How Call Of Duty Elite Will Help You Become A Better Player

We've seen what Call of Duty Elite looks like and been told of what it does, but how will it change the CoD experience for the player? We asked Robert Bowling of Infinity Ward to give us some examples.

Bowling says that Call of Duty Elite will make the game even more accessible than it already is by helping casual players improve in ways they may not have thought of.

The thing I love about Call of Duty is on the one hand it’s extremely accessible -- anyone can pick it up and play, whether you’re good or bad you can have fun at it -- but it’s also very deep. So there’s a lot that you can get into and master, and what Elite will do is allow more of those casual players to master it more so than they ever have before.

An example is being able to go in and identify what you’re good at. In the past when you go into a Call of Duty game, your first instinct is ‘I need to be a good team death match player, I need to be good at getting kills and not dying a lot'. But in reality, there are so many other ways to play the game that don’t involve being good at getting kills, and I know that sounds abnormal for a shooter, but that’s the glory of Call of Duty.

What Elite will allow you to do is see that maybe you’re really good at capturing the flag or you’re really good at defending, and you can see tips and recommendations so that if you’re good at one thing it can start recommending weapons and perks. You can then try them out and push that custom class directly into the game, then the next time you’re playing you'll realise it’s helping you be better at what you’re actually good at.

This is all well and good, but not everyone who plays CoD plays it casually. How will Elite help those who are playing at higher levels?

Elite gives players the tools to improve. For hardcore players, you can set-up specific teams you want to play with. The hardcore players can get more competitive if they want to, and then there’s tonnes of operations and tournaments that they can actively compete in that have set rules that allow them to find more challenges, because that’s the best way to become a better player. Elite affects your ability to control that experience.

Do you plan on paying for Call of Duty Elite when it comes out? Is this the sort of thing that appeals to you? Let us know!


Comments

    I may get the "hardened" edition because it comes with a year free. That depends on whether it is reasonably priced over here in rip-off land.

    If it's going to be more than $100 for the game plus one year, then no way.

      You'll struggle to get the game alone for less than $90. The cheapest Hardened Edition Pre-Order price I've seen is $157.

      What I do like most about COD:E is that there will be more players in DLC Lobbies because of it.

        gamestop has Hard Edition for $100

      Wouldn't bother, they are just charging extra for the hardened edition to cover the cost of the elite pass

        You realise the Hardened edition also gives you access to 4 DLC packs planned? Each DLC pack on 360 is 1200 points which is roughly $20 so thats $80 right there. Add in $50 Elite Subscription and $120 rrp for the game and you get a decent deal. Obviously buying the game separately from say ozgameshop for about $65 then paying for all the DLC will be cheaper, but only marginally.

          DLC is part of the Elite brother.

            I still don't think that doesn't make the DLC any less of a overpriced money-grab. But alas, like that previous Kotaku article, you're all poor suckers that will spend, regardless.

              Said the actress to the bishop.

              Actually if you think about it the Hardened pack is a pretty good deal. You get the game at an average Au retail price of $100, and you get Elite for $50 for one year, which is what it costs.

              So if you were planning on getting all the MW3 DLC coming out over the next 12 months, which means you were probably going to sign up for Elite, you're basically getting all the other goodies and downloads in the box for free.

              If you buy the standard game, then get Elite. Or buy the standard Game and download all the DLC for the next 12 months. You're going to spend as much as the Hardened version costs.

              Just seems like a good deal for fans when you look at it like that.

          Yeah but don't you find the fact that they already have the DLC maps planned out before the game is even close to release, a bit dodgey?

          To me, it just feels like they've kept a few of the maps off the full game, and then used them to help justify the cost of Elite.

            Wouldn't you be more surprised at this point if they announced that there were no plans to release additional maps for the game? It is pretty much a given for multi player shooter games these days.

            Also, if your complaint is that want to pay a one off fee for all the game's content, it appears they are letting you do that in the form of the hardened edition.

      Rather have it at a more reasonable US$100 oh wait Australia pays 50-60% more even with the higher dollar.

    Whatever...

    I wonder how many teams a player which gets labelled "meatshield" will be invited to join.

    The more i hear about this COD and elite, the less I want it. I've always loved COD, but i think they've finally lost me. Hello BF3.

    Sounds pretty interesting. Not my cup of tea though, I just join a game go in and shoot people in the face for an hour or so and then go do something else. But by the looks of things plenty of people are going to get a lot out of it.

      Don't you mean running around shooting your own teammates because you're a n00b!!!

    They talk as if playing the game in ways other than killing the highest number of opponents is something that is unique to CoD, or that stat-tracking as a means to determine things like this is unique to CoD-Elite. They aren't.

