easy map and a hard map are 2 different accomplishments. Using Gumballs simply makes other tasks simply feel unneeded work. No matter if you use them or not, you know they exist for you to use. For example: In Shangri-La, you're able to turn Max Ammo drops into a Perk Bottle drop if you're good enough. Or in Origins, you can find red dig sited if you search long enough in Zombie Blood. But what's the point of doing all that work when you know that you can, at any time, pay 0 points to get all perks immediately? You feel cheated, knowing there's a much easier, official way to get them. In BO1 and 2, I always went for these quests. In BO3, I went for them once, and never again, because I knew that "why go through that trouble when I can get an even better reward on round 1 by simply doing nothing at all?"
@@tslanews24 Why are they different though if the effort or lack there of is the same on BO Nacth no handicap vs BO3 Nacth handicapped? Only difference is BO3 Nacth has more variety in what you can do. I agree with the other part of your comment because those tasks are more inconvenient than not buying Jug, not sitting in a corner, etc
@SurvivalOfTheFittest I think WAW and BO Nacth are what's boring because they're more one dimensional. On BO3 Nacth you can camp for a while in multiple areas in addition to the old strategies. You're right that you can't control how people play in co op but randoms tend not to use the best strategy possible. If I hop on DE or Origins in BO3 right now the chances of making it to round 30+ with all 4 players or at least 3 of us staying is low. If you're playing with friends then you can just agree to play a certain way. When it comes to competing with others the problem with BO3 is just that it stops at round 255, not so much that it's too easy. Another thing I should have mentioned is that most of us still can't get to round 255 or whatever unless we have unlimited shopping free+near death though those aren't apart of offline solo meaning the mode is inherently harder which you guys claim has value. You could say the standards of a high round changes rather than go yawn I got to round 70 in 2 hours this is a bad game, how about going for 115 etc where you'll probably surprisingly fail. But again I'll definitely grant that the 255 limit is a flaw for world record players
Personally, I think Zombies does well with a mixture of risk and being overpowered. Let's take a more modern map, Shadows of Evil, for example. Certain perks are in really niche corners you rarely go to because they are associated with smaller spaces and corridors, making it harder to slip by the zombies or fight your way out. I never see myself going to the perk machine in Waterfront unprepared because I know it will result poorly if I'm not careful. Now the argument could be made that gumballs such as Perkaholic alleviate the need to even go there in the first place, but you have to make that decision to use up your valuable Megas, assuming you aren't going to close app. In terms of upgrading the sword and filling up souls in the same room as that perk, you are still extremely vulnerable, even with all of your perks and a powerful GG. Fill up the egg on a Margwa round and you find yourself in a sticky situation regardless of your gum. This kind of thing is why maps like SoE are so beautiful in my opinion. Yes, you are overpowered with tools like Gobblegum, but you still have that risk factor that is always in the back of your mind. Loving this series Reed, keep up the great content!
I agree that the risk factor has gone way down, games were way more intense in earlier games even just based off the amount of hits it takes to get down. when it went from 2 hit to 3 hit that was a good change as 2 hits sometimes happened way too quick but the current 4 hit system is a little too much as you can get out of almost everything. Its a weird balance of difficulty and satisfaction for doing a job well done, i also feel like some of the issue comes in when you compare older games to newer games where before getting a high round required more skill where as now getting high rounds just requires time and patience. Also if you ever need some footage recorded for anything hit me up, i have all the games and maps with free time to spend on them if you need a little help getting some footage
The points on 'Dominant Strategy' is something I've thought of for a LONG time. I still remember like, in BO3's case, for example, there's Unbearable (The one that keeps the box from moving when you get a teddy bear). I don't really use that one since it doesn't really have its uses. Crawl Space is another one. Why would I use it except for the Void Bow steps on Der Eisendrache? Now for subjectivity, I understand why people do not enjoy Zetsubou No Shima, and yet, I still love to play it despite it being a HEAVY parts and opening doors quest.
The Stranger Reed from the upside down lol Totally agree btw, it's lost. Create class stuff doesn't belong in zombies period, u get in ASAP survive and be able to do anything within that game with good rewards. 💯
Zombies lost its risk. I remember back in the day it was all about "hold one zombie so I go can pack my ray gun". In the most recent play of 9, I literally packed my guns while being chased by the guys with the throwing axes. Risk was gone when we gained the 3 hit system and the shield. BUT, these are beloved. I much prefer having these because you are able to play the clutch when you get cornered. But, it was much more fun when you had to constantly dodge zombies just incase you don't get windmilled.
So far, this new series has been a great in-depth look at the fundamental concepts/ideas that, when executed and balanced properly, make zombies great! As a day one zombies fan and someone who views day to day life through a very analytical/philosophical lens (due to the way my brain is wired), I can confidently say that this series is both highly enjoyable and mentally stimulating! I'm very excited to see where you take us, Reed! I know that, where ever that place is, it will be great, due to the fact that you made it! I say this because any work that you create, by it's very nature, has your unique creative signature which, can only come from you! Keep up the hard work and awesome content, but not at the expense of your mental and physical well-being! You're doing a fantastic job, man! 😊
Best Mainframe episode yet ! The absolute core of any game, and in the case of Treyarch Zombies, one with an observable, interesting history spanning 10 years that scales differently for each iteration. It's actually really awesome to see you talk about all this foundational stuff. This is the kind of stuff that some custom map developers legit think about to such a degree.
I'm so glad you made this video and I really hope the developers see it. My best mate and I used to play zombies split screen 3 times a week even during year 12 exams and we got to 50 and 60 on nearly every map without round robbin on black ops 3. We really tried to give B04 a chance, played every map and before the start of 2020 we were already sick of it and back on playing B03, only to realise we had lost so much of our skills because Black Ops 4 makes it so easy to escape the challenge that makes the game interesting. We played B03 zombies for over 3 years over 3000 hours game time and in less than one year of playing Black Ops 4 our skills dropped from reaching top hundreds on leaderboards to barley round 40
I love that you brought game theory into this. I'm an economics fanboy and that helps describe the issue, and also really solidifies that the issue is undeniable and that something about Zombies' system needs to change in order to keep Zombies fresh. It also explains a lot of what went wrong in Black Ops 3 and Black Ops 4. And yeah, I hate to admit it, but even though BO3 was brought back to life with Zombies Chronicles, it also showed the potential that the long-run fun of the game can be when a minimal risk, dominant strategy is present. It makes the game dull over time. You're absolutely right, and I can attest to this. Admittedly, I've been a Zombies fanboy since 2011 (during BO1 game cycle), and I can view this from a lot of the same angles as you. I am not sure what needs to change, but I don't think gobblegums and things help the situation. I still believe that an alternate "custom mode" where these gobblegums are permitted would work best, but I don't really know how that would play out in the long run, so I'm not going to pretend that I am a smarty pants and stick super hard to that opinion. I'm open to new ideas, and I really hope Treyarch is open to new ideas to modify this system as well.
I think the diminishing risk factor comes from the games getting easier, or at least more appealing to new players. I whole heartedly agree with you about game theory and dominant strategy. The argument "don't use Gobblegum" is equivalent to usain bolt breaking a leg so he has more competition.
I love the little comments and subtitles that pop up on screen for a split second. Took me about 5 minutes to pause it at the correct second to find out bo1 is the best zombies. Not disappointed. I agree
BO4: You can potentially and comfortably go up to round 100 on BO4 in the starting room......WITHOUT elixirs. -Specialist weapon -Wraith fires That's why the f***ing risk and being on edge is no longer there.
That just isn't true at all lmao, no one has done even close to a round 100 first room (outside one 76 round on Tag) without elixirs and only 2 people ever have gotten round 100 first room and they were both with mega elixirs and both on tag der toten. Black ops 3 has about 40-50+ first room 100s across all maps (If not more because every Rev first room is 100+ so we don't know how many there truly is).
I really love the talk about enjoyment being subjective, as well as opinion, preference and play style. Yes, we tend to play the dominant strategy in games cause we want to win, but maybe we can ask ourselves, why? Why winning is the one and only thing to drive us to play? Maybe we can really make the gameplay balanced for player choices, and with a good risk-reward system, different ways to change and play the game, during gameplay. And yes, we still want a boss rush mode or something like mutations with the possibility to do Easter eggs and boss fights with Ultrapowerful gear or maybe with unupgraded weapons if you choose to do it
Yes! This series is brilliant! Its interesting how bo4 had such a focus on being replayable but ended up having half of the gameplay locked behind choices before a match started. I hope bo5 can use bo4 as a lesson to give the player more freedom in each match, and hopefully mutations returns I can only imagine the fun challenges that could be made if ee's were activated too :D
I agree with almost everything you've said. The power creep we have experienced over time has allowed players to become complacent and removed much of the inherent stress factor that originally made zombies compelling. While I believe that new features are important to keep the experience fresh and keep players who are already experienced with old systems on their toes, Zombies developers have failed to properly account for those increases in power when creating new maps and allowed them to accumulate, creating power overlap that means players have so many good options that they are never in a real disadvantage state. There are many different design decisions that lead to this, but I think two are key among them: Wall guns being too strong, and too many "get of out of jail free" cards- zombie shield, specialist weapons, gobblegums/elixirs/whatever, area control wonder weapons like the storm bow. The extremely high reliability and applicability of these tools allows players to ignore the inherent risk/reward factor of decisions like using the box or pack-a-punch, because these are either simply unnecessary to make or those tools are so strong that even if the player does something stupid, they won't be punished for it. Get caught? Get out free. Get caught again after that? You have three more easy escapes. I think that either restricting how many of these a player can employ on a map simulateously or creating dangers that only one of these tools can properly address is a good potential solution, but of course these questions NEVER have an easy answer. Also, put the good guns in the box... at the moment there's very little reason to use it.
It seems that there are good elements of risk mitigation that have been introduced, but by being stacked on top of each other they become hilariously redundant. Shields for example could be a good way to ensure you don’t get dropped from behind, then when it breaks needing to run and dodge your way to where it is similar to your pack a punch example. But the shield defensiveness combined with specialist weapon getting you out of jail for free, combined with anywhere but here getting you out for free, combined with super strong wonder weapons like the thunder gun together in the early game and all rapidly recharging ruin any difficulty.
