The 15 minutes 2XP tokens in Vanguard were abaolutely pointless. The server search and the MVP screen combined meant losing 10 minutes every single time. What was left was barely enough for one round.
whats crazy is that the ONLY way to skip this screen is to have EVERY player in the lobby vote for someone, which never happens organically (found this out a couple months ago when my shipment lobby dwindled down to 3 players lol)
So true, the main issue was simply I didn’t want to go back to WW2. Then when I got myself ready to go there the game was not really a WW2 game. It was a modern silly game with a WW2 skin.
I had many complaints but that was my main one. I was originally sucked into cod many years ago because it nailed atmosphere and immersion. Vanguard absolutely failed on both fronts. It also reeked of desperation.
Krampus. Krampus chased you around for no reason. Initially they said he'd chase you if you weren't playing the objective. But, funny story, my last game ever on Vanguard, I joined a game of Domination late on Shipment and immediately jumped on the C flag and got it. Then went straight to B, and WHILE CAPTURING it, Krampus comes over and kills me. Insta-quit.
What screwed Vanguard was when they were trying to link Vanguard's story to Cold War's in the worst ways imaginable. By the time Adler, Woods, and Mason were done talking to Butcher, they probably sent him to an insane asylum.
The game has holo sights my brother in Khorne. It's not even like in WAW where they had these fake static sights. In Vanguard the sight dot moves like it's a Holo
I'd say one of the worst things was no factions (especially in a WW2 game). I can't wait to ask my great grandpa what was it like to fight against the Enemy team?
I understand why ppl didnt like that factions werent in the game but how does that ruin the whole game for you? Is it really just for an authentic experience?
@@AJCarter1922 I know it's hard to understand for some, but immersion for me is almost as important as gameplay. Battlefield 1 lacked gameplay, but it was the most immersive game I've ever played and therefore I played it a lot just for the feels. BFV was nowhere near as immersive, but the gameplay loop was better. Still, didn't play it that often.
You forgot the overbearing fire/smoke mechanic that got nerfed but is still outrageous. Unfortunately SHG went on holiday in late November and never seemed to fully come back which cost them a significant portion of their player base. To call what they did for this game over the last year support is generous at best. Which is a shame because when it first came out I was enjoying it. They gave up on the community and I don’t think we will ever fully forgive them for that. I’m just so glad at this point it’s over and hope mwll will be a decent title.
I agree with all of this. Another really frustrating thing you didn't touch on is how people in your party randomly get muted and they can't be unmuted.
The audio in general was so fucked. There was that one glitch that caused your audio to cut out COMPLETELY for about 3 seconds, which easily gets you killed in a fast paced map like das house or shipment. Also somehow that glitch permeated into warzone as well which was weird. Ever since Caldera I sometimes have the audio go away in warzone which never happened before.
That first point is so spot on. I was actually excited for WW2 setting on MW's engine and I stopped playing this game once you couldn't tell if it's still WW2 or AW2 with a weird setting. Edit: I must add that even with the MW engine, Vanguard had no attention to detail compared to MW. Like copy-pasted suppressed sounds or reload animations and so on.
@@lalter_ Because that literally elevates the gameplay lol. It's like asking why you don't eat a good steak with some dog poo on the side since the steak is amazing. But Vanguard is not even a good steak since its gameplay was also pretty bad (weapon balancing, cheesy perks, customization that made no sense and it was boring and so on).
@@whiterunguard9978 the last thing on my mind is art style when I play the game. I can’t imagine having a mindset that a game should be immerse when you respawn and combat stops dead in its tracks after a score is reached. Grow up.
Before watching, I think one thing they did wrong was not knowing which direction to go. Some things were super appropriate to a "grounded" WW2 experience, and then there were laser guns. An alternate history COD taking place post WW2 could have really had fun with the latter type of content, and a grounded WW2 game in the MW engine could have absolutely slapped too. Instead we got some weird middle ground where the "realism" people aren't happy, and the fans of things like sci fi tech and whatnot also aren't happy. Edit: I see you basically made this exact point early on. Great video as always.
YES THANK YOU, 10 attachments on a gun at a time is just absurd. There is no reason for it and exactly as you said no trade offs when it’s like that. MW gunsmith has been the best so far. I really enjoy how I dingy ward has handled the gunsmith and weapon balancing compared to any other game in this new era of cod
I like 10 attachments, allows for some really unique builds. They just need to add more negatives to the attachments which stack up as you add more, so it's never "meta" to turn your gun into a christmas tree, but rather an experiment you can have fun with. In MW2019 this would never work because the majority of attachments have strictly positive effects and almost no downsides
The biggest issue for me was the MVP animations and voting. I'm a 6v6 TDM player, and I often like to grind on shipment or something. The time it takes to find a game plus the animations are longer than the games themselves.
My main question I would like your opinion on is what does it look like to improve at cod in this modern era of footstep imbalance, fast ttk, SBMM, etc.? And how has that quest to improve at the game change over time? I asked jgod on his stream if it is still possible to improve at cod and he did not have a clear answer. I would love to hear your thoughts in a video above.
My honest opinion, you're better off not focusing on improvement too much with modern CoD. If you're having fun, don't change anything because the experience is more likely to get worse than better as you improve as a player.
Dude holy shit that’s an amazing question. Tbh I kinda fell off to the conclusion that getting better now is just pointless. Games are gonna get sweatier and people are gonna abuse the mechanics meant to help casuals more. Idk I would love to have an answer for that one too but it’s just really hard to answer.
An interesting dilemma presents itself then because if you play because you’re having fun, you naturally will improve, thus making your experience worse in a manner of speaking
You got it all right!!! Personally I quit the game within the first 3 months for two main reasons. 1. I'm a casual player don't have the time to spend trying to level up the guns just to see if the gun was any good. 2. The visibility on the game is just horrible and not having factions made it harder to see the enemies.
As someone who is relatively new to the series (Cold War was my first game, although I have played a little bit of MW19 too. I love Cold War, I have over a month of play time, both mastery camos on nearly every weapon in the game), Vanguard was a major step down, especially in zombies. It isn’t without its fun elements, but the campaign was weaker (certainly not bad, but not amazing like CW or MW19, which I played after the fact), the multiplayer, while not bad per say, felt like a reskin of MW19 shoved into WW2 (although this game wasn’t campy at least), and the zombies, while I don’t hate it nearly as much as the majority of people, is still a major step down from Cold War since Treyarch got shoved into it with like a month maximum to do the whole mode. That really describes the whole game to me, not bad, but no more. Cold War to me felt special. While in retrospect CW was undeniably rushed in many areas, there was so much more passion put into it (I think Sledgehammer wanted to do the same but didn’t get the resources after launch since the launch was weak). I’m probably going to mostly skip MW2 (if I do get it it’s for campaign and if the spec ops is good), and will be playing Splatoon 3 for a couple years. I’ve also been getting deeper into Zombies, I’ve gone backwards to BO4 and BO3 and am really enjoying them too.
I loved playing VG when it first came out. It felt like MW, but quicker and more balanaced, with less SBMM and a WW2 skin. However, the lack of post-launch content and a Ground War mode pushed me away. Also having teams (Axis vs Allies) or a more realistic map approach would have helped the game a lot. It felt like a loosely WW2 themed alternative uniserve shooter than anything.
I would have liked a WWII setting, but this 10-attatchement madness and colourful camos pushed me away from this game. Not to mention the endless grind
World at War will be the last good WWII CoD game as far as multiplayer goes. You simply just can’t make a WWII game appeal to a modern audience while maintaining authenticity. The games that do like Hell Let Loose are much more niche than CoD needs to be.
@@R17759 WaW is literally the last GOOD ww2 game to come out of the FPS market if youre not into milsims or into sniper elite Sure, WaW was practically a michael bay movie like the newer CODs, but at least they didnt sacrifice taking care in depicting a WW2 battle so they could have dumb scenes like the train crap in COD:WW2 or whatever the hell vaguard was going for 🤣
One of the biggest disappointments for me was it not being a WW2 game. I was excited to be able to have a good time with an M1 Garand, only to learn that I had to turn it into some abomination to make it usable. I think the gunsmith MW2019 came up with absolutely failed the WW2 setting. Made worse by the addition of 10 attachment slots and ridiculous ammo conversions. Lots of attachments made no sense for the setting and were too copy and pasted. A more limited gunsmith with attachments hand selected for use per weapon would have been an improvement. The weapon grind was too long. And ultimately got me to quit the game (I don’t even know if I got max level on any gun). I think Vangaurd is a perfect example of how to make a setting that no one will like. The WW2 aesthetic didn’t appeal to lots. For those who wanted WW2 it was just a modern setting reskin.
