If you're considering purchasing CoD: Ghosts for the PC, you should read this first.

Hi. I know there is ALREADY a CoD: Ghosts discussion thread, but I did not want to post this far down the thread and have it so to speak "lost". There's a lot of gamers here, and I know a lot of you probably laugh at Call of Duty on the PC, but the sheer number of twitch tv users who keep asking if they should get it on PC and the large number of personal friends who voice their interest on it compelled me to make an exhaustive list with a lot of issues (some of which I've not even seen or heard anyone else notice) that one can look through and read before deciding if the game is a good buy on PC.

PLEASE TAKE NOTE: This list has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GAME IN ITSELF. This is ONLY covering the PC VERSION and the downsides of its being a very, VERY bad port. I will NOT list gameplay balance issues, how good or bad the SP campaign is, how good or bad the MP is, if the extinction mode is fun or not, etc. I am ONLY listing issues present in the PC version of the game which are ABSENT in the console versions as well, for example if the consoles have single player crashing repeatedly if you.. say... put the volume slider to maximum. And this happens on consoles AS WELL AS PC, I would *NOT* list that issue here, as it is a direct game bug that affects multiple platforms. Now, with that being said, I have made a pastebin of the reasons which I will post here instead of making you all weed through a massive original post. You can read at your leisure.

Here is the link to the pastebin information. It is a LONG READ. I and I alone typed out and compiled these bugs; most from my own experience and a couple getting feedback from friends about how it works across different hardware etc. I hope this helps you all make your decisions better.

 

Totally agree with this. I mean the game works but there are some issues that PC users find unacceptable! Chatter online says the Xbox One and PS4 version has similar stuttering as well. xD

 

Yeah. I sincerely believe the PC version is almost a straight 1:1 port of the Xbox 1 version. Literally.

 

The new age consoles are messing up PC gaming (due to how its being handled by developers), and so is the problem that all these high profile games sell on popularity alone so they already make out with your cash when the game comes out before its been put to the test, once they have your money they tend to not care much about the work/effort to fix issues.

No way can we as educated person change the masses so it doesn't look like its going to change, all you can do is hope for good publishers to come along that put love and soul into there product instead of just going for the money.

Shame that older PC games came out with much less bugs and much more polished than any AAA title these days from the vast majority of developers. I wonder if they even beta test anymore, and if they do I do not mean the 3 PC's in the corner of the dev office, I mean let a few hundred people with different configurations on computers see how the game works before release. If they did I do not see how most of these issues would be present.

 

Sucks too since these AAA games are far more expensive than ever before. BF4 and COD are both $120 games. Quite frankly, playing either without Premium, Season Pass is idiotic. You can't play with your friends if they got em and many servers simply just won't let you join if you don't have premium.

 

The horrible graphics (I mean by late 2013 standards) I can deal with if the gameplay is fun... but FOV.... at 65..... 65???? Really?

Games at least 7 years back let you change that, I think the last game I played at extremely low FOV was Halo 1. I want to be able to see what's around me, not have some tunnel vision, as long as the FOV and gameplay are there I'm in. Activision has stated that changing the FOV through external mods will result in a ban, it was said on the PC-Gamer review of the game lol.

 

Can you link me to that? We've been asking IW if they will ban for it, though valve said they will not VAC ban for it. But IW can still issue bans.

 

ive heard nothing but bad things about the PC version of Ghosts.

 

Here: Call of Duty: Ghosts fixes and tweaks - mouse acceleration, FPS drops and stuttering | PC Gamer

I usually check PC-Gamer daily to keep up to date with the latest in pc gaming :thumbsup:

And it's not only Ghosts that is bad on PC, but BF4 as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MknLARblrDQ

I'll personally just stick to Counter Strike:GO, ARMA 3, Rising Storm, Red Orchestra 2, etc. There are tons of great pc-exclusive online shooters and without any bugs, if you haven't tried any I would highly recommend any of the ones mentioned... just stay away from the generic free-to-play crap lol

 

Finally, someone understands what I had been saying since BF3. The season pass is all but necessary to really enjoy the game. The basic maps STANK. And had terrible loading times. Ungodly long. The DLC maps? Great. Better destruction, better graphics, better lighting, better everything. Even vehicles that should have been there from the start, and great extra guns too. CoD is more tolerable without its DLC, but when someone has it and you don't, it's hell. And yes, they're about $120 games each.