I just remember those days in Black Ops 1 and WaW, where every time I played Der Riese in either version, every round my friends and I hope and pray that it was a dog round for a max ammo. I think the risk and reward system in zombies it what made it more enjoyable than it is today. It’s just my opinion though.
That's some great thoughts! I was thinking of the same things while playing the other day! Sometimes I like the feeling of being underpowered in zombies for the challenge! But I also like the option to be OP! As long as they give us choices in the next game, I'm good! Thx Reed, great video!👍🏻
This is what needs to be done to save zombies 1.More diverse maps with unique wonder weapons 2.difficulty increased similar to bo1, current zombies is boring, you can get to round 30 without trying 3.Remvoe specialist 4. Dont have maps centred around the easter egg because that limits replayability 5. Bring back side quests 6.change steps to easter eggs like filling a chest, random pointless fillers that make 0 sense to the quest 7.make the easter egg feel fresh with new steps and in game cinematics to make it feel more impactful 8.lastly TRY SOMETHING NEW AND DONT MAKE IT EASIER, MAKING IT EASIER WILL DESTROY ZOMBIES
I think there needs to be some risk, but not too much. I'm a person who believes games don't have to be difficult to be fun. I enjoy a challenge every now an then, but if it is so hard that I am always angry I don't like it. Bloodborne is an example if a hard game I enjoy, because it is hard at the start, but after you level up, and master the controls the game feels easy, then you encounter a new boss enemy that takes a couple tries to defeat. The average enemy(grunt) shouldn't feel like a boss, or else the boss is just a slightly harder version of the grunts. This can be applied to zombies. The early rounds are easy, but if you don't start to get yourself set up you'll have a hard time. After a while even with the best set up you'll be in trouble unless you've mastered the mechanics of the mode. If you know the best training spot, how to conserve ammo, etc. you'll be at a low risk of dying, that is until a different variable is thrown in. When trainiby a mini-boss, heavy enemy, dog, catalyst zombie, etc. could spawn a bit ahead of you, which will cause you to adjust your strategy accordingly, but if you can't adapt fast enough, or stop paying attention you'll be downed. In WaW the only truly difficult maps are Verruct, and Der Reise. In BO1 most of the maps are the same in terms of difficulty, but the hardest are probably Five, Shangri-La, and the updated WaW maps, while Ascension is probably the easiest. BO2 is again relatively the same in terms of difficulty, but the survival maps are probably the hardest, while Buried, and MOTD are the easiest(MOTD is only easy if you use the Electric Cherry+Acid Gay+Shield strat). Origins could probably be considered easy, but that's with the upgraded staffs, which most players need some sort of guide to get, and it also has the added variables of the Panzers, and Robots stomping around. In BO3 every map can be made easy with the right Gobble gum, but if you take them away the hardest maps are Shang, and the WaW maps(not including The Giant). Most BO3 original maps are just easy even without the GGs, which isn't really a bad thing, but it is inherently easy(you also have AATs that are overpowered). BO4 probably has some of the hardest maps, but it also has the most crutches. If you took aaway Elixers, The shield, Specialist, and Dying Wish most people would probably call it the hardest zombies(Every Aether map also now has the Raygun Mark 2, which is another Wonder Weapons at the players disposal). You have Catalyst, and the Blight Father on every Chaos map(I beileve besides DOTN), and every map also has its own unique heavy zombie. IX has Catalyst, Tigers, 2 Heavy Zombies, and the Blight Father. VOD has Catalyst, the Blight Father, and the Stoker. DOTN has Catalyst Werewolves, and Nosferatus(Vampires). Ancient Evil has Catalyst, the Blight Father, and whatever the shield guys name is(honestly can't remember). Every Aether map has dogs, and some sort of other enemy type. Classified has dogs, and Nova 6 crawlers. BOTD has dogs, and Brutus. Alpha Omega has dogs, and 2 different nova 6 crawler types. Tag set Toten has dogs, great value napalm zombies, and electric zombies. I know you said most people don't want to handicap themselves in games(hell I usually don't like to either), but like you said people can create challenges for themselves, or even up the difficulty. I don't really want zombies to go back to being hard, because of unfairness(which is how WaW is on Verruct with Super Sprinters, and Der Reise by getting stuck to zombies), but I don't want as many crutches. If it's hard it can have some crutches, but if it's easy I'd hope that there aren't crutches that make it even easier.
BO4's risk was more focussed on pack-a-punch. While the specialist weapons helped to decrease this risk, the map design made it easy for a careless player to go down before they could even pull out their specialist. Look at the cargo hold or the bottom of the staircase on Voyage, or the confined cage of Area 51 on Classified, or the crowded woods of Dead of the Night (heh heh yeeeaaa boi), or the tight circle in Ancient Evil. In terms of gameplay mechanics, on Alpha Omega, if you want to PaP, you have to fend off Nova Bombers and then juiced-up zombies that come with them; even on Tag, in order to access Golden PaP, you have to survive a somewhat long and dangerous lockdown event. Basically, I don't think risk has decreased at all, but the kind of risk we experience has changed.
I honestly don't like mechanics that make accessing the pack a punch machine harder or to long. Turning the valves on Alpha Omega is the map I hate the most for this is BO4. Especially on solo mode.
@@507Soccer Fair, but I'm not really talking about the mechanics for how you access PaP. It's more about the layout, enemies you encounter and special mechanics that occur once you get there. Alpha Omega isn't really my cup of tea, but I always know there's a risk to Packing since the Nova Bombers only spawn in the bunker.
Major problem started with BO3 & being able to close app, after everyone realized you could just close app to save gobblegums the risk of having to worry about how many of each gobblegum you had went away & since most are gonna use said dominant strategies in say a public match situation, combining the 2 makes for a not so fun experience since most games will just end in a connection interrupted instead of an actual game over due to the host closing app to save their gobblegum killing the game for the other players.
Awesome Main Frame episode! Really enjoy this series Just a though but maybe in a future episode you can talk about if IW zombies and ww2 zombies are really as bad as what people said from the beginning.
To me, the best way to sum up the problems bo4 had without going into the tid bits is this... Cod zombies core gameplay was always fun and easy to jump into, it was simple enough for new players to adjust to and advanced players to get used to. However, what made zombies so complex was the maps themselves 'not' the gameplay. Every map depends on how difficult your experience was going to be, for example lets look at Town and Origins. They both have their own set of weapons/perks that are available to the player, accessing pap is completely different, map size differ which affects how to manoeuvre around zombies. And yet the gameplay is the exact same but changed due to what was available in the map. Players can control their experience by playing the map they're comfortable with which made each map have their own level of uniqueness. Bo4 however has its gameplay more complex, its much harder for new players and throws off returning players. Pap requires you to to upgrade slowly, you can have the same weapon/perks on every map and zombies even are now just advanced ai that try move around everywhere with no rhythm. You can literally play the exact same on every bo4 map with the difference of boss zombies. I know that some people do like this, and thats good for them! Others may even prefer it. But its definitely not what kept zombies interesting all these years, and in my opinion the older gameplay styles were never broken and are something that people from bo4 can still enjoy regardless.
Kino was the perfect zombies map in my opinion in terms of gameplay. There was a simple strategy that new players could use (training on the stage strat) but if you wanted to challenge yourself you could do the fire trap strat which was more efficient and of you REALLY wanted to challenge yourself and maximise efficiency you could do the no nova fire trap strat. It had a strategy to entertain all skill levels. This also came with no unnecessary tediousness which has made zombies such a chore that I rarely play anymore.
Another issue with BO4, that goes in line with this argument, is the loss of natural progression. For example, in BOTD you can get set up for pack a punch on solo player by round one. granted there is a lot more to do but you can have your load out and over powered weapons ready to go by round 10-12 which now a days isn’t a stretch to get to
I think black ops 3 was the perfect balance of risk in zombies it allowed players to costumise their loadouts and the gobblegums provided a variety of helpfulness to the player
Hey man i agree Bo1 zombies absolutely was the best, hell Bo1 was my favorite cod until i hit the second prestige in multiplayer and then just played zombies and against bots with friends, ah the good old days
Lol I don’t know how you came away with BO1 being the best from the video. It has plenty of positives but it has drawbacks too. Every iteration has its own experience for better and worse 😃
@@Radaustin27 So very true, but I feel that BO1 had a more good than bad, or at least it was a more exciting experience with the things we had at the time. Anyway man thanks for the reply lol keep up the great work on this series and I look forward to the next one!
I do think BO4 made you basically invincible and that’s why it seems to lose its replayability. I mean, jump into IX, put on winters wail, dying wish, PhD, and victorious tortoise, then your shield (that has a gun is better than most weapons and that can be replenished with points) , 200 health, 3 self revives, and a hellion salvo and with 10 minutes practice my Mom could easily make it to round 15-20. I also agree that if you handicap yourself you lose the “fun” because you know you are not really playing the game. You are constantly distracted the fact that you are handicapping yourself. I also think that, yes GGs made you OP (BO3), but that was earned, and no matter how OP you felt when you rocked a Perkaholic, you were also gutted if you went down a round later and lost it. Sure you could dashboard, but I know most people reading this that used Perka have lost a few bc that finger wasn’t fast enough to pause and dashboard, and it SUCKED (like really bad), especially when you only had one or two (before Newton’s Cookbook made it easier to get them). So there was even a loss feeling when you were OP to keep doing well or you’re dead!
