Recent reviews by Big Smoke from Idlewood

Wow this is a really cute indie game. Look at the innovative retro PS1-esque graphics and pre-DirectX shaders.

On a more serious note, this is likely the worst Call of Duty® game developed - on many levels, which i'll break down. In general, the game teasers make some pretty big promises including that the game will push the boundaries of what we know about Call of Duty and return to its roots for the new generation of gamers. In my experience with the Beta thus far, I have yet to see either of these things.

Map Size:
The maps are smaller than any other maps i've seen in these sorts of games. Can anybody remember how massive Overgrown was on COD4? How about Pipeline? Array on Black Ops? These maps were enormous and didn't follow the standard 3-lane format that [all] COD maps follow since MW3. The maps are smaller and less dynamic than past games. Other games have had interactables or things that make them unique - these maps just look like standard boring maps.

Nowadays, the role of a sniper is hardly viable. Back in COD 4, MW2, etc. you could be a standard sniper, take up a nice camp spot on a hill or a concealed position and lay into people. Now if you want to be a sniper, you have to be some sort of pseudo-rush sniper with a mastery of quick scoping. This is partly why COD has lost repute - it isn't tactical or realistic in any way anymore.

Historical Inaccuracies:
I've consulted with a few history buffs in my network and, while a few of the weapons are inaccurate from a historical perspective, the most glaring thing we can see in the visuals is the lack of the most recognizable hate symbol since 1933. The swastika is not present in the game - for many reasons, you could see this as a good thing. However, for a game preaching that they had historians and developers comb through hours of footage and claim that this game was going to be the most historically accurate COD game to date -- the lack of the actual nazi party flag seems to be a misguided decision. The other glaring thing is the fact that I can play as a black, female soldier in the nazi army and carry a PPSh-43 SMG in my primary loadout. The historical inconsistencies really play themselves out here in a couple ways -- the germans did not have black infantry soldiers. In fact, Afro-Germans were discriminated against under the nazi regime and subject to constant propaganda. They were subject to compulsory sterilization - the "final solution" assigned to them.

Graphics:
Maybe my hardware is getting a little outdated - i'm running an FX-8350 processor and a GTX-970 GPU. In any case, the game looks like COD 1. The lighting is inconsistent. There are constant screen tears. I optimized the game settings with GeForce Experience and the experience improved a little bit, but it was often ridden with hang times (also attributed to server lag and the fact that it's a beta).

Gameplay:
The game is only fun because it's a fast-paced "haha eat ♥♥♥♥" kind of experience where you can make your friends eat ♥♥♥♥ when you're better than them at the game. Many mechanics and so-called "new" gamemodes added by the developers are just cookie cutter copies of gamemodes from other games. The new War mode is a copy of the "move the cart" style gamemode from Team Fortress 2 and Overwatch, and Domination as we know is a copy of the whole Battlefield Conquest type gameplay.

In general, this game falls into the same traps as all modern COD games do. The example War map, for example, follows the same 3-lane format that all modern COD games follow, except it doesn't use a sensible spawn system and it is much more condensed width wise. The width restriction on the map literally forces you into choke points - like on a bridge between 2 mounted machine guns and a whole lot of angry germans on the other side shooting. In this situation, you literally have to throw a smoke and commit suicide in hopes that you'll hold F for long enough to build the bridge (with telekinesis, mind you). This completely removes any degree of realism or immersion one could expect from a game boasting it's historical accuracy and realism. When I literally have to run into gunfire with not even a second thought and hope that the bridge gets built by my superior telekinetic mind powers, that's a problem and it negatively affects the experience.