 

Thank you for the info, it helps me further to not consider FPS genre anymore.. :thumbsup:

 

Oh I've seen that, sure. But that was activision taking down the hosters of fovely; they have yet to state whether people would get banned for it or not. That was PC gamer's speculation, and it's a valid speculation. Infinity Ward has said NOTHING with regards to PC gamers this time around. I personally have asked them about 5 times and been retweeted EVEN BY THE OFFICIAL @callofduty TWITTER ACCOUNT with my questions, and they have not answered me at all. But they were sure to retweet happy console users attending their midnight releases! That's for sure! It's part of the reason I just can't give them a break about this. They have a lot to answer for with MW3's disgusting PC port, but I never thought for one single second that they had the capacity to do WORSE.

As for the other shooters, yes, there are lots of ones out there. Arma, red orchestra, etc, but they are often quite niche areas and not particularly meant for super competitive or adrenaline-building play. And especially in the case of red orchestra 2, there seem to be absolutely no servers close to the east coast of the US. And there seem to be just about NO normal servers. Everything is either original or hardcore or something; I don't remember the exact name of the mode that is not exactly hardcore but still hardcore, but I prefer non-instant death in my games due to my usual helping of latency XD. But the point still stands; you want a nice multiplayer FPS, there's few things you can really look toward.

I did not include TF2 in the above list though when I said CS:GO/CoD/BF because that game has apparently gotten to a pay to win status with some very VERY strong items you can acquire in the store. I don't count pay to win anything because it can get old and boring REAL fast, and most importantly, unfair for people not willing to spend loads on it. It's fun for an hour or two every now and then though.

Up to you on that sir. Personally if you like the game itself, Xbox 360 is your best bet for it. Also, if you really do want PC versions of these games, Treyarch makes good PC ports. Not saying the GAMES themselves are good or not, but the PC version is likely to be good if treyarch did it. They at least TRY for PC players. As for Infinity Ward, however... let's just say I got the game for free, and if I didn't get the game for free I would STILL be cursing too hard to have written that list.

 

Don't compare the Arma series with the Red Orchestra series, they're not the same type of game.

The skill ceiling in Red Orchestra is much higher than in any CoD or Battlefield, but it's also much more satisfying than those games ever were for me. It actually rewards players with real skill and accuracy instead of those with the most OP weapons, vehicles, and special abilities. I find there's a lot more strategy, teamwork/coordination, and communication involved as well. A good game really feels like an RTS-FPS hybrid at times. Rising Storm in particular is one of my favorite shooters of all time. The map design and asymmetric gameplay are terrific.

Plus the the hit reg is damn near perfect and you can play in servers with up to 200 ms ping just fine since hit reg is all client-side. Most of the populated servers are in the eastern US so I don't think you'll have much trouble finding good places to play.

 

I tried it a good few times, that Red Orchestra. I really didn't mind the movement and stuff, but like... well you'll have to take my word for it. I'm really accurate. It's something I even pride myself on. When I tried that game, I couldn't kill anyone. It felt like counter-strike feels for me. I tap fire, I stop moving, I do as much as I possibly can to steady my aim and to reduce automatic fire penalties. And I can't kill people. I also feel instant death quite a lot, even if someone is directly in front of me. It doesn't feel... right. I only get this feeling in Counter-Strike otherwise, I've never tried Arma. I could never understand why it wouldn't work; the test range thing they had worked really well. But online just... if someone sees me and I see them, even if I see them and they turn around mid-being-shot-at, I can't kill em. I just die instantly. So I kind of gave up on that. Maybe it was just me, maybe it was just my old computer, maybe it was just my internet... but it isn't something I apparently can play properly, and thus I just don't even look anymore.