BO4 was so easy with specialist and Jugg being equipped at spawn. They wanted to get rid of crutch perks, but Dying wish, Victorious Tortoise and Winters wail are even more op than OG Perks
You know what would make zombies more exciting? If you go down before round 20, you just die in real life. That would make player risk go the hell up 😫
No risk. That’s a good way to describe bo4 zombies don’t matter if you are round 1 with your starting equipment or round 50 full loadout you are never really in danger it’s just boring: when a mini boss spawns (bo2 panzer)/running trough the small areas in mob.... what used to be challenging/scary Is just annoying in bo4
What I think makes it duller is simply just our skill levels as well, we've gotten to a point where everything is just normal to us. Its crazy to think but looking back I had the most fun when me and my friends were barely surviving by the skin of our teeth on round 30 back in BO1 but now the sense of fear is basically gone because we've been there and done that essentially and with games basically making it easy mode now round 30 is nothing for an experienced player idk just another crazy idea that came to mind
I think it's just a matter of degree. True, now we're more skilled than ever, but even then we still have to hit a round where we feel the same stress as hitting round 30 in bo1. So like round 30 back in the day should take the same skill level as say round 50 today if we had the same system of risk-reward. HOWEVER, it may be a psychological effect. Maybe we're so used to having round 30 feel so difficult for us that we expect every round 30 on every map to have the same stress level, when it's not. The human brain is truly complex and this argument has many viewpoints.
@@samer8073 I agree, its just a thought I had where as maybe sometimes its not the game thats dull but we in our own heads are making it feel dull because its not exactly an entirely new experience like it was when we were beginners. Like you said though it does have many viewpoints.
I think Zombies needs a good balance. If a game is too barebones or risky it gets aggravating and or boring quick. However, if a game is too easy or complex it can get boring or overbearing. I think great maps like Origins exemplify this because on most maps 4 elemental staffs would be op but the mud and the map design hinders the player so the staffs are NOT a free ticket to round 100. When you look at newer maps like Blood of the Dead, the map doesn’t necessarily motivate the player to do anything, in fact, wraith fires are actually better than the hells retriever so the game’s engine discourages progressing with that and the world record holder didn’t even get the magmagat, he rocked a sweeper. This makes it very clear that all the new content is overbearing because players don’t even need to build wonder weapons, tacticals, etc because the bo4 game engine just makes the game so easy you may as well just do the same strat on every map and go to round 500.
That's why I despise Ascension and Buried so much. There's no challenge involved, and it's just not fun to play something which holds your hand every step of the way. Call of The Dead, Shangri-la, Tranzit, Die Rise, Zetsubou No Shima... These are my "Not Top 5 Favourite - Favourites -" when it comes to challenge and the fun factor.
I hope BO5 adds an experimental mode like overwatch. For example we have our OG perks back in BO5 and the og mode with no perk changes. This experimental mode could have you buy Jugg and have a reward but also a risk like MW(2019).Let's say you buy Jugg you get more hit points but you are slower as a result.
I find dominant strategies to be incredibly basic and boring, it ties back to what you say about human nature. For me, having fun means that I create a strategy for myself that is not 100% the dominant strategy. Obviously, it is basically making things harder for me, but the thing is that I don't feel handicapped unless I choose to ignore a feature of the game entirely. For example, I could run Deadwire on my weapons, but I have a gun that works well when used infrequently, so that way I can use Thunderwall efficiently to clear a way for myself, and then use my "win condition" (combination of items in my loadout that can annihilate a horde). I try to make up for every bit of lost efficiency by utilising horde control mechanics in different ways.
Definitely needed more risks. Hey remember how risky it was to knife that one zombie while the bus was about to leave to get those extra points on tranzit? Yea it was very risky. U may argue I'm not using it in the right context here, and that could be true, it just jumped in my head when the video showed a photo from tranzit 😂
No. It was risky to knife zombies from BO1/BO2 PERIOD without Jugg. There is a chance you lunge knife into a zombie and that mofo may WINDMILL you, 2 hitting you before you can get out of harm's way... you're dead. BO3 and BO4 is forgiving, because you have 3 hits in BO3 without jugg, 4 hits in BO4.
Yeah its basically impossible to get trapped in a corner in BO4 with specialist weapon, wraith fire, ww, consumables, shield, the games dumbed down. Specialist weapons are way to over powered, the game becomes about charging up your specialist on the high rounds especially you get the specialist up every 2-3 minutes.
To be fair, while you make great points about the weapon customisation, The perk system, the special weapons. I would disagree with the weapon custom, since you have to use it constantly to get more and more attachments to make it more powerful. So the whole point of that system is for you to get used to the weapons, getting better and better the more you play with them. It will encourage replayability and for people to use more weapons and make them stronger. It also encourages as well for you to just not reroll weapons until you get the one you want, but rather kill zombies so it becomes a better weapon in the end.
To push back a little, why couldn’t we earn the attachments in game? If you need to unlock more attachments maybe players could have limited options available as they level up at a reasonable rate. (MW sucked at that in their survival mode). I can buy a strife or MOG in a starting room that has all the attachments for 800 to be safe for 10-15 rounds. You can’t use starting room weapons to survive in previous iterations pushing players to progress. You should try to get these attachments through the gameplay not automatically have them all before you’re in game.
@@Radaustin27 Well the problem is how exactly they would implement it in-game? I say that the Mw3 version of survival could be a great example for the survival modes for fighting soldiers and juggernauts etc. The most similar thing that zombies had was in bo2 when you had to pack a punch the weapons multiple times to have the attachment you wanted. I don't think it would be too good for zombies to just have a place where someone walks there and buys the attachments, since you have to put them in a place on the map where you shouldn't go down easily to use it right. The problem is that people tend to really plan out their builds to survive for longer, and buying attachments in a rush and then get killed wouldn't be really good.
frost man definitely agree. I just recently played some ascension and shangri la on bo3 and I forgot how damn good the zombie chronicles maps looked. Bo3 definitely looks better than bo4. Not sure what happened during development but it was like the graphics in bo4 got tuned down a notch or 2.
I think BO4 graphics are great, ZC has better color correction and the HUD is better. But when you are using theater you can see the difference. Getting thumbnails people think my BO4 images are direct render rips. You can’t quite get that with BO3. Bo3 is still gorgeous
RADAUSTIN27 everything looks less detailed than bo3 to me, granted that I’m on base ps4. Even so, there was a video comparing bo4 and bo3 textures that backs this.
jeremy roberts *puts on tinfoil hat* I think bo4 regressed in graphical fidelity because of blackout, seeing how a lot of a zombie assets were taken from blackout it does make sense.
Chaos was the definition of risk and the paid the price, I enjoyed it but I always saw zombies as disclosure with all the higher dimensional entities and all, but the masses didn’t appreciate it, it was too early, and they hadn’t even finished the aether yet.
The Grey Shaman I enjoyed the chaos storyline as well although I think the order they released the maps in was so wierd. Blundell seemed to be obsessed with telling stories out of order and making them as convoluted as possible. Dead of the night and voyage of despair should’ve been the chaos maps on disc at launch with IX being DLC 1. Also i agree that it was a huge risk doing it the way they did. They shouldn’t have tried to do 2 stories at once. Imo they should’ve finished the aether storyline and then started chaos after it was done because they doomed the new story from the beginning by doing what they did. Everyone wanted to see the end of aether not jump back and forth between 2 different storylines and having to wait all the way until dlc 3 and 4 to get aether again after the initial launch of the game
RADAUSTIN27 of course, I was just giving another example of a risk they took that sadly didn’t land with the masses. But you gotta think about the perspective of prospective new players who just jumped in and wanted more aether. Hell I was in love with the aether storyline and still am to the point where I still see the ending of tag der toten as merely one possibility but that goes down the rabbit hole of multidimensional keys and each reality needing to destroy their keys in order for the multiverse to truly become destroyed. Which wouldn’t technically invalidate our ending because since our crew destroyed their key to the multiverse they would no longer have access to the multiverse effectively destroying the multiverse for them subjectively. If you don’t perceive it, it doesn’t exist after all.
jeremy roberts seriously, that would have been the perfect rout but I think they had map design in mind rather than story in this case because IX was so beginner friendly. But I also agree they should have finished the aether storyline first mainly because of newcomers, it must have been overwhelming for newer players to continue the old storyline and follow a new one at the same time, they’re still trying to integrate the story after having such a short amount of time with it after all.
I overall agree with everything stated in this video. I've been playing Zombies since 2010 (I first played on Black Ops 1), and the new gameplay mechanics have just become awful. Gumballs that give all perks/all power-ups/death-machine whenever you feel like it? All those decisions that erased most of the in-game progression and risk? The worst of it all is, I actually like the maps on BO3 and BO4. Except for ZnS, which I'm not a fan of, the other maps are awesome. But these games are screwed up because of all those stupid decisions: making the visuals awful (BO4 was just disgusting), erasing most sources of difficulty, erasing the in-game progression... Honestly, after 10 years, I still play BO1 and BO2. But BO3 and BO4? Nope, I won't be playing them again in 10 years.
Is not only the mind, even the body would try to it's best to effectively and efficiently spend calories, if we don't consciously control our movement the body would do it without us noticing it (bench press, look it up).
The problem with Risk is that ever since the game got bigger, there was a higher chance of new players each game. If you made it hard as shit on the newbies' first games, then they'd rightfully get pissed and stop playing. It was a business idea instead of a gameplay, which is fair. Money over players. If you can make a butt ton of money off of it, why not continue that.
Me: Listening the intro. Rad: "The risk; where did we go" Me: Aight this mans a genius That intro was so good, this series gets better every episode p.s will the aether posters be available in 2 months or so?
I have tried, but the viewer won't watch. I see this comment time and time again, but no one supports any other series or content besides a few hundred to maybe a thousand people. That isn't sustainable. With this channel, it seems to be a pipe dream to get away from zombies after trying to do so for so many years. Even content that IS zombies shows what viewers want. Positive videos about zombies don't get the same views negative videos about zombies get. I am beyond disappointed and frustrated with the content at this point in terms of what viewership responses to.