Overall, I can honestly say that I have played indie games which were more complete and more polished than this. With companies like Sledgehammer, Raven, and the almighty Activision (and Activision-Blizzard Entertainment), there is a certain degree of polish which we can fairly expect from the biggest game (perhaps, next to World of Warcraft) in their repetoir. With the annual revenue that COD pulls in, with the added revenue that Major League Gaming (Gamebattles) pulls in since Activision-Blizzard owns MLG/GB, there should be no shortage of money when creating a game like this. The developers promised some great things - with the resources of a AAA studio and the budget of a technology conglomerate publishing company, there is no reason why this game cannot look amazing, play smoothly, and provide an all around good experience for the player. This was the developers' chance to bring a lot of older COD players (like myself) back into the fold by giving us a good beta and trying to show us some real change in the COD development mindset - alas, that chance has been wasted.

Why does any of this matter?
It doesn't, because COD has a strange business model of catering to the pro league's wishes and to the whims of small children. Older gamers (the 21-28 demographic) are ignored when it comes to these games, as demonstrated in the developers' "new generation" comments where they admit they are trying to introduce the pure, quintessential Call of Duty experience to the new generation of gamers. If this were true, they would have polished it a lot more, leveraging next-generation gaming technology to do so, and they would have developed a game which truly pays homage to the original Call of Duty games before they became the cookie-cutter, 3-lane, rush-only garbage they are today.

When I received a free key for this game to assist in making a promotion video, I figured "why not". I downloaded the game with high hopes that this could be a legitimately interesting game. Little did I know, this game would be a viable candidate for the "Worst Game of 2016" title. With no exaggeration, I can say that this game is terrifyingly awful and encompasses every bad mechanic possible.


[1] General
The game lacks a certain degree of professionalism expected from game developers. When playing an indie game, it is reasonable to expect a certain degree of polish or professionalism. The developer's attitude is apparent from the many signs in-game which bear inside jokes and emoticons alongside important information.

[2] Gameplay
The gameplay is confusing. Upon spawning into the game (after character creation), there are plenty of black signs telling the player information about Discord Channels and general information how to play. It took a little while to figure out the controls, but eventually I was able to navigate the area. It wasn't long before I found myself asking "what now", feeling misguided. The game offers assistance on the controls, but doesn't provide much assistance in finding objectives. The main objective in the game seems convoluted.

[3] Multiplayer Sync
Stained Glass Llama boasts highly about their core networking infrastructure, but fails to deliver a remotely acceptable multiplayer experience. A simple player-versus-player melee fight took nearly twenty minutes not because of the unrealistically low amount of damage done in unarmed combat but rather because the sync prevents an immersive fight from occurring. Hitting another player seemed nearly impossible due to the shoddy networking.

[4] Final Remarks
Conclusively, the game feels unplayable. As many previous reviewers have said, this game feels less like an Early Access game and more like a technical demo. The controls are clunky and nonsensical. The animations are just off - for example, what should be a rolling on the ground animation is actually a cartwheel. There are a massive amount of bugs in this game, to the point where I would never consider purchasing this game. It feels like it was developed by a beginner, and doesn't even remotely justify a $30 price tag.

This game is a massive disappointment. Looking for an SSX-style experience, I downloaded this game and tried to look past the fact that it's about skiing and not snowboarding. I found joy in trying to get the hang of an interesting set of mechanics, mostly from the falls that ensued. Overall, I would not recommend this game in its current state, for the following major reasons:
[1] Controls
The controls are clunky and hard to maneuver quickly with. I imagine it would be nicer playing with a controller, but even with a variety of keyboard configurations there was just no comfortable way to control everything.
[2] Gameplay
The worlds are severely limited, despite what the game has advertised thus far. I was expecting something open world or at least level-based with large maps. A standard run on one of the terrain park maps is literally three nice tricks. If I remember from SSX 3, you could go down from the top of the mountain to the bottom and it would take 25-45 minutes depending on your route and speed.
[3] Limited
The developers have focused entirely too much on making this a simulator and not enough on making it enjoyable. I don't want to play a game about something I can basically do or figure out how to do in real life. I want to soar in the clouds and do insane tricks which aren't even possible in real life. I don't want to cruise around at 10 MPH down the bunny hill terrain park, I want to fly down a double black diamond and launch off of a kicker, 200 feet into the air. The gameplay physics are insanely realistic, to the point where it's not even fun.

2 stars out of 5.