Also, if most of those servers are eastern US, they're pretty laggy. Last I checked the closest servers to me were 150 ping, and I can usually get a ~90 browser ping to most servers in most games, and down to 77 in battlefield 3/4's browser. And in game it's been that or higher (the 150 for RO2). So I dunno. I just stopped doubting myself and my own accuracy/ability to shoot when I can do amazing in BF:BC2, BF3, UT'99, CoD 4, W@W, MW2, BO1, BO2, Brink, Shattered Horizon, L4D1, L4D2, Killing Floor, UT 2004, UT3, Payday 1, Payday 2, Paranautical activity, Crysis 1, Crysis Warhead, Crysis 2, Binary Domain, Bioshock 1, Bioshock Infinite and Metro 2033... and at least above average in Quake Live, TF2, CS: S and MW3 (only decent in MW3 because that game REALLY... REALLLLLY... hated my internet connection) but if I turn on CS:GO or RO2 it's like I'm playing with a controller with 1 hand for all I'm able to kill anyone.

Anyway, I'm getting off topic to a point, but yeah. I don't count those in the same kind of FPS genre; things like Arma or Red Orchestra. I'm also hoping Titanfall turns out to be great. But at the end of it all, the awful releases of the two giants just kind of spells much doom for the gaming crowd of FPS lovers. At least FPSes like these.

 

Lol ya, Red Orchestra has a huge learning curve, I have been playing online fps since the original Unreal Tournament 99, and when I started playing Red Orchestra I was barely able to get any kills. Unlike other shooters, there is so much that you have to look out for, you have to work as a team and not just rush in and shoot wildly like in other shooters... but I wont really get into the details because the list would go on forever. End of the day, it took me about a month or so just to become a decent player, as said before, playing the game requires skill that you acquire over time through playing the game, and just being able to survive with your team mates taking on the objectives and such really leaves a much more rewarding impact than BF3 did. And I live close to the east coast and have 4 servers on favorite list that usually keeps the ping below 100, but they are all Realism Mode (1 shot kill on any vital body parts, chance to bandage yourself on non-vital wounds)

But TitanFall, that will be an instant buy for me, the developers know what they are doing for the most part... just ended up signing up with the wrong publisher .

 

Why don't you try the "other-fps genre" - First Person Slasher! "Chivalry: Medieval Warfare" is a prime example of this. My friends and I have put hundreds of hours into it lol, it's just too fun

 

That's funny. CS:GO probably has the best netcode out of all those games you listed, yet you say you can't shoot anyone in it and actually do better in abominations like CoD with its P2P and listen server crap and BC2/BF3/BF4 with their well-documented history of netcode issues. Not sure why singleplayer games are even in that list. I don't understand how you could possibly think RO2/RS servers are laggy when latency in CoD matchmaking is much higher.

 

I only listed RO2's server browser pings and consequent in-game pings. I *CANNOT* find servers under said 150 ping or so (at least that have anyone in them) whereas I can find far less in just about every other game out there. Just what I've been able to see. Not saying that there ARE no servers with lower latency for me, but if there are, they are not populated, and thus I say not east coast USA.

As for netcode, I don't know how good or not CS:GO's netcode is. I have not delved heavily into it. I know I try bot games, learn how to hit better and better, try all kinds of different guns and stuff. And things work mostly in bot games, but in online matches people are running/jumping while 1-bullet headshotting me with an AK-47 across the map, or they're strafing and I'm standing still/crouching and I still can't hit em right. I also listed single player games just to show I have a good feel for their mechanics too. But again, like I said, I could still be doing something wrong, but I see people on livestreams and stuff doing FAR more movement while shooting and fully-autoing etc than I, and killing far faster/more consistently than I can. Aiming isn't really the concern for me about it. I don't know if it only has good net code under a certain ping, which I am more likely to believe and understand as I really can't get under ~100 ping in any online game ever (with ~80 in browser before joining the game) due to my location.

 

Improve your aim.

 

Yes, because the ONE game out there where I have problems hitting people consistently shows me that my aim is absolute garbage and my success in all other games are a lie.

 

Don't feed the troll. It's clear that people are having all sorts of issues with hit detection. I'm getting one shot all the time too from great distances from a pistol our carbine.

It has nothing to do with SIM at all. I also get hit x indicators but still little to no damage on the enemy.

Beamed from my G2 Tricorder

 

Counter Strike games are definitely a whole new beast when it comes to fps games. I could be destroying in bf3 with 3+kdrs and a ton of points, but could go 40 and 100 in a game of cs:s. Now I'm not that bad in cs:s (used to play it religiously) but counter strike games in general just take a different level of skill compared to other games out there.