I hope we get OG perks with GGs returning. I just hope GGs are a bit less OP and you can’t quit app to keep em. Maps like GK and DE were perfect because they’re simple, but have other optional quests to get OP weapons and specialists if you want them. They aren’t required for core game play
Cody Harmon I personally don’t want the old perks back tbh, but I know I’m in the minority on that. I just don’t want it go back to how it was where every single game no matter what map you’re playing you are forced to always get the 4 OG perks to survive to high rounds. What they really need to do is get rid of the stupid 4 perk limit then it wouldn’t be a problem
@@jeremyroberts8822 it's still better than having no reason to buy those perks. Literally the only reason in bo4 people buy perks is bcuz they have the option to do so, it's not a necessity. Also, think of the risk of going down. Old perk system u become devastated as u have lost everything, from extra health and damage, to extra mobility and reload speed. Where as new perk system u can get up (possibly with a few perks as well if u get revived in time) and u would still have the same gameplay before u went down. U don't even have to rush to buy an extra life (aka quick revive) on solos bcuz they're handed to u at the start. And this is just scratching the surface on why I think old perk system is better than the new one. But hey, to each his own I guess
Samer I think that’s a good thing though that you can get back up and your good cus quick revive and jug and stuff like that is already built in. bo4 gives us a larger variety of possibilities during gameplay because we don’t have to use 3 of our 4 perk slots for the crutch perks like quick revive, jug and speed cola and really double tap as well. In all the older games you absolutely need those perks so you can’t experiment with all the other cool perks that much like widows wine, Stamin up, electric cherry etc. bo4 has no crutch perks imo and I disagree that there is no reason to get perks anymore I don’t get why you think that. There are so many different types of zombies and boss zombies coming at you in bo4 you definitely need certain perks to help you out like victorious tortoise, dying wish, zombshell you’re telling me none of those perks are necessary or useful? Like I said to me personally it’s better that we have jug and quick revive at the start and speed cola after we get our 4 perks cus then we don’t have to use up our perk slots on them and can use a bunch more different combinations of perks for different gameplay styles
@@jeremyroberts8822 jeremy roberts jeremy roberts while I do agree it has given us more variety to experiment and play around with, this is still not utilised properly. Crutch perks do exist in bo4. For ex, everyone uses dying wish since it's a free get out of jail card. Victorious tortoise is also very useful, being completely invulnerable while holding a shield. And there's so much more as well, I just can't remember them as I haven't played bo4 in a long long time. These crutch perks will exist regardless, and we will always pick them as Reed explained in dominant strategies. Other perks reward less skilled players, like that zombie see through perk (bear with me I forgot the perks lmao) , it basically reduces the awareness u need when playing zombies. Others are more of quality-of-life improvement perks, like bandolier bandit for more ammo and that time slip perk that reduces the time to pap, box rolls, etc. Other perks are just not that good man. PhD slider? Literally Blundell( rip my man) was working to reduce the need for PhD by reducing the need for explosive weapons, and in bo4 I don't recall anyone using explosive weapons, so why buy it? Winter's wail? Get two hits then wait for 3 hours so the perk recharges? These are the things on the top of my head since I can't recall much as I said before. I will give the bo4 perk system one thing however, the modifier. That was a pretty cool system which I liked. But PAPing my gun 4 times, spend a shit ton of points so it can function on round 20? Not my cup of tea, and I don't think many people's either.
@@jeremyroberts8822 also, getting back up and ur good reduces the risk of the game a tenfold. U would be stripping the player the risk which makes going down a minor inconvenience, which reduces the fun (subjective). But going down in the old games, u would feel like u were in a true horror movie, just hordes of the undead wanting to devour u as u frantically try to hold ur own in the hopes of finding that opening to buy back perks and then breath a sigh of relief. That joy no longer exists
I feel like infinite warfare brought risk back (And the series lost risk when they added things that save you in a corner (gobble gums, special weapons, elixirs)
Michael Does stuff I agree that gobblegums took away a lot of the risk of zombies but imo the elixirs in bo4 were pretty balanced. People seem to have mixed opinions on the difficulty of the latest maps we got in bo4 but to me some of the maps were pretty difficult. Voyage of despair, blood of the dead and alpha omega were all decently hard imo. I really wish people didn’t hate bo4 so much because I personally loved some of the changes they made. I love the new perk system and how many different combinations of perks you could use rather than using the same 4 perks every game like in all the other games and all the customization was awesome. Custom mutations was a great idea in theory but they didn’t give us any rewards or reason to play it.
jeremy roberts I’m level 1000 in bo4 zombies with 50 days played, it’s my favorite zombies right next to bo3, but I think bo4 is the easiest zombies game unfortunately, the health cap ruins all difficulty
Skand456 because it’s a lot harder to get a bunch of plasma than it was to get a ton of liquid divinium and for the most part a lot of the elixirs aren’t like super OP. Yea we still have stuff like perkaholic and shopping free but unless you’re paying real money you’re a lot less likely to get those elixirs considering how slow you build up plasma playing the game. I’m prestige 6 level 40 right now and I’ve only ever gotten 2 perkaholics the entire time I’ve played bo4. If you listed them all and compare the 2 there are a lot more crazy gobblegums than there are elixirs
I think BO3 is almost perfect. Only things I’d change are some details like Widow’s Wine, Shopping Free+Near Death combo in solo, etc and speed.. The older maps solo are generally boring being stuck with one strategy, if you’re doing a speed run you’re still stuck with 1 strategy which is what I’d adjust a bit. Reason I don’t care about handicapping myself is that I feel believing otherwise is arbitrary. In another universe where the game is released the way you’re playing it it’s great now but sucks in this reality even though that game is still possible? That just doesn’t sit well with me
WaW, BO1/2/3: I can play for 5+ hours before i get bored BO4: I can only play to 30 minutes to an hour before I start to get bored I never really felt a risk factor in bo4.
I feel like the player base is partially to blame. Everyone ones to hold a crawler t do this and that, take the easter eggs for instance. I'm one of the only people who believes doing easter eggs mid round (and yes its totally possible, I set up a splitscreen game on call of the dead and did the easter by myself. I just made sure to respawn the second player y the vodka bottleso I could use it to knife it), everyone is obsessed with the doing the easter eggs for the sake of the easter egg and not to give the game more of a purpose and challenge
Zombies needs more bad guns, I believe bo2 and bo1 was so much more enjoyable because of the risk of getting an SMR or China lake. Takes away from the fun of getting a gun out the box and being stuck with it
The old days when getting to round 30 was an achievement
I do miss those days. Town, me, a ray gun mk2 and a DSR. Nothing could stop me, besides the eventual zombies health increase that was impossible to overcome
@@killwillv2610 stop your gunna make me cry
Remember getting so existed to the point I nearly died in game when I hit round 30 on mob, within a week of getting bo3 I got to round 40 in der eisendrache
I remember it took me forever to get to round 50 on Shangri la on BO1. When I finally got there it felt like a genuine achievement. Meanwhile on BO3 I literally got to round 100 on Der Eisendrache on my first attempt, whilst barely paying attention once I got my setup. I’ll take training in a tight room over sitting in a corner pressing the fire button every 5 seconds or so.
Really hope lee ross, Craig Houston, and the entire zombies team is watching your mainframe series 👍
Considering how lee Ross is he might actually be watching
That’s why Black Ops 2 Zombies was more appealing to me. Every map felt different.
Facts
That intro music gets me every time
You can statistically prove the change in risk looking at world records of old maps vs the remasters
Uh... in WaW the records are in the thousands and in the others they're in the hundreds 😂
Hela the system for rounds worked different and had exploits in WaW firstly and those aren’t the only maps to be remade. Plus compare waw to bo1 versions then compare bo1 version to bo3
But that goes back to the zombroz episode where they discuss what’s really a good measure of difficulty. BO3 stops at 255 and you speed through the rounds. The only real thing about BO3 offline that could make the game inherently easier is Widow’s Wine m+Shield combo but you start running out of Widow’s during later rounds. Der Riese in BO3 doesn’t have Widow’s at all, you’re just forced to run a tight ass train in the spawn to progress through the rounds quickly
Kurokami Najimi agreeable but the problem and erosion of challenge isn’t adding the systems in because we had new gradual systems added and included back in the day but they weren’t to the level of Perkaholic and specialist weapons that kill everything right next to you give you armour etc etc. I think excessive added systems and features imo only started with Jason Blundell Maps
@@Wiitigo_X well he had a lot of good changes even if some didn't work
Definitely agree. Another point as well is the feeling of progression was completely lost in BO4, you basically started with Jug & a wonder-weapon (specialist weapon), then the perks you could get weren't even that good (compared to double tap, jug, speed cola, etc). I remember every time I played Shadows of Evil I'd always have a struggle picking my 4 perks. Widows wine was god tier, but so is jug, speed, double tap, and stammin up - as well as the fact that on solo most people get quick revive. Making these difficult decisions, as well as the heavy elements of luck (mystery box weapons) & trying to survive against those odds you've given yourself is what makes zombies fun in my opinion.
TwoHats yeah you started off as a semi-god in bo4 and only needed to achieve one tier above (which is god status). But for bo3 you started off as a puny mortal and it took MUCH more to eventually achieve the god status.
That’s an interesting point comparing how useful perks felt. Maybe I’ll explore that on another episode! There are super strong perks in BO4 but they don’t feel as good as BO3 perks. That’s so strange!
The agony truuuuuuuueeeeee
@@Radaustin27 Yeah I'm not sure why that is the case. Maybe because they were new, or because of the "modifier" slot it was hard to understanding when they'd actually help you. Compared to something like jug that is obvious what it does and has saved us all countless times over the years probably. Dying wish is the only perk I'd prioritise in BO4 imo, or maybe modifier slot stammin' up.
I always felt the removal of World at War’s “grapple” mechanic where zombies slow you down was a mistake.
It actively made zombies more hazardous and encouraged players to avoid getting close. Now you can just push them aside like they’re nothing
Late Night Gaming bo4 and bo3 replaced standstill grapple zombies with very precise tracking by improving the zombie AI and spawn time.
Amazing video. What you talked about around the 10 minute mark about the "dominant startegy", this is EXACTLY why the "don't like em, don't use em" argument has never worked with me in terms of Gobblegums. Sure, you can choose not to use Gums, but you can also choose not to buy Jugg, or PaP a weapon, or open a certain door. That doesn't mean Gums don't break the game. If you had a map, where you could go through a quest to get a Thunder Gun as a reward, would you bother doing it if you could also buy it off the wall for 10 points?