The bug where it says it's searching for a game but doesn't show ping so it isn't actually searching has existed in every COD since MW 2019. It happens all the time in warzone.
I never got the impression of any spawn fix. Tried hopping on a couple weeks ago, and had multiple times (usually while using that perk that lets you keep your streak after death, idk if that’s intentional) where I spawned surrounded by enemies with no chance of firing a shot. Broken spawns with hardcore TTK in core modes and a post-game and disbanding lobby system intent on wasting our time.
I was never able to play a completed round of Vanguard without extreme packet burst. I actually played a lot when it first came out before quitting over it.
I upgraded my internet from 500mbps to 1gbps and swapped out my Xbox 1S for a Series X during the lifecycle of this game. I expected the packet burst to stop, but there was virtually no difference. That's when I bailed on Vanguard.
@@cipherpac Same thing. I thought my internet was bad so I started paying extra to get a faster connection which could solve the issue but it didn't help whatsoever. Also, I don't know how the American or Asian servers are doing but trying to play MW 2019 and BOCW in Europe really sucks. Each passing month the connection gets worse. They are shamelessly redirecting the server capacity instead of augmenting it. MW is what WZ uses as a base, for crying out loud! It makes no sense to weaken THAT game when the two are so appealingly and conveniently connected through a menu screen.
In regards to the theming, I wish they dove fully in to the theme of ww2 alternate history , instead of half a**ing that type of theme. There was honestly so much potential for them to make a cool story and even gameplay features with the idea they had going for alternate history. Especially with the idea that Germany wasn’t giving up even after they lost the war, like with what they were setting up in the campaign. Could you imagine if the war never ended the type of technology they would’ve developed at the time? Like steam punk style kill streaks or equipment. Just so much failed potential here.
They just refused to make up their minds, so nobody was happy. Someone that wanted an actual WW2 hated it because half the stuff in the game never actually existed in WW2. People that wanted not WW2 or alternate WW2 hated it because they refused to admit they couldn't/didn't want to make a realistic WW2 until halfway through the life cycle.
@@pspcow Long shots + mount kills or attachments specific camo challenges makes it always a grind. I dont hate Vanguard but getting massive amount of longshots just makes it tedious
I think Vanguard would’ve had a cool and unique setting of maybe 1943/4-1950, set at the start of the Cold War but close enough to WW2 that it wouldn’t be another Cold War game.
The map rotations being affected by combat pacings and modes was incredibly annoying and contradictory to one of Vanguard's main pros of having over a dozen maps at launch. As time went on, the map rotations would usually give people the same few maps, usually ones that didn't play too well but yet they weren't disabled? Overall Sledgehammer's solution to this didn't make sense and felt like they limited us to their own experience.
15:33 - Every time you're asking "Why?!?" regarding a design decision in COD, all you have to do is think back to the "Safe Space"-Interview where Joe Cecot explained how they designed MW2019 to hand out "Free Kills" to "Lower Skilled" players... Interviewer: "But these changes aren't going to come at the expense of the hardcore players, right?" Joe Cecot: "Eh, eh, eh, eh, eh, eh. How do I..."
As a Camo Grinder myself, it took them months to fix one specific challenge on the Panzerfaust that prolonged the completion of atomic. When they did, it took me almost 9 hours to finish the challenge since most of the kill streaks didn’t count. The packet loss was the biggest issue to me and in fact, I stopped playing the game after I finished atomic. Add the incendiary grenade spam (entire map was always on fire) and the absolutely miserable zombie experience until just recently, Vanguard is one of the worst games I’ve ever played from a technical standpoint and I didn’t really enjoy much of the gaming experience at all.
I feel like when it came to the destructive material and peircing vision making it worse. I had a problem dodging gunfire and being shot through every object. It is more realistic but I think cover should be cover and I find myself getting clipped through a wall around corners😢😢
That mvp rubbish used to get me so frustrated , if I had bad game I just want to get into the next match to make up or if I had a good one I was want to keep the momentum going and the fact that those xp tokens run in real time
Personal opinion of course, but I think the 10 attachments and the variety that you can make was great! I'm all for more adjustments the player can make.
One thing MW 2019's 5 attachments did right was certain guns had limitations inherently not allowing them to be too OP. The uzi is a great example, you have to use .41 AE for it to be good, but that restricts you to a smaller magazine size and removes one attachment slot for other things
I didn’t mind it, didn’t feel it was the worse ever ( advanced warfare for me ) but as soon as they brought in shipment in, it killed it as that was all I wanted to play as it sped everything up.
No factions was my biggest problem with this game. Close runner -ups were not sticking to WW2 style, and those dumb MVP voting after every game. Also, Play of the Game was usually not showing anything great.
Here’s my personal list on what I didn’t like about Vanguard. Though I liked the game, there were just way too many things in this game I felt had no place in the game. - ATVI stubbornly jamming SBMM for 3rd year in a row even after Cold War dropped in popularity thanks to it - Ping NOT being king - Terrible post launch map count - Little support for Zombies - No factions - Party game modes took months to come (We just have Gun Game to this day) - No red dots on the minimap by default - Disbanding lobbies - Horrible spawn logic for launch through season 2 - Cheesy trash perks like Piercing Vision - No special calling card for earning a V2 Rocket - MVP screen being an absolute waste of time - Too many featured modes at any given time, splitting up an already small playerbase - Bugs and issues taking way too long to be fixed (Muzzle smoke was an issue in zombies for 10 whole months) - Only allowed to take 1 T1 perk. So you’re only able to counter one thing, and T1 perks counter dogs, Piercing Vision, explosions. - Riot shield + Overkill - 70 weapon levels for every gun (55 for handguns) and abysmal XP rates - Only ONE DLC scorestreak - Recycled weapon inspect animations
between all modern cods, cold war has been by far the best. The team at treyarch did a really good job, especially considering the development circumstances.
I think there's more to it than "people didn't want to go back to WWII". The fans who loved Modern Warfare '19 wanted more of that. But we can't deny that while MW19 helped revitalize COD, it was also extremely divisive. I for one prefer the more arcadey style of COD gameplay, I didn't like MW19's multiplayer but I liked Cold War. So I was actually excited to return to WWII, because to me that meant a likely return to that Treyarch Black Ops and WaW style of gameplay, more of an arcade shooter style (because old tech = lack of attachments) with a touch of history. But what we ended up getting instead was... weird, crappy MW19 with a WWII skin. In the end, neither the MW fans nor the arcade fans got what we wanted from Vanguard.
The game was surprisingly decent last time I played it but I was so worn out from trying to level guns early I never wanted to play it again. That weapon grind completely ruined the game
One thing that really annoyed me was not bringing the Lee-Enfield from campaign into multiplayer / Warzone; I mean sure, it would’ve oversaturated the sniper category for Vanguard alone but why leave it out? In fact, it would’ve been awesome to make the De Lisle carbine as a conversion, even if it wouldn’t be the most practical or competitive gun
04:57 - I found this searching problem happened a lot when during the time you were playing a match an Update was made. Instead of the game notifying you in the menu to back out of the lobby and update, it just searches for ever.
Great summary. Don't think visibility was mentioned? Played on PS5 120hz and could barely ever see people. So brown, blurred and muddy. Let's be honest, Vanguard was just a continuation towards removing any skill gap, protecting noobs and ensuring everyone is as close to 1KD as possible. That feeling of randomness permeated Vanguard. Every mode felt like Free for All, with features added to gift out easy free kills to lesser skilled players.
The destructible walls were one of the most annoying things about this game. It was like a 50/50 coin flip whether I would get stuck running into a wall or not. Especially in SND it really messes up the flow of the game because right off the bat you have a stupid obstacle in your way you can't do anything about.