 

What the what was I trying to say nothing to do with SIM at all? AIM I meant, damn tri-corder. Have to send it back to Starfleet.

 

Yeah. I can tell when hit detection is an issue not through my own fault. I definitely have better hit success in CS: S than in GO. Maybe it's my net, maybe it's just the game. Who knows? But yeah, that game... has some weird stuff. At least when I see ESEA matches or people playing competitive scrims they all follow the CS aiming rules to get their skill shots off, or they just throw it to the wind and spray wildly in close enough quarters and hope for the best. But pubs? Nope. I will forever stay far far away from that.

Side note: Looks like they finally optimized Planetside 2. May have taken a supremely long time, but hey, something else to try and play now I guess.

Now games like BF3 and stuff are a bit different. The time to die is often so high that reacting is difficult, depending on who's shooting and how much lag there is. It's the main problems I have with BF4 and Ghosts (though I don't play ghosts... at all) is that the new FPS games seem to think that quick death is a good thing. The quicker the death though, especially with hitscan and largely recoilless weaponry, is that it takes out the skill factor. It's a reason why I go back to Black Ops 1 so much, because my 120 pings aren't much of a detriment. The time to kill and die is relatively high, therefore even if someone "sees" me first, I can usually still react and outshoot them. But when I started playing ghosts (and all the streams still) show that you can 2-bullet with an SMG at close range and 3 bullet most of them up to close-medium range, and ARs can 2-3 shot until medium-long range, and rates of fire are quite high. And don't even talk about BF4's sub-0.5 second deaths at extreme close ranges. I mean I can literally shoot about 4-5 shots (which come out SUPER fast) and you'll have been dead before I was finished with those 5 shots. It's just too fast. I have the best battles from medium range onward, but I miss the chaotic adrenaline of close range encounters.

But yeah. So games like BF3/BF4/MW3/Ghosts/etc? Different level of "skill" involved. Which is to say less. MW2 (to an extent), Black Ops 1, Unreal tournament, Shattered Horizon, L4D2, etc? Much more skill... not required per se... but more like allowed? A newb can still kill, but a skilled player has less limiting factors on skill. Though ARMA and CS are definitely in a class of their own really.

 

I've always likened BF3/4 series to being 60% ping, 20% luck, 10% experience, 10% skill. You do improve with experience, but that doesn't mean skill. It just means you monkey muscle motion to get used to the way the game "likes" your computer and internet connection. And by ping I don't mean low ping, I mean whatever freaking ping or net connectivity it seems to favor. Sometimes low ping is a disadvantage.

I'm tempted to go back to the slower paced tactical shooters like ArmA because of this. That being said, I do like the fast paced action of BF series only for the fact that I can play for 20 minutes and get out.

 

Yeah. Because my connection is often so bad, I tend to prefer games where my skill can overcompensate for my connection. Experience is always a factor in any game ever, no doubt, but anytime I feel myself doing better in gunfights with a little practise or just flat out being able to outshoot people when other skilled players often get me because our levels are closer together so it's more about surprise factor, I want to stick with that game. It's why I miss the UT games, and why I wish BO1 was more populated. There I feel like I can have good gunfights. Gives such an exhilarating feeling.

 

^This is what I was trying to say. I see my comment makes me look like a d-bag, sorry.

 

developers are going to get lazy when they churn out the same crap year after year.
noone but ourselves to blame for not voicing opinions and buying this game in masses every year

 

i didnt buy premium for bf3 and bf4 and i am enjoying it. i dont understand why you would buy premium at launch date. it is cheaper than buying all 5 dlc maps but it shouldnt hinder the game at all. no one is forcing you to pay premium. you could just pay for the base game, then if you like it, pay for the premium. i do agree that there are a lot of bugs on bf4. that is just what AAA games are now and its been like that for years. in general i dont buy dlc. last time i bought a dlc was for shogun 2 and i enjoyed. i bought the dlc after i spent 40 hours on the base game.

 

Lol, last DLC I bought was for Dead Space 3, because the base game really didn't have an ending, and to get the real ending you had to get the DLC. I hate when developers do that, take out stuff essential to the game and repackage it as a DLC to gain extra profits.