This is also one of the reasons why I love WW2 Zombies. It feels like a great mix of classic and modern Zombies, with loudouts that don't make or break a game, but slightly changes how you play (the Mods and the Special Abilities).
I don’t see the difference, if the point of playing zombies is to feel accomplished after doing something difficult why does it matter if that difficult task was one you made up rather than one the devs made default? In fact what’s the difference between someone saying I want to get to x round in zombies so I’m gonna play the easiest map and then saying all other maps are bad due to the existence of the easier map that allowed them to reach the goal?
@@KurokamiNajimi Because getting to high rounds on an easy map and a hard map are 2 different accomplishments. Using Gumballs simply makes other tasks simply feel unneeded work. No matter if you use them or not, you know they exist for you to use. For example: In Shangri-La, you're able to turn Max Ammo drops into a Perk Bottle drop if you're good enough. Or in Origins, you can find red dig sited if you search long enough in Zombie Blood. But what's the point of doing all that work when you know that you can, at any time, pay 0 points to get all perks immediately? You feel cheated, knowing there's a much easier, official way to get them. In BO1 and 2, I always went for these quests. In BO3, I went for them once, and never again, because I knew that "why go through that trouble when I can get an even better reward on round 1 by simply doing nothing at all?"
@@tslanews24 Why are they different though if the effort or lack there of is the same on BO Nacth no handicap vs BO3 Nacth handicapped? Only difference is BO3 Nacth has more variety in what you can do. I agree with the other part of your comment because those tasks are more inconvenient than not buying Jug, not sitting in a corner, etc
@SurvivalOfTheFittest I think WAW and BO Nacth are what's boring because they're more one dimensional. On BO3 Nacth you can camp for a while in multiple areas in addition to the old strategies. You're right that you can't control how people play in co op but randoms tend not to use the best strategy possible. If I hop on DE or Origins in BO3 right now the chances of making it to round 30+ with all 4 players or at least 3 of us staying is low. If you're playing with friends then you can just agree to play a certain way. When it comes to competing with others the problem with BO3 is just that it stops at round 255, not so much that it's too easy. Another thing I should have mentioned is that most of us still can't get to round 255 or whatever unless we have unlimited shopping free+near death though those aren't apart of offline solo meaning the mode is inherently harder which you guys claim has value. You could say the standards of a high round changes rather than go yawn I got to round 70 in 2 hours this is a bad game, how about going for 115 etc where you'll probably surprisingly fail. But again I'll definitely grant that the 255 limit is a flaw for world record players
Personally, I think Zombies does well with a mixture of risk and being overpowered. Let's take a more modern map, Shadows of Evil, for example. Certain perks are in really niche corners you rarely go to because they are associated with smaller spaces and corridors, making it harder to slip by the zombies or fight your way out. I never see myself going to the perk machine in Waterfront unprepared because I know it will result poorly if I'm not careful. Now the argument could be made that gumballs such as Perkaholic alleviate the need to even go there in the first place, but you have to make that decision to use up your valuable Megas, assuming you aren't going to close app. In terms of upgrading the sword and filling up souls in the same room as that perk, you are still extremely vulnerable, even with all of your perks and a powerful GG. Fill up the egg on a Margwa round and you find yourself in a sticky situation regardless of your gum. This kind of thing is why maps like SoE are so beautiful in my opinion. Yes, you are overpowered with tools like Gobblegum, but you still have that risk factor that is always in the back of your mind.
Loving this series Reed, keep up the great content!
I agree that the risk factor has gone way down, games were way more intense in earlier games even just based off the amount of hits it takes to get down. when it went from 2 hit to 3 hit that was a good change as 2 hits sometimes happened way too quick but the current 4 hit system is a little too much as you can get out of almost everything. Its a weird balance of difficulty and satisfaction for doing a job well done, i also feel like some of the issue comes in when you compare older games to newer games where before getting a high round required more skill where as now getting high rounds just requires time and patience.
Also if you ever need some footage recorded for anything hit me up, i have all the games and maps with free time to spend on them if you need a little help getting some footage
The points on 'Dominant Strategy' is something I've thought of for a LONG time. I still remember like, in BO3's case, for example, there's Unbearable (The one that keeps the box from moving when you get a teddy bear). I don't really use that one since it doesn't really have its uses. Crawl Space is another one. Why would I use it except for the Void Bow steps on Der Eisendrache?
Now for subjectivity, I understand why people do not enjoy Zetsubou No Shima, and yet, I still love to play it despite it being a HEAVY parts and opening doors quest.
The Stranger Reed from the upside down lol
Totally agree btw, it's lost. Create class stuff doesn't belong in zombies period, u get in ASAP survive and be able to do anything within that game with good rewards. 💯
Zombies lost its risk. I remember back in the day it was all about "hold one zombie so I go can pack my ray gun". In the most recent play of 9, I literally packed my guns while being chased by the guys with the throwing axes.
Risk was gone when we gained the 3 hit system and the shield. BUT, these are beloved. I much prefer having these because you are able to play the clutch when you get cornered. But, it was much more fun when you had to constantly dodge zombies just incase you don't get windmilled.
Much to think about
So far, this new series has been a great in-depth look at the fundamental concepts/ideas that, when executed and balanced properly, make zombies great! As a day one zombies fan and someone who views day to day life through a very analytical/philosophical lens (due to the way my brain is wired), I can confidently say that this series is both highly enjoyable and mentally stimulating! I'm very excited to see where you take us, Reed! I know that, where ever that place is, it will be great, due to the fact that you made it! I say this because any work that you create, by it's very nature, has your unique creative signature which, can only come from you! Keep up the hard work and awesome content, but not at the expense of your mental and physical well-being! You're doing a fantastic job, man! 😊
Best Mainframe episode yet !
The absolute core of any game, and in the case of Treyarch Zombies, one with an observable, interesting history spanning 10 years that scales differently for each iteration.
It's actually really awesome to see you talk about all this foundational stuff. This is the kind of stuff that some custom map developers legit think about to such a degree.
I'm so glad you made this video and I really hope the developers see it. My best mate and I used to play zombies split screen 3 times a week even during year 12 exams and we got to 50 and 60 on nearly every map without round robbin on black ops 3. We really tried to give B04 a chance, played every map and before the start of 2020 we were already sick of it and back on playing B03, only to realise we had lost so much of our skills because Black Ops 4 makes it so easy to escape the challenge that makes the game interesting. We played B03 zombies for over 3 years over 3000 hours game time and in less than one year of playing Black Ops 4 our skills dropped from reaching top hundreds on leaderboards to barley round 40
I love that you brought game theory into this. I'm an economics fanboy and that helps describe the issue, and also really solidifies that the issue is undeniable and that something about Zombies' system needs to change in order to keep Zombies fresh. It also explains a lot of what went wrong in Black Ops 3 and Black Ops 4.
And yeah, I hate to admit it, but even though BO3 was brought back to life with Zombies Chronicles, it also showed the potential that the long-run fun of the game can be when a minimal risk, dominant strategy is present. It makes the game dull over time. You're absolutely right, and I can attest to this. Admittedly, I've been a Zombies fanboy since 2011 (during BO1 game cycle), and I can view this from a lot of the same angles as you.
I am not sure what needs to change, but I don't think gobblegums and things help the situation. I still believe that an alternate "custom mode" where these gobblegums are permitted would work best, but I don't really know how that would play out in the long run, so I'm not going to pretend that I am a smarty pants and stick super hard to that opinion. I'm open to new ideas, and I really hope Treyarch is open to new ideas to modify this system as well.
I think the diminishing risk factor comes from the games getting easier, or at least more appealing to new players. I whole heartedly agree with you about game theory and dominant strategy. The argument "don't use Gobblegum" is equivalent to usain bolt breaking a leg so he has more competition.
Best RUclipsr ever. I love how indept and interesting his videos are
I love the overall aesthetic. So glad your back reed I’ve really enjoyed these mainframe episodes over the past few weeks.
I love the little comments and subtitles that pop up on screen for a split second. Took me about 5 minutes to pause it at the correct second to find out bo1 is the best zombies. Not disappointed. I agree
BO4: You can potentially and comfortably go up to round 100 on BO4 in the starting room......WITHOUT elixirs.
-Specialist weapon
-Wraith fires
That's why the f***ing risk and being on edge is no longer there.
That just isn't true at all lmao, no one has done even close to a round 100 first room (outside one 76 round on Tag) without elixirs and only 2 people ever have gotten round 100 first room and they were both with mega elixirs and both on tag der toten. Black ops 3 has about 40-50+ first room 100s across all maps (If not more because every Rev first room is 100+ so we don't know how many there truly is).
honestly, when i see this in my feed its an instant click, love this series way too much
Love the Mainframe series man keep it up!
Loving the Mainframe Episodes Reed!! Keep it up man
I really love the talk about enjoyment being subjective, as well as opinion, preference and play style. Yes, we tend to play the dominant strategy in games cause we want to win, but maybe we can ask ourselves, why? Why winning is the one and only thing to drive us to play? Maybe we can really make the gameplay balanced for player choices, and with a good risk-reward system, different ways to change and play the game, during gameplay.
And yes, we still want a boss rush mode or something like mutations with the possibility to do Easter eggs and boss fights with Ultrapowerful gear or maybe with unupgraded weapons if you choose to do it
this series is fantastic, very excited to see where this progresses Reed! :)
Yes! This series is brilliant! Its interesting how bo4 had such a focus on being replayable but ended up having half of the gameplay locked behind choices before a match started. I hope bo5 can use bo4 as a lesson to give the player more freedom in each match, and hopefully mutations returns I can only imagine the fun challenges that could be made if ee's were activated too :D
Loving the graphics and music on this series, plus Reed's content is pretty good too ;)
I agree with almost everything you've said. The power creep we have experienced over time has allowed players to become complacent and removed much of the inherent stress factor that originally made zombies compelling. While I believe that new features are important to keep the experience fresh and keep players who are already experienced with old systems on their toes, Zombies developers have failed to properly account for those increases in power when creating new maps and allowed them to accumulate, creating power overlap that means players have so many good options that they are never in a real disadvantage state.