Yeah that was HORRIBLE. Also after everythings blown up, theres very little cover anywhere because alot of it was destructible. Plus the wall hack perk that highlights enemies through walls was dumb
With the ball turret gunner, I just wish they made it more powerful, using it on Das Haus is terrible, you need to prefire doorways or the lanes usually.
That perk where they get a flash at you look at them was legit terrible. Understanding spawns and movement to get behind people has been a super fun playstyle as long as COD has been around. Been so long since I’ve played that I don’t even remember the trade off. I’m pretty sure running the counter to that perk meant no forward intel or something
Pretty much you explained everything I had issues with the game. Easily the worst thing about this game was the bare minimum of post launch it had starting with season 3. It like if SHG decided not make that division overhaul update in WW2 and stopped doing events all of sudden. Other things like the campaign was very forgettable. I mean I don’t see any talk about that campaign. Even some of the disliked CoD’s campaigns, BO3 had some cool set pieces and while the story was bizarre, people still talked about it. Oh yeah and vanguard zombies lol
We must also consider the fact that this game has just become a thing for leveling weapons for Warzone. Sledgehammer constantly treated players with Shipment and Das Haus constantly
Vanguard set in the WW2 era could have been a chance to simplify the gunsmith and weapon progression seeing how WW2 guns were simply with few attachments, instead they made it more complicated with ridiculous unrealistic attachments.
@@playerslayer6923agreed. imagine everyone having to learn iron sights and not needing to send 3 days unlocking attachments but just playing the objective.
Another issue that the developers still haven't fixed yet was players getting gate keeped late game from getting Atomic and possibly Dark Aether mastery camos. And no I'm not talk8ng about unlock difficulty as it literally won't unlock when you meet the requirements. I only had smgs 3 assault rifles and 2 snipers left in the game to unlock atomic, so I started grinding smgs and before I unlocked diamond for them it said 6/9 diamonds unlocked, and shortly after I unlocked diamond smgs on all launch smgs and it still says 6/9 when it should have said 7/9. I am still going to try and see if it's just a visual bug (hopefully) when I get my assault rifles and snipers diamond otherwise I am going to have to file a support ticket. Assuming they will even fix it given how fast they are trying to jump ship.
My main issue is Activision labeling this as WW2 game but added nothing from that time period. If this game was a best of, it would have been 100 times better. They literally had the blueprint to making a good WW2 game and decided to make garbage.
I agree with almost all of this. Can't overstate how badly SHGs dealt with hardcore modes. Not figuring out a perk to counter explosives in hardcore largely made the mode a farce. It's ridiculous. I'm less fussed on piercing vision. I use it to my advantage, no doubt, but I also get smoked because of it regularly. And since there is a counter but I don't use it, I'm fine with that. I don't get the complaining if there is a counter available. It's a perk that literally punishes camping. Otherwise, you pretty much got it right.
It felt like they balanced everything for core and if that destroyed the hardcore experience, too bad. Add to that, no factions, bizarrely limited map rotations, and the many players who will not play the objective but still easily get rewarded with high score... How hard would it be to have different xp values for different game types and reward people for playing the type of game type they are in? This would certainly promote more satisfying games for every game type.
The game for me on PC had HUGE packet loss issues for a good few weeks that I just stopped playing. It was AWFUL and I felt like I was the only one going thru it in my lobbies. Also I had terrible stutters to the point I had to reinstall windows.
Spot on. I did like the game for the most part. But things like the month of incendiary killed it. Playing hard core it became team kill or nade. That was most deaths.
The lack of controllable streaks really made the kill streaks boring, plus the amount of grenade spam in the first half of the games cycle was ridiculous, all because they refused to add a trophy system. I’m tired of the whole “realistic” approach, like bro its supposed to be an arcade shooter.
I think the early December update they pushed out made a lot of people leave the game. When you push out an update that introduces more bugs than it fixed and also adds an OP lethal into the game then take the next month off of work, that will make people quit playing the game. And to this day, the Blind Fire challenge is still now tracking. a
Personally, the biggest issue was sound and I am not talking about footsteps. I found the sound in general to be really glitchy and underwater sounding. I tried to do a lot of things to fix it with no success. Also, when they added all the laser guns I really lost interest.
Agree with everything in the video, here are several other things that really irked me: -Turtling was too easy and widespread. -No trophy system in 1/2 of life cycle. -Tac Sprint Delay made movement weird sometimes. -Movement speed was too fast which created camera issues and gun fight issues. -Poor Killstreak design. -Counter UAV was OP as hell til the nerf but still too strong and they can't stack. -Mortar Barrage lasts way too long. -None of the killstreaks are fun to use at all. -Player Collision. -Elims instead of kills and deaths being removed from scoreboard for awhile.
Apart from its general flow, footstep audio (or lack thereof), map variety and combat pacing, Vanguard is the first CoD with severe identity crisis. When it first came out, my main complain was the absence of factions (thus reliance on red name tags) and shitty spawns. But after five seasons, the content that they brought in showed me that they didn't care about the game, it was just an experiment of how much we can tolerate certain things...
Thank you for both videos. I consider V to be really underrated, I like it a lot. When you criticize the weapon tuning and camo grinding, I think you somewhat contradict yourself. First, you say that you can tune any gun to your game style (isn’t that a great option btw?), but then you bash camo grind, by saying that it’s tedious and takes too much time? For me camo challenges made me change the way I played with different guns. For example I run some AR with all the attachments for zero recoil and maximum distance, but then came the scull camo, which forced me to switch to up close and personal with some very jumpy barrel attachment. That was a fun and interesting to mix and match weapons/playstyles. I guess the worst fault of the game was it’s setting. Cold War did such power fantasy better.
What I hate most about the game is the complete lack of regard and respect for the WW2 setting. It felt like an afterthought, like they just wanted to do a modern game and slapped a WW2 skin on it because they thought that was the setting that was going to sell most this year. And that also led to the only CoD campaign that I've ever hated. And the no factions thing in MP was utter bs. As if suddenly it would be a big no-no to play as a Nazi in a WW2 game, even though we've been doing that in every WW2 CoD.
My biggest problem with the game was the overall missing identity. I actually really liked SGs CoD WWII and the biggest thing for me in that game was the war mode. I absolutely loved that mode and basically just played that for the entire year with my friends. I was so disappointed, that they didnt bring this mode back and maybe even expand on it. Same goes with the firing range that, like you said, is sort of a staple of Sledgehammer CoDs. Instead they just went the "easy" way and basically tried to do MW2019 in a WW2 setting and then not even stick to that. I think it's mainly due to the messed up development history of what eventually became Black Ops Cold War. IMO is Sledgehammer actually quite a decent developer, they just need to focus on their strengths like war mode and firing ranges and have to develop their own identity for their games. I hope that if they manage to get a full development cycle for their next game and dont get to much intervention by Activision, that they can fulfill their true potential with their next main line CoD title...
My biggest gripe with the camos was the 3 camo categories that made you use 3 specific attachments on your gun, because most of the time they were stupid attachments that I would never use or never use them together the way they wanted!! Like you said it felt like clocking in for a job and playing the way they wanted me to play instead of playing how I like and actually enjoy the game!
Vanguard did well in fixing some issues from MW like spawns, map design (wasn't great but better than MW), footstep audio, ninja perk etc but ultimately the setting and lack of post launch support really killed this game for me. I enjoyed it for a few months but I stopped playing around February due to it being very boring. It had nothing like the support Cold War got in terms of content and events. I feel like it was always destined to fail, really.
I hate how they keep buffing / nerfing guns. Release them NOT broken / glitched, and then leave them alone. Let the players find their favourite load outs.
Honestly I feel like it would've been cool as hell to see this game take place in an alternate universe where it's kind of like Wolfenstein. Could've done a lot of cool things with that concept and it would make all the goofy cosmetics seem less dumb.
Watched part 1 and at the end Ace asked us what we liked about this game, and I honestly couldn't think of one single thing. The campaign was absolute trash, the zombies was half-assed at best, and the MP ranks up there with the worst of all time in CoD. I truly hate the entire package.
Holy crap, can we talk about the mortars? The amount of time that thing was active was ridiculous. It was way too long, especially on small maps like shipment.
