Meet The Specialists Of Call Of Duty's Extinction Mode

Meet the Specialists of Call of Duty's Extinction Mode

Extinction, the horde mode replacing (or so it seems) zombies for Call of Duty: Ghosts will feature four classes specific to the mode, according to this post yesterday afternoon from the game's developer.

The classes are rather meat-and-potatoes: Weapon Specialist, Tank, Engineer and Medic. The first two are your offensive classes, the second two are support. Of note, the Engineer can armour the team's drill, which is the weapon used to destroy an alien hive. (You can see that in action, sorta, in the official announcement video here.)

Basically, the weapon specialist deals 20 per cent more bullet damage; tanks absorb damage, engineers secure the drill and medics revive everyone. "The most successful teams will consist of a variety of classes, using different abilities to best complement each other and adequately defend against the alien horde," Infinity Ward says.

The game, of course, arrives next week.

Call of Duty: Ghosts Intel — Extinction Class Overview [Call of Duty.com]


Comments

    It doesn't replace anything. Zombies is only in CoDs by Treyarch. This is a game by Infinity Ward. Research, son. It is the cornerstone of journalism.

    So they've created a very basic game that if released as it's own thing would be shit panned, but as a tacked on mini game in CoD becomes (presumably) a valuable extra game mode.

    I find it hilarious, people buy CoD because it's called CoD, that's it. There is no thing that CoD does that no other game does better. It's not the graphics, it's not the story and it certainly isn't the price ($90 AU on Steam). The multiplayer is vastly overrated and just not worth it, the single player is there to justify the multiplayer, and that wasn't enough so they've included Zombies and now Extinction to make it seem like that $90 gets you something worth that.

    Battlefield is in a very similar situation, but nowhere near as bad as CoD's. This is because EA can sell the game based off of the graphics and massive online battles alone. But this won't be enough, games like Arma get the realism so much better and since Arma 3 the graphics are getting really good. As for massive battles, games like Planetside are waging wars on much grander scales, for free(mium).

    Maybe I'm just cynical, but I've played through half of BF3's story and gave up, got all the way through CoD's tiny story and regretted it only to find that all that was left was either crappy multiplayer and/or pretty graphics.

    I guess seeing AAA quality TV shows like Walking Dead, Breaking Bad, Boardwalk Empire and Game of Thrones make me wish we could have that as the AAA standard in games, because CoD is labeled AAA, but just isn't.

    Last edited 03/11/13 8:14 pm

      Mario Party has a bunch of games in it that on their own are terrible, but combined the game is great.

      Some games do one thing really well. Other games do lots of things well enough. My opinion is that CoD is fun. The campaigns are terrible, but i play them everytime without getting bored. Fun is why we play games, and CoD does it better than most.

    Have they announced the recommended specs for Ghosts yet? Only seen minimum specs floating around

    @bushrat011899

    CoD is the gold standard for multiplayer on console. Fast, varied, responsive. The people that play it are usually jerks, but the game itself is unrivalled.

    You're clearly a PC gamer, so perhaps you're correct on that platform, but on 360/PS3 CoD is where it's at. Battlefield 3 SUCKS on console.

    Last edited 04/11/13 8:23 am

      Yeah I see what you mean, BF3 on PC is good fun if you put the grind in, Counter Strike is great jump in jump out shooting, Arma brings realism (and DayZ) to the mix and of course a multitude of other PC games that are fantastic. And on console these games aren't that fun, CS and BF3 are horrible with gamepads (not accurate enough) and Arma would NEVER work completely with a gamepad.

      I understand that on console and to an extent on PC CoD is a standard in gaming. Split screen on console in CoD is great fun, mainly because it's a rather social event that gets everyone talking, same goes for games like Killing Floor and Left 4 Dead. But it just doesn't translate onto PC, I don't know if it's completely because that social element is restricted to TeamSpeak and Skype, definitely partially, maybe completely.

      But I really think it's just because there are so many really good games on Steam and others that are amazing, Borderlands 1/2, Left 4 Dead, Killing Floor, TF2, Planetside 2, DayZ/Arma and Natural Selection 2 just to name a handful. When I compare CoD to any of these games I just feel disappointed because each game does what an element of CoD has better than CoD. I find L4D to be much more fun for a quick fix of fun, Borderlands is great multiplayer fun, Killing Floor is just great team survival and DayZ makes for some fantastic survival horror with friends.

      And all of these games are now less than $50, some even free. So when I see all the CoD games still the same price and Ghosts coming in at $90, I just don't feel I'm getting my money's worth.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now