    "But in reality, there are so many other ways to play the game that don’t involve being good at getting kills, and I know that sounds abnormal for a shooter, but that’s the glory of Call of Duty"

    I don't get that from COD at all. With battlefield you have the vehicle repairs, ammo packs, health packs, motion detectors, this sounds like what he's talking about, but where is that in COD? All I see is run and gun on tiny maps. Last year I bought both COD and BFBC2. this year I'll only be buying BF3.

    Eh CoD4 is where i think i'll stay.

    though he's right there's many different ways to play the game. Doesn't change the fact that 80% of players still camp for OP Killstreaks.

    worst thing they ever done was giving players any more control over KS than they had in CoD4

    Sound great, to bad it cost more money on top of the $89 I will have to spend for the game.

    How to get better at an Infinity Ward Call of Duty game.

    Step1. Select the broken/overpowered perk/weapon that won't be patched for a long time/at all.
    Step2. Abuse it.
    Step3. Use Tactical Insertion with a friend to boost.

      How to troll Kotaku.
      1. Select a topic of conversation
      2. Whinge that the game mechanic/gun is broken
      3. Profit???

        Aha, no. There were sooo many complaints about Modern Warfare 2 that took too long to fix or not at all. It got to the point that Black Ops was advertising itself as NOT including those weapons/perks in its game. Even stating that tactical insertion won't be usable in Free for all.

        One complaint that was ignore for like, 5-6 months from Australians was the ability to be able to play with other Australians since it always matched them up with Americans.

        and don't ask the PC crowd about servers.

          Dude i'm not really trying to argue about these topics with you. You seem like a fairly passionate about gaming which is something that we all share but you seem to just pick the bad parts of gaming and not the really awesome parts. You gotta stop all the negativity. Us regulars don't like it that much. Im not saying don't voice your opinion but maybe not so matter of factly. Other people have opinions too and i know for a fact the guys here know a lot more than i do when it comes to the topics you are talking about :)

            It wasn't really picking out the bad parts it was really a joke that MW2 players would chuckle at if they regularly played the game.
            Except the comment about Australians playing with Americans, that really did piss me off and I actually stopped playing the game until they fixed it.

            I actually did enjoy many aspects that was introduced into MW2, like customizable killstreaks, extended challenges, weapon attachments, etc. and even though Nuke boosting was a negative thing I had so much fun hunting boosters down and stopping them (hate mail FTW!).

            Except for like, one or two things in Black OPs multiplayer I never really had a problem with the overall game.

              Thanks dude you made my day by saying positives. I really like kotaku comments they are usually well written and say insightful things. Just hope that you will be part of the troll fighters instead of the troll!

                I can write articles detailing the positve aspects and negative aspects of games, hell I would write up FF13 in a positive light given enough thought.

                But my intial comment really was a joke at the handling of MW2 multiplayer. Boosting did become such a huge problem that players have actually managed to make millions of views on Youtube with videos of themselves hunting these boosters down (and recording their messages).

                I heard that MW3 increased playtesting time and number of people to combat these problems and I really hope it does pull through to the point where there's basically nothing in the game that can break online play. So long as I'm allowed to play with Australians I'll be happy too.

            He's not saying don't voice your opinion, he's saying only voice it if it's exactly the same as his.

              i have no opinion with this or any other topic that neo-kaiser has discussed. I just hate those sort of posts.

              I don't agree with your comment. Rewrite the way I would say it!

    I play for the sporadic fun... but I'm far from being a good player.
    It's pretty rough always seeing your name towards the bottom of the KD charts , even more so when your team's lost.

    I'd like to get better... even if I'm not the best, so long as I stop being a drag on the scoreboard, I'll be joining it.

    It's just a massive fluff package this whole elite crap. Spend less time pretending to add content and actually add content.

    No chance I'm paying a cent for it! Not when you can get nearly the exact same thing on Bungie.net for free.

    Not even sure if I'll get that game at all. Black Ops just didn't do it for me this time

    Eh sounds like a waste of money. i currently have cod4,5 MW2 and blops which people still play i cant see a reason to buy this. i should have stopped buying them after cod4/5 they havent improved at all and only gotten worse. each time i hoped that the next would surpass cod4 but they never did.

    oh please, don't make me ring up fox news again.

    Or go get BF3 and it wont cost anything!!

      so BF will give out free DLC? sure they will, after all, EA is such a charitable company.

        Since every Battlefield game in the past has had free DLC, then... yes.

        What part of this DLC is free.

        your paying 50 dollars a year for elite access.

        And generally speaking they have on average released like 2-3 map packs per year at an average price of 15 dollars.

        meaning you'll still be loosing 5 dollars for features which should be free.

        Not to mention more if there was a Map pack you otherwise wouldn't have purchased

          black ops had 4 map packs all at $22 each, so that is $88 all up. not to mention IW announced they are bringing out new maps every month. sounds like pretty good value to me. nice work not checking your facts though.