I agree with most of what you said , in short Vanguard probably is the worst COD for me excluding the campaign because I enjoyed it ,, from the packet burst I discovered in the Alpha on PS5 and tweeted to them and posted many feedback even videos , didn't listen .. but currently is good but too late ..so no more feedback to any Call Of duty studio , they don't deserve it and it's waste of time .. Hardcore no longer or barely one shot to kill unlike other COD HC settings .. this due nerf to damage in many attachment .. ATVI or SH games apparently didn't care to support the game anymore ,, selling the game for Ultimate edition $100 comparing to Cold War $90 .. Vanguard is most stupid chaotic COD I've ever played especially the Shipment Das Haus playlist with high SBMM and crazy players you play against the amount of jump-shot , shoot anywhere with mouse for PC and you will get Kill Chain Medal easily only on this game .. bad terrible visibility with clutter and smoke everywhere .. incendiary grenades spam .. no support for special events but only in Warzone and game became stale. Zombies is no comment same opinion as the community. and currently I don't think I'll buy a game ever from SH games again after that disaster.
frankly I was one of those people who was exited for a ww2 game with the new engine and I was hoping for a game like WaW where it had a gritty tone and dark theme to show how bad war is generally and the story showed how cruel both sides of the war were, the mp had a nice feel to it with some great map and it was fun to play as each faction where they had unique lines and the progression was fun but in vanguard they just made a safe and generic game with no memorable moment in the campaign and took all the flare and factions out of a ww2 game, also while zombies in WaW was kinda bare bones but it had a great atmosphere and was fun to see how far you can hold out it was challenging and it was so so so scary which vanguard took all of that away, and here we arrive at the part where I bitch and moan about the guns in the game.... I love ww2 and ww1 weapons cause they are simple stuff and they have a much more of a rough feel to them, they feel so satisfying to get kills with (just look at battelfield 1) but vanguard with 10 attachments took all of that fun and the skill of using those guns away I feel like the board meeting for vanguard went a little like this: have you seen battlefield 1 and 5? have you seen how much people didn't like what they did with battlefield 5 and it's alternate universe thing? let's do exactly that but 10 times worse the best way I can describe vanguard is apathy cause it seems no one cared about it but it could have been so good and that's what makes me sad about this whole thing cause the game was designed to a playground to max your new guns to use in warzone not a game to be fun
The issue for me was after launch the lack of anything that improved the game new maps etc it felt like they decided it was a failure before it had even launched Some of the stuff was deffo not in the WW2 spirit I just got to hate the game more and more each day tbh
I think the potential was wasted. After WW2 and hearing they were doing another WW2 game, I was actually excited. I can excuse the silly elements in MP but the campaign was just... ehhhh? Absolutely not a good followup to WW2, which had a decent campaign and really good MP. This feels like another serious rush job like CW the year before. So many elements just didn't work. MVP screen, damage/ROF attachments, TEN ATTACHMENTS, the general apathy towards the community and half-hearted work. I got my playtime out of it, and I liked some stuff but overall... such a letdown and it makes me sad. Zombies makes me even more sad, but the round based maps were fun so there was that. Had a little fun with my bf on the game but not as much as MW19 or CW. Overall, a disappointing entry. Not as bad as BO4 since I actually played it, but not worthy of much praise either.
Still can't get over no factions, it really broke immersion and just seemed like a lazy excuse to not have more operators. Plus I hated the janky MVP screens, so cringey.
What I liked: - I liked the weapon count in Vanguard. I didn’t want to go back to WW2 cuz the weapons are usually limited in CODs with older settings, but this game didn’t have that issue. What I didn’t like: - The combat pacing. It was a good idea, but it didn’t really work because some maps were too big or too small for different combat pacing - The maps. 3 lane maps worked very well in older CODs, I don’t think they need to complicate it too much. It’s not fun when you have someone shooting you from above, across the map, and behind you because each area has so many lines of sight - Obviously SBMM. It makes the bad games feel worse because it feels like im being forced to be someone else’s “good game”, then it makes the good games feel bad because I don’t even know if I’m good or if I’m playing against players who are that bad. Also I can’t play with friends of different skill levels because someone will end up getting destroyed every single game. I know how unlikely it is for them to get rid of SBMM but I feel like if they made these changes, the game would’ve been much more fun
My biggest problem with this game are the following: 1) EOD perk is useless for hardcore players and I am a main hardcore player. 2)The game settings of this game as ww2 and the game colours are simply boring and awful. 3) snipers of the game ww2 is better than vanguard, disappointed of lack sniping variety. 4) Many cheaters of warzone moved into hardcore search and there were a lot of them, Lost so many games because of the cheaters and since there is no replay for hardcore you mostly wouldn’t know if they cheat. But I was able to have a proof of a few cheaters and post it on my channel. 5) the lack of content made me stop playing since May 2022 and I deleted the game by June. 6) piercing vision perk is very op, and many have used it including me. 7) There was no war game mode like ww2, at least it would make me continue play the game. My final request is don’t make world war game settings anymore, just stop.
Having done the full camo grind on MW, CW, and VG…. VG was my most enjoyable and CW was my least. The WW2 setting was a miss, but the core mechanics and feel of the game has been my favorite in the modern cod era.
![BabyChiefDoit - Too Slow (feat. STAR BANDZ) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zayaxws7RPg/mqdefault.jpg)
“How many times do you want do reuse the same reload sound effects?”
Sledgehammer: Yes
Reminds me of black ops 2 & 3
The mvp screen also wastes your double xp
A few months ago I decided I was done with that screen and back out and take the L to avoid it wasting my time. I also play solo so I had that luxury.
They should've had a "vote to skip" option for the MVP screen at least. Anyone 2 weeks into that game's life cycle would've used it every time.
The 15 minutes 2XP tokens in Vanguard were abaolutely pointless. The server search and the MVP screen combined meant losing 10 minutes every single time. What was left was barely enough for one round.
whats crazy is that the ONLY way to skip this screen is to have EVERY player in the lobby vote for someone, which never happens organically (found this out a couple months ago when my shipment lobby dwindled down to 3 players lol)
The double xp for you to get too lvl55 and be stuck lol
So true, the main issue was simply I didn’t want to go back to WW2. Then when I got myself ready to go there the game was not really a WW2 game. It was a modern silly game with a WW2 skin.
I had many complaints but that was my main one. I was originally sucked into cod many years ago because it nailed atmosphere and immersion.
Vanguard absolutely failed on both fronts. It also reeked of desperation.
Some cods like CW or BO1 had more WW2 elements Thant vanguard
@@grrinc And don't forget the cringe. It's so full of cringe!
@@grrinc the game's flatout disrespectful to its time period
WWW2 - woke world war 2
Pretty spot on. They lost me around Christmas time with all the fire lethals and no counter, and old Kringle chasing you around for no reason
Krampus. Krampus chased you around for no reason. Initially they said he'd chase you if you weren't playing the objective. But, funny story, my last game ever on Vanguard, I joined a game of Domination late on Shipment and immediately jumped on the C flag and got it. Then went straight to B, and WHILE CAPTURING it, Krampus comes over and kills me.
Insta-quit.
@@sortofanoakyafterbirth3661 lighten up Frances. I said Kringle as in Santa on purpose.
Vanguard just had an awful identity crisis
Yes, absolutly. Especialy the non existing WW2 feel.
Cod in general, vanguard was the worst ofender to date
@@ericknunez8069 Only sledgehammer games had bad identity. Modern Warfare and Black Ops are just fine.
What screwed Vanguard was when they were trying to link Vanguard's story to Cold War's in the worst ways imaginable. By the time Adler, Woods, and Mason were done talking to Butcher, they probably sent him to an insane asylum.
@@JD_503 I think the atmosphere in cod ww2 was actually ok
I liked the part of the campaign where the character said “It’s Vanguardin’ time” and proceeded to guard the van against all the enemies in the game
Truly one of the games ever made
@@krossersmachinima exactly. No wonder it sold over a Vanbillion copies in November.
*DO YOU SPEAK JAPANESE?* *Saying it in English to a English speaker implying that he can translate whatever the guy says to his commander.
one of the call of duty’s ever made
"The character" 💀
Love that there's a F2000 in the game. Very WW2.