There are many different design decisions that lead to this, but I think two are key among them: Wall guns being too strong, and too many "get of out of jail free" cards- zombie shield, specialist weapons, gobblegums/elixirs/whatever, area control wonder weapons like the storm bow. The extremely high reliability and applicability of these tools allows players to ignore the inherent risk/reward factor of decisions like using the box or pack-a-punch, because these are either simply unnecessary to make or those tools are so strong that even if the player does something stupid, they won't be punished for it. Get caught? Get out free. Get caught again after that? You have three more easy escapes. I think that either restricting how many of these a player can employ on a map simulateously or creating dangers that only one of these tools can properly address is a good potential solution, but of course these questions NEVER have an easy answer. Also, put the good guns in the box... at the moment there's very little reason to use it.
Love the videos as always man 💯
That intro music just butters my toast! DAMN
It seems that there are good elements of risk mitigation that have been introduced, but by being stacked on top of each other they become hilariously redundant. Shields for example could be a good way to ensure you don’t get dropped from behind, then when it breaks needing to run and dodge your way to where it is similar to your pack a punch example. But the shield defensiveness combined with specialist weapon getting you out of jail for free, combined with anywhere but here getting you out for free, combined with super strong wonder weapons like the thunder gun together in the early game and all rapidly recharging ruin any difficulty.
Exactly!
I just remember those days in Black Ops 1 and WaW, where every time I played Der Riese in either version, every round my friends and I hope and pray that it was a dog round for a max ammo. I think the risk and reward system in zombies it what made it more enjoyable than it is today. It’s just my opinion though.
👏 I look forward to mainframe every week now
That's some great thoughts! I was thinking of the same things while playing the other day! Sometimes I like the feeling of being underpowered in zombies for the challenge! But I also like the option to be OP! As long as they give us choices in the next game, I'm good! Thx Reed, great video!👍🏻
This is what needs to be done to save zombies
1.More diverse maps with unique wonder weapons
2.difficulty increased similar to bo1, current zombies is boring, you can get to round 30 without trying
3.Remvoe specialist
4. Dont have maps centred around the easter egg because that limits replayability
5. Bring back side quests
6.change steps to easter eggs like filling a chest, random pointless fillers that make 0 sense to the quest
7.make the easter egg feel fresh with new steps and in game cinematics to make it feel more impactful
8.lastly TRY SOMETHING NEW AND DONT MAKE IT EASIER, MAKING IT EASIER WILL DESTROY ZOMBIES
Risk in zombies is everything. It’s the adrenaline rush. Bo4 makes it up to the player to have risks. There’s custom mutations, challenges etc
I think there needs to be some risk, but not too much.
I'm a person who believes games don't have to be difficult to be fun.
I enjoy a challenge every now an then, but if it is so hard that I am always angry I don't like it.
Bloodborne is an example if a hard game I enjoy, because it is hard at the start, but after you level up, and master the controls the game feels easy, then you encounter a new boss enemy that takes a couple tries to defeat.
The average enemy(grunt) shouldn't feel like a boss, or else the boss is just a slightly harder version of the grunts.
This can be applied to zombies.
The early rounds are easy, but if you don't start to get yourself set up you'll have a hard time.
After a while even with the best set up you'll be in trouble unless you've mastered the mechanics of the mode.
If you know the best training spot, how to conserve ammo, etc. you'll be at a low risk of dying, that is until a different variable is thrown in.
When trainiby a mini-boss, heavy enemy, dog, catalyst zombie, etc. could spawn a bit ahead of you, which will cause you to adjust your strategy accordingly, but if you can't adapt fast enough, or stop paying attention you'll be downed.
In WaW the only truly difficult maps are Verruct, and Der Reise.
In BO1 most of the maps are the same in terms of difficulty, but the hardest are probably Five, Shangri-La, and the updated WaW maps, while Ascension is probably the easiest.
BO2 is again relatively the same in terms of difficulty, but the survival maps are probably the hardest, while Buried, and MOTD are the easiest(MOTD is only easy if you use the Electric Cherry+Acid Gay+Shield strat).
Origins could probably be considered easy, but that's with the upgraded staffs, which most players need some sort of guide to get, and it also has the added variables of the Panzers, and Robots stomping around.
In BO3 every map can be made easy with the right Gobble gum, but if you take them away the hardest maps are Shang, and the WaW maps(not including The Giant).
Most BO3 original maps are just easy even without the GGs, which isn't really a bad thing, but it is inherently easy(you also have AATs that are overpowered).
BO4 probably has some of the hardest maps, but it also has the most crutches.
If you took aaway Elixers, The shield, Specialist, and Dying Wish most people would probably call it the hardest zombies(Every Aether map also now has the Raygun Mark 2, which is another Wonder Weapons at the players disposal).
You have Catalyst, and the Blight Father on every Chaos map(I beileve besides DOTN), and every map also has its own unique heavy zombie.
IX has Catalyst, Tigers, 2 Heavy Zombies, and the Blight Father.
VOD has Catalyst, the Blight Father, and the Stoker.
DOTN has Catalyst Werewolves, and Nosferatus(Vampires).
Ancient Evil has Catalyst, the Blight Father, and whatever the shield guys name is(honestly can't remember).
Every Aether map has dogs, and some sort of other enemy type.
Classified has dogs, and Nova 6 crawlers.
BOTD has dogs, and Brutus.
Alpha Omega has dogs, and 2 different nova 6 crawler types.
Tag set Toten has dogs, great value napalm zombies, and electric zombies.
I know you said most people don't want to handicap themselves in games(hell I usually don't like to either), but like you said people can create challenges for themselves, or even up the difficulty.
I don't really want zombies to go back to being hard, because of unfairness(which is how WaW is on Verruct with Super Sprinters, and Der Reise by getting stuck to zombies), but I don't want as many crutches.
If it's hard it can have some crutches, but if it's easy I'd hope that there aren't crutches that make it even easier.
My man wrote out exactly how I feel, down to the Bloodborne/Souls comparison. Good shit man.
That Bloodborne analogy was spot on
Great job Reed. Great content keep it up!
Another banger! No risk, no fun imo
Zombies has always reminded me of Doom 1 & 2! Would be awesome to get some zombies maps made in that style!
BO4's risk was more focussed on pack-a-punch. While the specialist weapons helped to decrease this risk, the map design made it easy for a careless player to go down before they could even pull out their specialist. Look at the cargo hold or the bottom of the staircase on Voyage, or the confined cage of Area 51 on Classified, or the crowded woods of Dead of the Night (heh heh yeeeaaa boi), or the tight circle in Ancient Evil. In terms of gameplay mechanics, on Alpha Omega, if you want to PaP, you have to fend off Nova Bombers and then juiced-up zombies that come with them; even on Tag, in order to access Golden PaP, you have to survive a somewhat long and dangerous lockdown event. Basically, I don't think risk has decreased at all, but the kind of risk we experience has changed.
I honestly don't like mechanics that make accessing the pack a punch machine harder or to long. Turning the valves on Alpha Omega is the map I hate the most for this is BO4. Especially on solo mode.
@@507Soccer Fair, but I'm not really talking about the mechanics for how you access PaP. It's more about the layout, enemies you encounter and special mechanics that occur once you get there. Alpha Omega isn't really my cup of tea, but I always know there's a risk to Packing since the Nova Bombers only spawn in the bunker.
Major problem started with BO3 & being able to close app, after everyone realized you could just close app to save gobblegums the risk of having to worry about how many of each gobblegum you had went away & since most are gonna use said dominant strategies in say a public match situation, combining the 2 makes for a not so fun experience since most games will just end in a connection interrupted instead of an actual game over due to the host closing app to save their gobblegum killing the game for the other players.
The intro is nuts btw
Awesome Main Frame episode! Really enjoy this series
Just a though but maybe in a future episode you can talk about if IW zombies and ww2 zombies are really as bad as what people said from the beginning.
I’ve been looking forward to this
To me, the best way to sum up the problems bo4 had without going into the tid bits is this...
Cod zombies core gameplay was always fun and easy to jump into, it was simple enough for new players to adjust to and advanced players to get used to. However, what made zombies so complex was the maps themselves 'not' the gameplay.
Every map depends on how difficult your experience was going to be, for example lets look at Town and Origins. They both have their own set of weapons/perks that are available to the player, accessing pap is completely different, map size differ which affects how to manoeuvre around zombies. And yet the gameplay is the exact same but changed due to what was available in the map. Players can control their experience by playing the map they're comfortable with which made each map have their own level of uniqueness.
Bo4 however has its gameplay more complex, its much harder for new players and throws off returning players. Pap requires you to to upgrade slowly, you can have the same weapon/perks on every map and zombies even are now just advanced ai that try move around everywhere with no rhythm. You can literally play the exact same on every bo4 map with the difference of boss zombies.
I know that some people do like this, and thats good for them! Others may even prefer it. But its definitely not what kept zombies interesting all these years, and in my opinion the older gameplay styles were never broken and are something that people from bo4 can still enjoy regardless.
intro is fire lol
Kino was the perfect zombies map in my opinion in terms of gameplay. There was a simple strategy that new players could use (training on the stage strat) but if you wanted to challenge yourself you could do the fire trap strat which was more efficient and of you REALLY wanted to challenge yourself and maximise efficiency you could do the no nova fire trap strat. It had a strategy to entertain all skill levels.
This also came with no unnecessary tediousness which has made zombies such a chore that I rarely play anymore.
Another issue with BO4, that goes in line with this argument, is the loss of natural progression. For example, in BOTD you can get set up for pack a punch on solo player by round one. granted there is a lot more to do but you can have your load out and over powered weapons ready to go by round 10-12 which now a days isn’t a stretch to get to
I think black ops 3 was the perfect balance of risk in zombies it allowed players to costumise their loadouts and the gobblegums provided a variety of helpfulness to the player
Another great vid man, awesome 👍
Hey man i agree Bo1 zombies absolutely was the best, hell Bo1 was my favorite cod until i hit the second prestige in multiplayer and then just played zombies and against bots with friends, ah the good old days
Lol I don’t know how you came away with BO1 being the best from the video. It has plenty of positives but it has drawbacks too. Every iteration has its own experience for better and worse 😃
@@Radaustin27 So very true, but I feel that BO1 had a more good than bad, or at least it was a more exciting experience with the things we had at the time. Anyway man thanks for the reply lol keep up the great work on this series and I look forward to the next one!
