that one make it one more review than I need.
It's nice that they have some green environments this time instead of only brown ones.
What are you, stuck in the 90's? Shooters haven't been brown since quake.
|Jet Bin Fever |
I would hate to have been on that development team, having to rush an unimaginative, buggy game just to make it in time for the console release.
Many of them just were only showing up to get checks to cash.
At least they got to put a mocap suit on a dog. That must have been lots of fun.
I honestly doubt this release was any different from the usual. Call of Duty has become something that releases once a year, every holiday season.
The first thing I thought when I saw the first trailer for this was: "Oh. Another one. Already?"
Yeah, spend another year on it fellas. Maybe you'll actually do something new this time. Call of Duty has always had a great engine and great gameplay, and it's weird how this amazing game from this amazing developer turned from CoD2's awesomeness to stuff like mw3, black ops 2, and this new garbage.
Mw1 and mw2 were pretty good, black ops 1 was alright, but everything since has just reeked of not trying anymore. The only really amazing thing i've played are some of the newer zombie maps for black ops 2. The "Origins" map with the giant robots walking around, and the panzer-soldat zombies and the ridable tank were fun, but i'm already over it. Zombies in that game just don't have anything dynamic about them. A horde of enemies in the exact same frame of the exact same animation is getting really old.
I'd argue that the last good one was the first Modern Warfare, Once called CoD4, just before they abandoned the numbering system, probably to make it a little less obvious how often they're churning them out.
It was after 4 that the campaigns became something even casual gamers could beat in a single sitting, which to me was the biggest sign they stopped trying.
I've heard the timeless argument that Call of Duty isn't about the single player, the multiplayer is where it's at, which makes me wonder, why keep buying a new one yearly, especially when recycling old maps (Oh em gee Nuketown is back!!) is apparently a series highlight?
I have no idea why Activation decided to fire the two guys that made Infinity Ward. What an incredibly stupid idea that was.
They probably wanted to be paid a salary commensurate with their experience and talent.
Probably something about not wanting to do sequels 3 times a year
The head of Activision is still basically an investment banker douchewad who doesn't like video games and splits his precious time between making bad decisions for this company and earning millions for just showing up to board meetings at Coca-Cola, isn't he?
You might be thinking about almost every CEO at a large american corporation.
The guy running Ford now is top pick for next Microsoft CEO, because cars = xbox.
No, I'm pretty sure I'm talking about Robert Kotick:
Mind you, the chuckleheads at EA are doing a bang-up job at sucking balls, but Kotick has actually said out loud what a lot of gamers suspect goes through the heads of most AAA-game boardroom members.
Needs the Silent Hill 2 dog ending song.
|Caminante Nocturno |
They should have just made the dog the star and only playable character in the game.
According to IGN, Ghosts is 'one of the best in the series', though the score they gave it is actually one of the worst (the lowest score they've given a current-gen is 8.5, putting Ghosts as their second lowest score.). Makes me wonder if they were lying with all the 9s, or if they are now. Or both.
That was GameSpot!
The reviewer of GTAV is has actually been a friend of mine for about twelve years now, and I just found out about the controversy last week. It feels weird to be this divorces from the video game world when I used to be so tied up in the minutia of it.
Seeing as the new age of critics sees 9 out of 10 as "mediocre", 8.8 must be a scathing score.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|