The game has holo sights my brother in Khorne. It's not even like in WAW where they had these fake static sights. In Vanguard the sight dot moves like it's a Holo
The F2000 is a top-secret proto gun that the Nazis bringed from the future
I'd say one of the worst things was no factions (especially in a WW2 game). I can't wait to ask my great grandpa what was it like to fight against the Enemy team?
I understand why ppl didnt like that factions werent in the game but how does that ruin the whole game for you? Is it really just for an authentic experience?
@@AJCarter1922 Hard to tell who is on what team if there are identical operators on both teams.
Bro what? This is something 99.9% of the games population wouldn’t notice with or without
@@AJCarter1922 I know it's hard to understand for some, but immersion for me is almost as important as gameplay. Battlefield 1 lacked gameplay, but it was the most immersive game I've ever played and therefore I played it a lot just for the feels. BFV was nowhere near as immersive, but the gameplay loop was better. Still, didn't play it that often.
@@AJCarter1922 because while it may not add to gameplay per say, it does give the game more flare
You forgot the overbearing fire/smoke mechanic that got nerfed but is still outrageous. Unfortunately SHG went on holiday in late November and never seemed to fully come back which cost them a significant portion of their player base. To call what they did for this game over the last year support is generous at best. Which is a shame because when it first came out I was enjoying it. They gave up on the community and I don’t think we will ever fully forgive them for that. I’m just so glad at this point it’s over and hope mwll will be a decent title.
If you think the smoke is bad on this....wait until you play mw2...
I agree with all of this. Another really frustrating thing you didn't touch on is how people in your party randomly get muted and they can't be unmuted.
The audio in general was so fucked. There was that one glitch that caused your audio to cut out COMPLETELY for about 3 seconds, which easily gets you killed in a fast paced map like das house or shipment. Also somehow that glitch permeated into warzone as well which was weird. Ever since Caldera I sometimes have the audio go away in warzone which never happened before.
@@pricklycats I completely forgot about that annoying bug. I thought it was just my game for some reason.
Wait that happened to other people too💀 I also thought it was just me lol
@@pricklycats i thought that was just me having a fucked up computer.
That first point is so spot on. I was actually excited for WW2 setting on MW's engine and I stopped playing this game once you couldn't tell if it's still WW2 or AW2 with a weird setting.
Edit: I must add that even with the MW engine, Vanguard had no attention to detail compared to MW. Like copy-pasted suppressed sounds or reload animations and so on.
And this affects the gameplay because...?
@@lalter_ Might as well have stick figures fighting each other in colorless environments since that wouldn't "affect the gameplay".
@@lalter_ Because that literally elevates the gameplay lol. It's like asking why you don't eat a good steak with some dog poo on the side since the steak is amazing.
But Vanguard is not even a good steak since its gameplay was also pretty bad (weapon balancing, cheesy perks, customization that made no sense and it was boring and so on).
@@whiterunguard9978 the last thing on my mind is art style when I play the game. I can’t imagine having a mindset that a game should be immerse when you respawn and combat stops dead in its tracks after a score is reached. Grow up.
@@howdoichangemyusername9802 🤣 well then keep that shit to yourself and let us ask for something that clearly doesnt affect you either way.
Before watching, I think one thing they did wrong was not knowing which direction to go. Some things were super appropriate to a "grounded" WW2 experience, and then there were laser guns. An alternate history COD taking place post WW2 could have really had fun with the latter type of content, and a grounded WW2 game in the MW engine could have absolutely slapped too.
Instead we got some weird middle ground where the "realism" people aren't happy, and the fans of things like sci fi tech and whatnot also aren't happy.
Edit: I see you basically made this exact point early on. Great video as always.
YES THANK YOU, 10 attachments on a gun at a time is just absurd. There is no reason for it and exactly as you said no trade offs when it’s like that. MW gunsmith has been the best so far. I really enjoy how I dingy ward has handled the gunsmith and weapon balancing compared to any other game in this new era of cod
I like 10 attachments, allows for some really unique builds. They just need to add more negatives to the attachments which stack up as you add more, so it's never "meta" to turn your gun into a christmas tree, but rather an experiment you can have fun with. In MW2019 this would never work because the majority of attachments have strictly positive effects and almost no downsides
“Mom, can we get World at War?”
“No honey, we have World at War at home”
World at War at home:
The biggest issue for me was the MVP animations and voting. I'm a 6v6 TDM player, and I often like to grind on shipment or something. The time it takes to find a game plus the animations are longer than the games themselves.
But don't you CARE AT ALL about voting for the guy who MOST TIME SPENT NEAR ALLIES?!!?
@@sortofanoakyafterbirth3661 Not at all. "Honorable mention" is obviously the most important person ever.
@@honzabalak3462 😆 yes duhhh
My main question I would like your opinion on is what does it look like to improve at cod in this modern era of footstep imbalance, fast ttk, SBMM, etc.? And how has that quest to improve at the game change over time? I asked jgod on his stream if it is still possible to improve at cod and he did not have a clear answer. I would love to hear your thoughts in a video above.
My honest opinion, you're better off not focusing on improvement too much with modern CoD. If you're having fun, don't change anything because the experience is more likely to get worse than better as you improve as a player.
Dude holy shit that’s an amazing question. Tbh I kinda fell off to the conclusion that getting better now is just pointless. Games are gonna get sweatier and people are gonna abuse the mechanics meant to help casuals more. Idk I would love to have an answer for that one too but it’s just really hard to answer.
An interesting dilemma presents itself then because if you play because you’re having fun, you naturally will improve, thus making your experience worse in a manner of speaking
If you are bad stay bad 😂
@@bushmonster1702 I guess we officially have to retire the phrase “get gud”
You got it all right!!! Personally I quit the game within the first 3 months for two main reasons.
1. I'm a casual player don't have the time to spend trying to level up the guns just to see if the gun was any good.
2. The visibility on the game is just horrible and not having factions made it harder to see the enemies.
Wait they added the FN2000 to Vanguard? 😂😂😂
Yeah they gave up with season 5 and just added whatever
I mean, why not? They added a LASER GUN before that...
They added more stupid shit
As someone who is relatively new to the series (Cold War was my first game, although I have played a little bit of MW19 too. I love Cold War, I have over a month of play time, both mastery camos on nearly every weapon in the game), Vanguard was a major step down, especially in zombies. It isn’t without its fun elements, but the campaign was weaker (certainly not bad, but not amazing like CW or MW19, which I played after the fact), the multiplayer, while not bad per say, felt like a reskin of MW19 shoved into WW2 (although this game wasn’t campy at least), and the zombies, while I don’t hate it nearly as much as the majority of people, is still a major step down from Cold War since Treyarch got shoved into it with like a month maximum to do the whole mode.
That really describes the whole game to me, not bad, but no more. Cold War to me felt special. While in retrospect CW was undeniably rushed in many areas, there was so much more passion put into it (I think Sledgehammer wanted to do the same but didn’t get the resources after launch since the launch was weak).
I’m probably going to mostly skip MW2 (if I do get it it’s for campaign and if the spec ops is good), and will be playing Splatoon 3 for a couple years. I’ve also been getting deeper into Zombies, I’ve gone backwards to BO4 and BO3 and am really enjoying them too.
I loved playing VG when it first came out. It felt like MW, but quicker and more balanaced, with less SBMM and a WW2 skin. However, the lack of post-launch content and a Ground War mode pushed me away. Also having teams (Axis vs Allies) or a more realistic map approach would have helped the game a lot. It felt like a loosely WW2 themed alternative uniserve shooter than anything.
What Vanguard did wrong: Literally everything except minimal and ninja
*minimap
It did ninja wrong by adding it. Footsteps were fine before crybabies got it after beta
I would have liked a WWII setting, but this 10-attatchement madness and colourful camos pushed me away from this game. Not to mention the endless grind
World at War will be the last good WWII CoD game as far as multiplayer goes. You simply just can’t make a WWII game appeal to a modern audience while maintaining authenticity. The games that do like Hell Let Loose are much more niche than CoD needs to be.
@@R17759 WaW is literally the last GOOD ww2 game to come out of the FPS market if youre not into milsims or into sniper elite
Sure, WaW was practically a michael bay movie like the newer CODs, but at least they didnt sacrifice taking care in depicting a WW2 battle so they could have dumb scenes like the train crap in COD:WW2 or whatever the hell vaguard was going for 🤣
Shit i liked the ww2 weapons and maps layout with colorful camos.