I do think BO4 made you basically invincible and that’s why it seems to lose its replayability. I mean, jump into IX, put on winters wail, dying wish, PhD, and victorious tortoise, then your shield (that has a gun is better than most weapons and that can be replenished with points) , 200 health, 3 self revives, and a hellion salvo and with 10 minutes practice my Mom could easily make it to round 15-20. I also agree that if you handicap yourself you lose the “fun” because you know you are not really playing the game. You are constantly distracted the fact that you are handicapping yourself. I also think that, yes GGs made you OP (BO3), but that was earned, and no matter how OP you felt when you rocked a Perkaholic, you were also gutted if you went down a round later and lost it. Sure you could dashboard, but I know most people reading this that used Perka have lost a few bc that finger wasn’t fast enough to pause and dashboard, and it SUCKED (like really bad), especially when you only had one or two (before Newton’s Cookbook made it easier to get them). So there was even a loss feeling when you were OP to keep doing well or you’re dead!
Great video. I hope they consider this In the next game.
Keep it up reed!🙏👍
BO4 was so easy with specialist and Jugg being equipped at spawn. They wanted to get rid of crutch perks, but Dying wish, Victorious Tortoise and Winters wail are even more op than OG Perks
I miss the risk and progression that you would feel in BO1's zombies.
The only thing I wish they would add is a save/quit functionality because I want to get high rounds, but I often don't have the time to.
Become an audio book reader. Voice is so relaxing to listen to
You know what would make zombies more exciting? If you go down before round 20, you just die in real life. That would make player risk go the hell up 😫
Lol
No risk. That’s a good way to describe bo4 zombies don’t matter if you are round 1 with your starting equipment or round 50 full loadout you are never really in danger it’s just boring: when a mini boss spawns (bo2 panzer)/running trough the small areas in mob....
what used to be challenging/scary
Is just annoying in bo4
Reed please sing more intros, they're absolutely amazing lmao.
Don’t listen to this man, he’s crazy
@Caesar Marcus Aurelius Alexander don't listen to him Reed your singing voice is magnificent
@@_boils_8492 always listen to me, I'm clearly sane
Hottttttt trash is my singing voice
Pls sing for us Reed
What I think makes it duller is simply just our skill levels as well, we've gotten to a point where everything is just normal to us. Its crazy to think but looking back I had the most fun when me and my friends were barely surviving by the skin of our teeth on round 30 back in BO1 but now the sense of fear is basically gone because we've been there and done that essentially and with games basically making it easy mode now round 30 is nothing for an experienced player idk just another crazy idea that came to mind
I think it's just a matter of degree. True, now we're more skilled than ever, but even then we still have to hit a round where we feel the same stress as hitting round 30 in bo1. So like round 30 back in the day should take the same skill level as say round 50 today if we had the same system of risk-reward. HOWEVER, it may be a psychological effect. Maybe we're so used to having round 30 feel so difficult for us that we expect every round 30 on every map to have the same stress level, when it's not. The human brain is truly complex and this argument has many viewpoints.
@@samer8073 I agree, its just a thought I had where as maybe sometimes its not the game thats dull but we in our own heads are making it feel dull because its not exactly an entirely new experience like it was when we were beginners. Like you said though it does have many viewpoints.
I think the fact that I didn't need to purchase a single perk in bo4 kill the replayability I think having high risk and reward is a must
I think Zombies needs a good balance. If a game is too barebones or risky it gets aggravating and or boring quick. However, if a game is too easy or complex it can get boring or overbearing. I think great maps like Origins exemplify this because on most maps 4 elemental staffs would be op but the mud and the map design hinders the player so the staffs are NOT a free ticket to round 100. When you look at newer maps like Blood of the Dead, the map doesn’t necessarily motivate the player to do anything, in fact, wraith fires are actually better than the hells retriever so the game’s engine discourages progressing with that and the world record holder didn’t even get the magmagat, he rocked a sweeper. This makes it very clear that all the new content is overbearing because players don’t even need to build wonder weapons, tacticals, etc because the bo4 game engine just makes the game so easy you may as well just do the same strat on every map and go to round 500.
That's why I despise Ascension and Buried so much.
There's no challenge involved, and it's just not fun to play something which holds your hand every step of the way.
Call of The Dead, Shangri-la, Tranzit, Die Rise, Zetsubou No Shima... These are my "Not Top 5 Favourite - Favourites -" when it comes to challenge and the fun factor.
I hope BO5 adds an experimental mode like overwatch. For example we have our OG perks back in BO5 and the og mode with no perk changes. This experimental mode could have you buy Jugg and have a reward but also a risk like MW(2019).Let's say you buy Jugg you get more hit points but you are slower as a result.
Surprised Reed didn't use Jugg as an example in Dominant Strategy.
Once again I completely agree with every point you made oof
To everything you said.....yes
MAINFRAME!
I find dominant strategies to be incredibly basic and boring, it ties back to what you say about human nature. For me, having fun means that I create a strategy for myself that is not 100% the dominant strategy. Obviously, it is basically making things harder for me, but the thing is that I don't feel handicapped unless I choose to ignore a feature of the game entirely. For example, I could run Deadwire on my weapons, but I have a gun that works well when used infrequently, so that way I can use Thunderwall efficiently to clear a way for myself, and then use my "win condition" (combination of items in my loadout that can annihilate a horde).
I try to make up for every bit of lost efficiency by utilising horde control mechanics in different ways.
its just to complicated for casuals like myself to get into now B02 was the last cod zombies a casual could play and succeed in
Definitely needed more risks. Hey remember how risky it was to knife that one zombie while the bus was about to leave to get those extra points on tranzit? Yea it was very risky.
U may argue I'm not using it in the right context here, and that could be true, it just jumped in my head when the video showed a photo from tranzit 😂
No. It was risky to knife zombies from BO1/BO2 PERIOD without Jugg. There is a chance you lunge knife into a zombie and that mofo may WINDMILL you, 2 hitting you before you can get out of harm's way... you're dead. BO3 and BO4 is forgiving, because you have 3 hits in BO3 without jugg, 4 hits in BO4.
Yeah its basically impossible to get trapped in a corner in BO4 with specialist weapon, wraith fire, ww, consumables, shield, the games dumbed down. Specialist weapons are way to over powered, the game becomes about charging up your specialist on the high rounds especially you get the specialist up every 2-3 minutes.
To be fair, while you make great points about the weapon customisation, The perk system, the special weapons. I would disagree with the weapon custom, since you have to use it constantly to get more and more attachments to make it more powerful. So the whole point of that system is for you to get used to the weapons, getting better and better the more you play with them. It will encourage replayability and for people to use more weapons and make them stronger. It also encourages as well for you to just not reroll weapons until you get the one you want, but rather kill zombies so it becomes a better weapon in the end.
To push back a little, why couldn’t we earn the attachments in game? If you need to unlock more attachments maybe players could have limited options available as they level up at a reasonable rate. (MW sucked at that in their survival mode). I can buy a strife or MOG in a starting room that has all the attachments for 800 to be safe for 10-15 rounds. You can’t use starting room weapons to survive in previous iterations pushing players to progress. You should try to get these attachments through the gameplay not automatically have them all before you’re in game.
@@Radaustin27 Well the problem is how exactly they would implement it in-game? I say that the Mw3 version of survival could be a great example for the survival modes for fighting soldiers and juggernauts etc.
The most similar thing that zombies had was in bo2 when you had to pack a punch the weapons multiple times to have the attachment you wanted.
I don't think it would be too good for zombies to just have a place where someone walks there and buys the attachments, since you have to put them in a place on the map where you shouldn't go down easily to use it right. The problem is that people tend to really plan out their builds to survive for longer, and buying attachments in a rush and then get killed wouldn't be really good.
what about a roulette challenge? you rotate maps for 10 rounds most points win. Could even break it up into different areas of each map.
I do not agree that bo4 has better graphics than bo3 just look at zombies chronicles, there’s no denying that bo3 looks better
frost man definitely agree. I just recently played some ascension and shangri la on bo3 and I forgot how damn good the zombie chronicles maps looked. Bo3 definitely looks better than bo4. Not sure what happened during development but it was like the graphics in bo4 got tuned down a notch or 2.
I think BO4 graphics are great, ZC has better color correction and the HUD is better. But when you are using theater you can see the difference. Getting thumbnails people think my BO4 images are direct render rips. You can’t quite get that with BO3. Bo3 is still gorgeous
RADAUSTIN27 everything looks less detailed than bo3 to me, granted that I’m on base ps4. Even so, there was a video comparing bo4 and bo3 textures that backs this.
jeremy roberts *puts on tinfoil hat* I think bo4 regressed in graphical fidelity because of blackout, seeing how a lot of a zombie assets were taken from blackout it does make sense.
I miss the old days
Chaos was the definition of risk and the paid the price, I enjoyed it but I always saw zombies as disclosure with all the higher dimensional entities and all, but the masses didn’t appreciate it, it was too early, and they hadn’t even finished the aether yet.
