I can count on one hand the number of actual changes to the game that have been made since CoD4. It's a re-skin. A $60 annual re-skin. How can you not see what's wrong with that?
Don't get me wrong, I can see what is wrong is with that but I can't see why it continues to piss so many people off. I mean if the game is enjoyable then what the fuck is the problem.
Don't get me wrong, I can see what is wrong is with that but I can't see why it continues to piss so many people off. I mean if the game is enjoyable then what the fuck is the problem.[/quote:2g8r4k82] because that's why it's enjoyable. it's the same ship over and over again with nothing new. it's the same thing that happened to 4X games and space combat sims, and now look at those types of games, they didn't bring new things to the table and just reskined shit till the fan base shunned those types of games, and i don't want that to happen to shooters and that's what COD is doing to the whole FPS market
Do you like Battlefield? Because if so then I can justly call you a hypocrite. Also, it is arguable that scenario would happen if CoD existed or not. Clever people, such as myself, would not buy the game when it is just out. I did that for WaW which was my first CoD on the new generation and for MW 2 because I fucking thought that game was amazing when I played it. And the reason I would contribute to a lack of innovation is the worry that it is not what the fanbase wants. And with recent releases such as RAGE, I think there is still room for innovation from other developers.
yes i enjoy battlefield, because it hasn't fucking stagnated for 4 games. it's added and innovated for almost every one of it's games but for maybe Vietnam. COD hasn't added anything but lower the overall quality of shooters as a whole.
Don't get me wrong, I can see what is wrong is with that but I can't see why it continues to piss so many people off. I mean if the game is enjoyable then what the fuck is the problem.[/quote:2p6k12q9] 'How dare people have high expectations! they should always be happy no matter what!' Your logic
'How dare people have high expectations! they should always be happy no matter what!' Your logic[/quote:3o9a8b8p] Come again? If a game is good then there is no reason to hate it. How does theat translate to what you wrote?
That's the point he's making, the game isn't good. So there's reason to hate it. That's how that translates to what he wrote.
its not very fun in my opinion and the No Russian mission was greatly disappointing. Also I think the multiplayer is not very fun IMO.
it's like a sandbox shooter, it's fun but gets boring when there are cheats in it. (Mercenaries 2) not saying that there are cheaters/cheats in CoD, I am relating to why you can't play it and have fun for more than 5 minutes.
COD is shit. It's boring, unbalanced, the plot is asbsolute AMERICA IS DOMINATE propaganda, and all it's fans are like "U SUK @ DIS GAEM U N00B"
The plot isn't even consistant. It's not America is Dominate, it's that AND if has a personality disorder that makes it want to be America is suck and die.
To be fair, I used to play Call of Duty multiplayer all of the time, for CoD4 and WaW. It wasn't until Modern Warfare 2 was released did Call of Duty become horrible. After the fanbase became militant and competitive, it resulted in the multiplayer being composed mainly of adolescent boys with names like "xxxXXxx QuEeKsCOPZ". I couldn't stand playing with these fucks. I remember back when WaW was released, the only people you would hear over the mic were hairy frustrated Americans and hilarious English 23 year olds on the warpath. That being said, playing Nazi Zombies with teams composed of these people yelling their fucking faces off was highly entertaining, and then when MW2 was released the entire Call of Duty fanbase became angsty annoying crackers. This is why I respect Battlefield more than Call of Duty.
I couldnt agree more. I used to love playing WaW with a few friends because it just wasnt as big of a deal as it turned into with MW2 taking a shot at me :/
Bf3 looked and played like bc2 with better graphics. I like both games, but neither are innovating or deviating from their respective norms. The bad company games deviated only slightly from bf2 in that they were inferior, not that they brought anything new to the table. EA is just as money hungry as activision, they're just worse at it... [spoiler:q98gypuk][/spoiler:q98gypuk]
MW3 will sell more. why you ask? Steam-works. Activision is smart enough to use steam to it's full extent. Either EA is money-hungry to the max or they don't realise how much of a powerhouse steam is. Steam is popular because 1) It downloads directly to your computer. 2) It backs up all your info on it's servers. 3) It has deals that don't cost much and are extremely effective (tf2 hats). I was gonna preorder bf3. I had all the money ready. But when they refused steam i refused them my money.