@@R17759 Disagree. WWII in 2017 was a great game. Camos, weapons, maps and a wonderful HQ with shooting range.
I enjoy your relaxing and informative videos. Keep it up ACE!
One of the biggest disappointments for me was it not being a WW2 game. I was excited to be able to have a good time with an M1 Garand, only to learn that I had to turn it into some abomination to make it usable.
I think the gunsmith MW2019 came up with absolutely failed the WW2 setting. Made worse by the addition of 10 attachment slots and ridiculous ammo conversions. Lots of attachments made no sense for the setting and were too copy and pasted. A more limited gunsmith with attachments hand selected for use per weapon would have been an improvement.
The weapon grind was too long. And ultimately got me to quit the game (I don’t even know if I got max level on any gun).
I think Vangaurd is a perfect example of how to make a setting that no one will like. The WW2 aesthetic didn’t appeal to lots. For those who wanted WW2 it was just a modern setting reskin.
it was cool for me but when they started adding futuristic and modern things, i got very ticked off
F
If it was a WW2 game similar to WAW it would have done phenomenally.
WAW is still the darkest themed COD
Trying to grind in zombies was like one of those weird dreams where you're running but realise you're not going anywhere
The fact that there was a packet loss issue for ages in this game, and MWIII had an issue with it too, makes me real worried for MWIII
The bug where it says it's searching for a game but doesn't show ping so it isn't actually searching has existed in every COD since MW 2019. It happens all the time in warzone.
I never got the impression of any spawn fix. Tried hopping on a couple weeks ago, and had multiple times (usually while using that perk that lets you keep your streak after death, idk if that’s intentional) where I spawned surrounded by enemies with no chance of firing a shot. Broken spawns with hardcore TTK in core modes and a post-game and disbanding lobby system intent on wasting our time.
I was never able to play a completed round of Vanguard without extreme packet burst. I actually played a lot when it first came out before quitting over it.
I upgraded my internet from 500mbps to 1gbps and swapped out my Xbox 1S for a Series X during the lifecycle of this game. I expected the packet burst to stop, but there was virtually no difference. That's when I bailed on Vanguard.
@@cipherpac It wasn't an issue on our side
@@cipherpac same bro, luckily elden ring had just come out too so my new console was still put to good use
@@cipherpac Same thing. I thought my internet was bad so I started paying extra to get a faster connection which could solve the issue but it didn't help whatsoever.
Also, I don't know how the American or Asian servers are doing but trying to play MW 2019 and BOCW in Europe really sucks. Each passing month the connection gets worse. They are shamelessly redirecting the server capacity instead of augmenting it. MW is what WZ uses as a base, for crying out loud! It makes no sense to weaken THAT game when the two are so appealingly and conveniently connected through a menu screen.
In regards to the theming, I wish they dove fully in to the theme of ww2 alternate history , instead of half a**ing that type of theme. There was honestly so much potential for them to make a cool story and even gameplay features with the idea they had going for alternate history. Especially with the idea that Germany wasn’t giving up even after they lost the war, like with what they were setting up in the campaign. Could you imagine if the war never ended the type of technology they would’ve developed at the time? Like steam punk style kill streaks or equipment. Just so much failed potential here.
They just refused to make up their minds, so nobody was happy.
Someone that wanted an actual WW2 hated it because half the stuff in the game never actually existed in WW2.
People that wanted not WW2 or alternate WW2 hated it because they refused to admit they couldn't/didn't want to make a realistic WW2 until halfway through the life cycle.
Spot on. Would have loved the War mode to come back. Gave up on the camo grind a while back
The camp grind isn't supposed to feel like a grind if you actually enjoy the game
@@pspcow
Long shots + mount kills or attachments specific camo challenges makes it always a grind. I dont hate Vanguard but getting massive amount of longshots just makes it tedious
I think Vanguard would’ve had a cool and unique setting of maybe 1943/4-1950, set at the start of the Cold War but close enough to WW2 that it wouldn’t be another Cold War game.
The map rotations being affected by combat pacings and modes was incredibly annoying and contradictory to one of Vanguard's main pros of having over a dozen maps at launch. As time went on, the map rotations would usually give people the same few maps, usually ones that didn't play too well but yet they weren't disabled? Overall Sledgehammer's solution to this didn't make sense and felt like they limited us to their own experience.
15:33 - Every time you're asking "Why?!?" regarding a design decision in COD, all you have to do is think back to the "Safe Space"-Interview where Joe Cecot explained how they designed MW2019 to hand out "Free Kills" to "Lower Skilled" players...
Interviewer: "But these changes aren't going to come at the expense of the hardcore players, right?"
Joe Cecot: "Eh, eh, eh, eh, eh, eh. How do I..."
As a Camo Grinder myself, it took them months to fix one specific challenge on the Panzerfaust that prolonged the completion of atomic. When they did, it took me almost 9 hours to finish the challenge since most of the kill streaks didn’t count.
The packet loss was the biggest issue to me and in fact, I stopped playing the game after I finished atomic. Add the incendiary grenade spam (entire map was always on fire) and the absolutely miserable zombie experience until just recently, Vanguard is one of the worst games I’ve ever played from a technical standpoint and I didn’t really enjoy much of the gaming experience at all.
I feel like when it came to the destructive material and peircing vision making it worse. I had a problem dodging gunfire and being shot through every object. It is more realistic but I think cover should be cover and I find myself getting clipped through a wall around corners😢😢
That mvp rubbish used to get me so frustrated , if I had bad game I just want to get into the next match to make up or if I had a good one I was want to keep the momentum going and the fact that those xp tokens run in real time
Personal opinion of course, but I think the 10 attachments and the variety that you can make was great! I'm all for more adjustments the player can make.
One thing MW 2019's 5 attachments did right was certain guns had limitations inherently not allowing them to be too OP. The uzi is a great example, you have to use .41 AE for it to be good, but that restricts you to a smaller magazine size and removes one attachment slot for other things
I didn’t mind it, didn’t feel it was the worse ever ( advanced warfare for me ) but as soon as they brought in shipment in, it killed it as that was all I wanted to play as it sped everything up.
Hey ace, please do what warzone did wrong before warzone 2.0 comes out
No factions was my biggest problem with this game. Close runner -ups were not sticking to WW2 style, and those dumb MVP voting after every game. Also, Play of the Game was usually not showing anything great.
Here’s my personal list on what I didn’t like about Vanguard. Though I liked the game, there were just way too many things in this game I felt had no place in the game.
- ATVI stubbornly jamming SBMM for 3rd year in a row even after Cold War dropped in popularity thanks to it
- Ping NOT being king
- Terrible post launch map count
- Little support for Zombies
- No factions
- Party game modes took months to come (We just have Gun Game to this day)
- No red dots on the minimap by default
- Disbanding lobbies
- Horrible spawn logic for launch through season 2
- Cheesy trash perks like Piercing Vision
- No special calling card for earning a V2 Rocket
- MVP screen being an absolute waste of time
- Too many featured modes at any given time, splitting up an already small playerbase
- Bugs and issues taking way too long to be fixed (Muzzle smoke was an issue in zombies for 10 whole months)
- Only allowed to take 1 T1 perk. So you’re only able to counter one thing, and T1 perks counter dogs, Piercing Vision, explosions.
- Riot shield + Overkill
- 70 weapon levels for every gun (55 for handguns) and abysmal XP rates
- Only ONE DLC scorestreak
- Recycled weapon inspect animations
between all modern cods, cold war has been by far the best. The team at treyarch did a really good job, especially considering the development circumstances.
I think there's more to it than "people didn't want to go back to WWII". The fans who loved Modern Warfare '19 wanted more of that. But we can't deny that while MW19 helped revitalize COD, it was also extremely divisive. I for one prefer the more arcadey style of COD gameplay, I didn't like MW19's multiplayer but I liked Cold War. So I was actually excited to return to WWII, because to me that meant a likely return to that Treyarch Black Ops and WaW style of gameplay, more of an arcade shooter style (because old tech = lack of attachments) with a touch of history. But what we ended up getting instead was... weird, crappy MW19 with a WWII skin. In the end, neither the MW fans nor the arcade fans got what we wanted from Vanguard.