The Grey Shaman I enjoyed the chaos storyline as well although I think the order they released the maps in was so wierd. Blundell seemed to be obsessed with telling stories out of order and making them as convoluted as possible. Dead of the night and voyage of despair should’ve been the chaos maps on disc at launch with IX being DLC 1. Also i agree that it was a huge risk doing it the way they did. They shouldn’t have tried to do 2 stories at once. Imo they should’ve finished the aether storyline and then started chaos after it was done because they doomed the new story from the beginning by doing what they did. Everyone wanted to see the end of aether not jump back and forth between 2 different storylines and having to wait all the way until dlc 3 and 4 to get aether again after the initial launch of the game
That wasn’t the risk I was talking about lol. I enjoyed the chaos story in the end but I’m talking game mechanics not developers taking risks. 😄
RADAUSTIN27 of course, I was just giving another example of a risk they took that sadly didn’t land with the masses. But you gotta think about the perspective of prospective new players who just jumped in and wanted more aether. Hell I was in love with the aether storyline and still am to the point where I still see the ending of tag der toten as merely one possibility but that goes down the rabbit hole of multidimensional keys and each reality needing to destroy their keys in order for the multiverse to truly become destroyed. Which wouldn’t technically invalidate our ending because since our crew destroyed their key to the multiverse they would no longer have access to the multiverse effectively destroying the multiverse for them subjectively. If you don’t perceive it, it doesn’t exist after all.
jeremy roberts seriously, that would have been the perfect rout but I think they had map design in mind rather than story in this case because IX was so beginner friendly.
But I also agree they should have finished the aether storyline first mainly because of newcomers, it must have been overwhelming for newer players to continue the old storyline and follow a new one at the same time, they’re still trying to integrate the story after having such a short amount of time with it after all.
I overall agree with everything stated in this video.
I've been playing Zombies since 2010 (I first played on Black Ops 1), and the new gameplay mechanics have just become awful. Gumballs that give all perks/all power-ups/death-machine whenever you feel like it? All those decisions that erased most of the in-game progression and risk?
The worst of it all is, I actually like the maps on BO3 and BO4. Except for ZnS, which I'm not a fan of, the other maps are awesome. But these games are screwed up because of all those stupid decisions: making the visuals awful (BO4 was just disgusting), erasing most sources of difficulty, erasing the in-game progression...
Honestly, after 10 years, I still play BO1 and BO2. But BO3 and BO4? Nope, I won't be playing them again in 10 years.
Reed starting to look like milo
Is not only the mind, even the body would try to it's best to effectively and efficiently spend calories, if we don't consciously control our movement the body would do it without us noticing it (bench press, look it up).
I liked the video. +10 algorithm points
+10 awesome points to you
Nice haircut reed!
Reed might as well be a game developer
The big agree
The problem with Risk is that ever since the game got bigger, there was a higher chance of new players each game. If you made it hard as shit on the newbies' first games, then they'd rightfully get pissed and stop playing. It was a business idea instead of a gameplay, which is fair. Money over players. If you can make a butt ton of money off of it, why not continue that.
Me: Listening the intro.
Rad: "The risk; where did we go"
Me: Aight this mans a genius
That intro was so good, this series gets better every episode
p.s will the aether posters be available in 2 months or so?
Aether posters can be bought right now on the website 😁
I feel like it is time for you to move on from zombies. You are a great RUclipsr and I feel like you could do more.
I have tried, but the viewer won't watch. I see this comment time and time again, but no one supports any other series or content besides a few hundred to maybe a thousand people. That isn't sustainable. With this channel, it seems to be a pipe dream to get away from zombies after trying to do so for so many years. Even content that IS zombies shows what viewers want. Positive videos about zombies don't get the same views negative videos about zombies get. I am beyond disappointed and frustrated with the content at this point in terms of what viewership responses to.
Honestly dude you are a pretty awesome dude. You have good quality content. Continue what you got to do. I just want the best for you.
I hope we get OG perks with GGs returning. I just hope GGs are a bit less OP and you can’t quit app to keep em.
Maps like GK and DE were perfect because they’re simple, but have other optional quests to get OP weapons and specialists if you want them. They aren’t required for core game play
Cody Harmon I personally don’t want the old perks back tbh, but I know I’m in the minority on that. I just don’t want it go back to how it was where every single game no matter what map you’re playing you are forced to always get the 4 OG perks to survive to high rounds. What they really need to do is get rid of the stupid 4 perk limit then it wouldn’t be a problem
@@jeremyroberts8822 it's still better than having no reason to buy those perks. Literally the only reason in bo4 people buy perks is bcuz they have the option to do so, it's not a necessity.
Also, think of the risk of going down. Old perk system u become devastated as u have lost everything, from extra health and damage, to extra mobility and reload speed. Where as new perk system u can get up (possibly with a few perks as well if u get revived in time) and u would still have the same gameplay before u went down. U don't even have to rush to buy an extra life (aka quick revive) on solos bcuz they're handed to u at the start.
And this is just scratching the surface on why I think old perk system is better than the new one.
But hey, to each his own I guess
Samer I think that’s a good thing though that you can get back up and your good cus quick revive and jug and stuff like that is already built in. bo4 gives us a larger variety of possibilities during gameplay because we don’t have to use 3 of our 4 perk slots for the crutch perks like quick revive, jug and speed cola and really double tap as well. In all the older games you absolutely need those perks so you can’t experiment with all the other cool perks that much like widows wine, Stamin up, electric cherry etc. bo4 has no crutch perks imo and I disagree that there is no reason to get perks anymore I don’t get why you think that. There are so many different types of zombies and boss zombies coming at you in bo4 you definitely need certain perks to help you out like victorious tortoise, dying wish, zombshell you’re telling me none of those perks are necessary or useful? Like I said to me personally it’s better that we have jug and quick revive at the start and speed cola after we get our 4 perks cus then we don’t have to use up our perk slots on them and can use a bunch more different combinations of perks for different gameplay styles
@@jeremyroberts8822 jeremy roberts jeremy roberts while I do agree it has given us more variety to experiment and play around with, this is still not utilised properly. Crutch perks do exist in bo4. For ex, everyone uses dying wish since it's a free get out of jail card. Victorious tortoise is also very useful, being completely invulnerable while holding a shield. And there's so much more as well, I just can't remember them as I haven't played bo4 in a long long time. These crutch perks will exist regardless, and we will always pick them as Reed explained in dominant strategies. Other perks reward less skilled players, like that zombie see through perk (bear with me I forgot the perks lmao) , it basically reduces the awareness u need when playing zombies. Others are more of quality-of-life improvement perks, like bandolier bandit for more ammo and that time slip perk that reduces the time to pap, box rolls, etc. Other perks are just not that good man. PhD slider? Literally Blundell( rip my man) was working to reduce the need for PhD by reducing the need for explosive weapons, and in bo4 I don't recall anyone using explosive weapons, so why buy it? Winter's wail? Get two hits then wait for 3 hours so the perk recharges?
These are the things on the top of my head since I can't recall much as I said before. I will give the bo4 perk system one thing however, the modifier. That was a pretty cool system which I liked. But PAPing my gun 4 times, spend a shit ton of points so it can function on round 20? Not my cup of tea, and I don't think many people's either.
@@jeremyroberts8822 also, getting back up and ur good reduces the risk of the game a tenfold. U would be stripping the player the risk which makes going down a minor inconvenience, which reduces the fun (subjective). But going down in the old games, u would feel like u were in a true horror movie, just hordes of the undead wanting to devour u as u frantically try to hold ur own in the hopes of finding that opening to buy back perks and then breath a sigh of relief. That joy no longer exists
I feel like infinite warfare brought risk back (And the series lost risk when they added things that save you in a corner (gobble gums, special weapons, elixirs)
Michael Does stuff I agree that gobblegums took away a lot of the risk of zombies but imo the elixirs in bo4 were pretty balanced. People seem to have mixed opinions on the difficulty of the latest maps we got in bo4 but to me some of the maps were pretty difficult. Voyage of despair, blood of the dead and alpha omega were all decently hard imo. I really wish people didn’t hate bo4 so much because I personally loved some of the changes they made. I love the new perk system and how many different combinations of perks you could use rather than using the same 4 perks every game like in all the other games and all the customization was awesome. Custom mutations was a great idea in theory but they didn’t give us any rewards or reason to play it.
jeremy roberts I’m level 1000 in bo4 zombies with 50 days played, it’s my favorite zombies right next to bo3, but I think bo4 is the easiest zombies game unfortunately, the health cap ruins all difficulty
jeremy roberts how were elixirs balanced? We still had perkaholic and other over powered elixirs
Skand456 because it’s a lot harder to get a bunch of plasma than it was to get a ton of liquid divinium and for the most part a lot of the elixirs aren’t like super OP. Yea we still have stuff like perkaholic and shopping free but unless you’re paying real money you’re a lot less likely to get those elixirs considering how slow you build up plasma playing the game. I’m prestige 6 level 40 right now and I’ve only ever gotten 2 perkaholics the entire time I’ve played bo4. If you listed them all and compare the 2 there are a lot more crazy gobblegums than there are elixirs
jeremy roberts I disagree, I think plasma is much easier to get with contracts (and I only hit the 30s and 100 deals when they come around)
If you don’t shoot the crap out of the box when waiting to see what gun you got are you even playing zombies
I think BO3 is almost perfect. Only things I’d change are some details like Widow’s Wine, Shopping Free+Near Death combo in solo, etc and speed.. The older maps solo are generally boring being stuck with one strategy, if you’re doing a speed run you’re still stuck with 1 strategy which is what I’d adjust a bit. Reason I don’t care about handicapping myself is that I feel believing otherwise is arbitrary. In another universe where the game is released the way you’re playing it it’s great now but sucks in this reality even though that game is still possible? That just doesn’t sit well with me
WaW, BO1/2/3: I can play for 5+ hours before i get bored
BO4: I can only play to 30 minutes to an hour before I start to get bored
I never really felt a risk factor in bo4.
Same i mostly play bo4 Zombies for the contracts
Ismael Valle by dlc 1 I was pretty much done with the game
I feel like the player base is partially to blame. Everyone ones to hold a crawler t do this and that, take the easter eggs for instance. I'm one of the only people who believes doing easter eggs mid round (and yes its totally possible, I set up a splitscreen game on call of the dead and did the easter by myself. I just made sure to respawn the second player y the vodka bottleso I could use it to knife it), everyone is obsessed with the doing the easter eggs for the sake of the easter egg and not to give the game more of a purpose and challenge
Zombies needs more bad guns, I believe bo2 and bo1 was so much more enjoyable because of the risk of getting an SMR or China lake. Takes away from the fun of getting a gun out the box and being stuck with it