          @mattroe, yeah man remember how bfbc2 vietnam was free? oh that's right, no, just like other DLC, it costs. the days of free DLC are long gone my simple friend.

          i swear half the people who blindly follow BF3 are morons.

    Does somebody pay all these people to comment on every COD post with "Getting BF3 instead!", or do they do it for free?

      Normally I'd assume some sort of astroturfing, but the whole hating Activision thing been going on long enough that it seems almost believable.

      Yeah, apparently you're not allowed to talk about one game without mentioning the other.

      The real question to ask is why do so many people recommend BF in CoD articles when in-game the first thing you'll hear if you're playing badly is 'go back to CoD with the rest of the losers'?

    I would like to have fun. Why is there so much details and bickering over fun. It wasn't like this when i was a lad, no siree.

      Back then you hit a hoop along the ground with a stick. Now activision bought your stick and hoop, is making you wait to buy them back( if you're a PS3/PC stick n hoop man) and all this means dads gonna have to slap mum around more.

        Activision is tearing my family apart, my wife is leaving me and my kids hate me. Now with battlefield knocking on my door my dog will probably die. Oh these modern day perils.

    Why is it that people who lose faith in COD, automatically say they'll throw lots in with BF? To those who've never played a BF game, it's a somewhat different ballpark to COD. It's as if Battlefield and COD are similar enough to be alternatives to each other. Just because you don't like the new COD, doesn't guarantee that you'll like the new Battlefield.

    After being off FPS's for a while (specifically COD) a friend of mine gifted me BC2 a game with a different psyche but imo a much harder one.

    'with call of duty elite, we find new ways of taking ur money'

    The whole 'there may be other ways that you can contribute' line makes me laugh. Most CoD players play TDM, and a lot of players I've seen who play Domination or Sabotage tend to just use their TDM playstyle, and get awesome KRD but suck at winning the round.

    Not really a stab at CoD, but it seems strange since BF3 I recall also posted something along similar lines of having different roles that can be filled by players in combat.

    Maybe I'm getting my games mixed up... I've been out of the loop for a few days, and a lot of the commentary coming out of BF3 and CoD these days is starting to sound very similar.

    Can't say I've ever seen anyone commenting about how much fun they were having being killed over and over again in CoD...

    What Bowling calls 'other ways to play' have been such a pathetic way to gain anything as far as experience/ranking goes thus far in CoD games... To the point where you may as well not even exist.

    He talks like people just stop shooting at you when you're trying to capture objectives too. If you're bad at getting kills, you're going to be damn awful at capturing anything in CoD.

    Kills are where it has always been in CoD, and it will not change anytime soon.

    I wonder sometimes how the writers here can see some of the answers given to such questions and not just laugh... Being professional is one thing, but publishing responses like this in a serious manner would make me feel more than a little unclean given that I know exactly what these games play like.

    The only way CoD Elite could possibly help the casual player who is bad at getting kills is by giving them an aim-bot. And I'd say Activision would jump at the chance to start selling those too...

      I partly agree, although I've seen players in CoD Domination who can kill all opponents defending a capture point, and then move off before capturing the point themselves. Not to say they need to capture it all the time, but some just never try. So they're awesome at killing, but crap at actually winning in that situation.

      I've found the best Dom and Sabotage games I've played were in teams that had even kdr for most players. In those game types, since the focus shouldn't be on hunting and killing, less time is spent doing that, sometimes reducing overall kills. But since capturing and planting the bomb leaves you vulnerable, deaths go up too.

      So while killing is integral to the game, it's not the only way in all situations.

      But yeah, just saying to ppl, 'You've died heaps, and not killed so many people, but you've managed to get heaps of points in Domination! Therefore, you should play as a Meat Shield! Here's perks to help you.' doesn't really help at all.

        The problem lies in the fact that those who are generally good at capturing objectives tend to HAVE to be good at getting kills also. Or they would just die since the focus in those game modes is the objectives, and they're not just left completely open and free to take.

        The only alternative to this is the player who leeches/steals objective capture points, etc, from the players on their team who are doing all the killing to clear said objective.

        And as much as people hate it when Battlefield is brought up... You can go an entire match in the likes of BC2 as pure support medic/engineer, and be extremely beneficial to not only your team but your own experience & ranking.

        Claiming that there is anything remotely close to that level of 'other ways to play' in CoD is just ludicrous. Because there isn't, you're either good at killing which means you can be good on objective modes too... Or you leech off your much better teammates and don't really do squat to support them besides give the other team a meatshield to shoot at.

    Oh my GAWD, they're just in it for the money!!!

    [N.S. Sherlock]

    I'd rather a sporting game of Pong. With gameplay like that you can't lose.

Join the discussion!