The game was surprisingly decent last time I played it but I was so worn out from trying to level guns early I never wanted to play it again. That weapon grind completely ruined the game
One thing that really annoyed me was not bringing the Lee-Enfield from campaign into multiplayer / Warzone; I mean sure, it would’ve oversaturated the sniper category for Vanguard alone but why leave it out?
In fact, it would’ve been awesome to make the De Lisle carbine as a conversion, even if it wouldn’t be the most practical or competitive gun
Made a WW2 game that wasn't a remotely accurate WW2 game. Give me a WAW again + SBMM was too harsh but that's just every year now
04:57 - I found this searching problem happened a lot when during the time you were playing a match an Update was made. Instead of the game notifying you in the menu to back out of the lobby and update, it just searches for ever.
Great summary. Don't think visibility was mentioned?
Played on PS5 120hz and could barely ever see people. So brown, blurred and muddy.
Let's be honest, Vanguard was just a continuation towards removing any skill gap, protecting noobs and ensuring everyone is as close to 1KD as possible.
That feeling of randomness permeated Vanguard. Every mode felt like Free for All, with features added to gift out easy free kills to lesser skilled players.
If you think visibility in vanguard is bad just wait till you play MW2
@@kakyointhemilfhunter4273 im having no issues seeing ppl in MW2. They did a good job at making things more colorfull than in MW!
@@finalboss7956 I guess it’s just me but I seriously struggle seeing people in MW2. Although I almost exclusively play Ground war so that might be why
15:03 isn’t there a perk for it like 2019? That seems like a perfectly fine trade-off for getting scorestreaks
The destructible walls were one of the most annoying things about this game. It was like a 50/50 coin flip whether I would get stuck running into a wall or not. Especially in SND it really messes up the flow of the game because right off the bat you have a stupid obstacle in your way you can't do anything about.
Yeah that was HORRIBLE. Also after everythings blown up, theres very little cover anywhere because alot of it was destructible. Plus the wall hack perk that highlights enemies through walls was dumb
With the ball turret gunner, I just wish they made it more powerful, using it on Das Haus is terrible, you need to prefire doorways or the lanes usually.
That perk where they get a flash at you look at them was legit terrible. Understanding spawns and movement to get behind people has been a super fun playstyle as long as COD has been around. Been so long since I’ve played that I don’t even remember the trade off. I’m pretty sure running the counter to that perk meant no forward intel or something
Pretty much you explained everything I had issues with the game. Easily the worst thing about this game was the bare minimum of post launch it had starting with season 3. It like if SHG decided not make that division overhaul update in WW2 and stopped doing events all of sudden.
Other things like the campaign was very forgettable. I mean I don’t see any talk about that campaign. Even some of the disliked CoD’s campaigns, BO3 had some cool set pieces and while the story was bizarre, people still talked about it.
Oh yeah and vanguard zombies lol
We must also consider the fact that this game has just become a thing for leveling weapons for Warzone. Sledgehammer constantly treated players with Shipment and Das Haus constantly
No prestige
No combat record
Súper bad maps
Every lobby was full sweat
No lv1000
Vanguard set in the WW2 era could have been a chance to simplify the gunsmith and weapon progression seeing how WW2 guns were simply with few attachments, instead they made it more complicated with ridiculous unrealistic attachments.
The ironsights made the waw weapons special. But in vanguard, the same boring red dots are a requirement
@@playerslayer6923agreed. imagine everyone having to learn iron sights and not needing to send 3 days unlocking attachments but just playing the objective.
Another issue that the developers still haven't fixed yet was players getting gate keeped late game from getting Atomic and possibly Dark Aether mastery camos.
And no I'm not talk8ng about unlock difficulty as it literally won't unlock when you meet the requirements.
I only had smgs 3 assault rifles and 2 snipers left in the game to unlock atomic, so I started grinding smgs and before I unlocked diamond for them it said 6/9 diamonds unlocked, and shortly after I unlocked diamond smgs on all launch smgs and it still says 6/9 when it should have said 7/9.
I am still going to try and see if it's just a visual bug (hopefully) when I get my assault rifles and snipers diamond otherwise I am going to have to file a support ticket. Assuming they will even fix it given how fast they are trying to jump ship.
My main issue is Activision labeling this as WW2 game but added nothing from that time period. If this game was a best of, it would have been 100 times better. They literally had the blueprint to making a good WW2 game and decided to make garbage.
I agree with almost all of this.
Can't overstate how badly SHGs dealt with hardcore modes. Not figuring out a perk to counter explosives in hardcore largely made the mode a farce. It's ridiculous.
I'm less fussed on piercing vision. I use it to my advantage, no doubt, but I also get smoked because of it regularly. And since there is a
counter but I don't use it, I'm fine with that. I don't get the complaining if there is a counter available. It's a perk that literally punishes camping.
Otherwise, you pretty much got it right.
It felt like they balanced everything for core and if that destroyed the hardcore experience, too bad. Add to that, no factions, bizarrely limited map rotations, and the many players who will not play the objective but still easily get rewarded with high score... How hard would it be to have different xp values for different game types and reward people for playing the type of game type they are in? This would certainly promote more satisfying games for every game type.
I absolutely hated the MVP screen at the end of each match.
The game for me on PC had HUGE packet loss issues for a good few weeks that I just stopped playing. It was AWFUL and I felt like I was the only one going thru it in my lobbies. Also I had terrible stutters to the point I had to reinstall windows.
Spot on. I did like the game for the most part. But things like the month of incendiary killed it. Playing hard core it became team kill or nade. That was most deaths.
About the gunsmith I thought the fact that you could make any weapon the worst and most cursed abomination ever it was hilarious
The lack of controllable streaks really made the kill streaks boring, plus the amount of grenade spam in the first half of the games cycle was ridiculous, all because they refused to add a trophy system. I’m tired of the whole “realistic” approach, like bro its supposed to be an arcade shooter.
I think the early December update they pushed out made a lot of people leave the game. When you push out an update that introduces more bugs than it fixed and also adds an OP lethal into the game then take the next month off of work, that will make people quit playing the game. And to this day, the Blind Fire challenge is still now tracking. a
Personally, the biggest issue was sound and I am not talking about footsteps. I found the sound in general to be really glitchy and underwater sounding. I tried to do a lot of things to fix it with no success. Also, when they added all the laser guns I really lost interest.
Agree with everything in the video, here are several other things that really irked me:
-Turtling was too easy and widespread.
-No trophy system in 1/2 of life cycle.
-Tac Sprint Delay made movement weird sometimes.
-Movement speed was too fast which created camera issues and gun fight issues.
-Poor Killstreak design.
-Counter UAV was OP as hell til the nerf but still too strong and they can't stack.
-Mortar Barrage lasts way too long.
-None of the killstreaks are fun to use at all.
-Player Collision.
-Elims instead of kills and deaths being removed from scoreboard for awhile.
Apart from its general flow, footstep audio (or lack thereof), map variety and combat pacing, Vanguard is the first CoD with severe identity crisis. When it first came out, my main complain was the absence of factions (thus reliance on red name tags) and shitty spawns. But after five seasons, the content that they brought in showed me that they didn't care about the game, it was just an experiment of how much we can tolerate certain things...
Thank you for both videos. I consider V to be really underrated, I like it a lot.
When you criticize the weapon tuning and camo grinding, I think you somewhat contradict yourself. First, you say that you can tune any gun to your game style (isn’t that a great option btw?), but then you bash camo grind, by saying that it’s tedious and takes too much time?
For me camo challenges made me change the way I played with different guns. For example I run some AR with all the attachments for zero recoil and maximum distance, but then came the scull camo, which forced me to switch to up close and personal with some very jumpy barrel attachment. That was a fun and interesting to mix and match weapons/playstyles.
I guess the worst fault of the game was it’s setting. Cold War did such power fantasy better.
What I hate most about the game is the complete lack of regard and respect for the WW2 setting. It felt like an afterthought, like they just wanted to do a modern game and slapped a WW2 skin on it because they thought that was the setting that was going to sell most this year. And that also led to the only CoD campaign that I've ever hated. And the no factions thing in MP was utter bs. As if suddenly it would be a big no-no to play as a Nazi in a WW2 game, even though we've been doing that in every WW2 CoD.
My biggest problem with the game was the overall missing identity. I actually really liked SGs CoD WWII and the biggest thing for me in that game was the war mode. I absolutely loved that mode and basically just played that for the entire year with my friends. I was so disappointed, that they didnt bring this mode back and maybe even expand on it. Same goes with the firing range that, like you said, is sort of a staple of Sledgehammer CoDs. Instead they just went the "easy" way and basically tried to do MW2019 in a WW2 setting and then not even stick to that. I think it's mainly due to the messed up development history of what eventually became Black Ops Cold War.
IMO is Sledgehammer actually quite a decent developer, they just need to focus on their strengths like war mode and firing ranges and have to develop their own identity for their games. I hope that if they manage to get a full development cycle for their next game and dont get to much intervention by Activision, that they can fulfill their true potential with their next main line CoD title...
The devs gave up back in January. The game had one in-game event with Krampus for Christmas and New Years. Nothing since
My biggest gripe with the camos was the 3 camo categories that made you use 3 specific attachments on your gun, because most of the time they were stupid attachments that I would never use or never use them together the way they wanted!! Like you said it felt like clocking in for a job and playing the way they wanted me to play instead of playing how I like and actually enjoy the game!
Vanguard did well in fixing some issues from MW like spawns, map design (wasn't great but better than MW), footstep audio, ninja perk etc but ultimately the setting and lack of post launch support really killed this game for me. I enjoyed it for a few months but I stopped playing around February due to it being very boring. It had nothing like the support Cold War got in terms of content and events. I feel like it was always destined to fail, really.
I still exprience packet burst to this day
The finding a match issue also plagues Warzone, the exact same way!
I have up on the camo grind on day 1. Still have 2 or 3 camo categories with 0 unlocked
I hate how they keep buffing / nerfing guns. Release them NOT broken / glitched, and then leave them alone. Let the players find their favourite load outs.
There are so many wars they could've done, falklands, korean, gulf war 1 & 2, hell even world war one would be more interesting than ww2 again
Honestly I feel like it would've been cool as hell to see this game take place in an alternate universe where it's kind of like Wolfenstein. Could've done a lot of cool things with that concept and it would make all the goofy cosmetics seem less dumb.
Watched part 1 and at the end Ace asked us what we liked about this game, and I honestly couldn't think of one single thing. The campaign was absolute trash, the zombies was half-assed at best, and the MP ranks up there with the worst of all time in CoD. I truly hate the entire package.
Holy crap, can we talk about the mortars? The amount of time that thing was active was ridiculous. It was way too long, especially on small maps like shipment.
The packet burst is still available and not fixed. What a shame sledgehammer 😑
I always felt like one day I would play great and then the next I would get destroyed
I agree with most of what you said , in short Vanguard probably is the worst COD for me excluding the campaign because I enjoyed it ,, from the packet burst I discovered in the Alpha on PS5 and tweeted to them and posted many feedback even videos , didn't listen .. but currently is good but too late ..so no more feedback to any Call Of duty studio , they don't deserve it and it's waste of time .. Hardcore no longer or barely one shot to kill unlike other COD HC settings .. this due nerf to damage in many attachment .. ATVI or SH games apparently didn't care to support the game anymore ,, selling the game for Ultimate edition $100 comparing to Cold War $90 .. Vanguard is most stupid chaotic COD I've ever played especially the Shipment Das Haus playlist with high SBMM and crazy players you play against the amount of jump-shot , shoot anywhere with mouse for PC and you will get Kill Chain Medal easily only on this game .. bad terrible visibility with clutter and smoke everywhere .. incendiary grenades spam .. no support for special events but only in Warzone and game became stale. Zombies is no comment same opinion as the community. and currently I don't think I'll buy a game ever from SH games again after that disaster.
frankly I was one of those people who was exited for a ww2 game with the new engine and I was hoping for a game like WaW where it had a gritty tone and dark theme to show how bad war is generally and the story showed how cruel both sides of the war were, the mp had a nice feel to it with some great map and it was fun to play as each faction where they had unique lines and the progression was fun but in vanguard they just made a safe and generic game with no memorable moment in the campaign and took all the flare and factions out of a ww2 game, also while zombies in WaW was kinda bare bones but it had a great atmosphere and was fun to see how far you can hold out it was challenging and it was so so so scary which vanguard took all of that away, and here we arrive at the part where I bitch and moan about the guns in the game.... I love ww2 and ww1 weapons cause they are simple stuff and they have a much more of a rough feel to them, they feel so satisfying to get kills with (just look at battelfield 1) but vanguard with 10 attachments took all of that fun and the skill of using those guns away
I feel like the board meeting for vanguard went a little like this: have you seen battlefield 1 and 5? have you seen how much people didn't like what they did with battlefield 5 and it's alternate universe thing? let's do exactly that but 10 times worse
the best way I can describe vanguard is apathy cause it seems no one cared about it but it could have been so good and that's what makes me sad about this whole thing cause the game was designed to a playground to max your new guns to use in warzone not a game to be fun
What went wrong in Vanguard:
1- it exists
2- Sledgehammer made it
The issue for me was after launch the lack of anything that improved the game new maps etc it felt like they decided it was a failure before it had even launched
Some of the stuff was deffo not in the WW2 spirit I just got to hate the game more and more each day tbh
Still experiencing this spotlight issue on Hotel Royal.
I think the potential was wasted. After WW2 and hearing they were doing another WW2 game, I was actually excited. I can excuse the silly elements in MP but the campaign was just... ehhhh? Absolutely not a good followup to WW2, which had a decent campaign and really good MP. This feels like another serious rush job like CW the year before. So many elements just didn't work. MVP screen, damage/ROF attachments, TEN ATTACHMENTS, the general apathy towards the community and half-hearted work. I got my playtime out of it, and I liked some stuff but overall... such a letdown and it makes me sad. Zombies makes me even more sad, but the round based maps were fun so there was that. Had a little fun with my bf on the game but not as much as MW19 or CW.
Overall, a disappointing entry. Not as bad as BO4 since I actually played it, but not worthy of much praise either.
The thing i hate the most about the past couple years of cod is the fact that multiplayer gets treated like dog shit
Still can't get over no factions, it really broke immersion and just seemed like a lazy excuse to not have more operators. Plus I hated the janky MVP screens, so cringey.
What I liked:
- I liked the weapon count in Vanguard. I didn’t want to go back to WW2 cuz the weapons are usually limited in CODs with older settings, but this game didn’t have that issue.
What I didn’t like:
- The combat pacing. It was a good idea, but it didn’t really work because some maps were too big or too small for different combat pacing
- The maps. 3 lane maps worked very well in older CODs, I don’t think they need to complicate it too much. It’s not fun when you have someone shooting you from above, across the map, and behind you because each area has so many lines of sight
- Obviously SBMM. It makes the bad games feel worse because it feels like im being forced to be someone else’s “good game”, then it makes the good games feel bad because I don’t even know if I’m good or if I’m playing against players who are that bad. Also I can’t play with friends of different skill levels because someone will end up getting destroyed every single game.
I know how unlikely it is for them to get rid of SBMM but I feel like if they made these changes, the game would’ve been much more fun
My biggest problem with this game are the following:
1) EOD perk is useless for hardcore players and I am a main hardcore player.
2)The game settings of this game as ww2 and the game colours are simply boring and awful.
3) snipers of the game ww2 is better than vanguard, disappointed of lack sniping variety.
4) Many cheaters of warzone moved into hardcore search and there were a lot of them, Lost so many games because of the cheaters and since there is no replay for hardcore you mostly wouldn’t know if they cheat. But I was able to have a proof of a few cheaters and post it on my channel.
5) the lack of content made me stop playing since May 2022 and I deleted the game by June.
6) piercing vision perk is very op, and many have used it including me.
7) There was no war game mode like ww2, at least it would make me continue play the game.
My final request is don’t make world war game settings anymore, just stop.
Having done the full camo grind on MW, CW, and VG…. VG was my most enjoyable and CW was my least. The WW2 setting was a miss, but the core mechanics and feel of the game has been my favorite in the modern cod era.