|
|
 |
| [Nov 19, 2012, 12:05 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
SlashGear - Sales Mean Nothing: Call of Duty Has Gone Stale. Thanks HARDOCP.
But I’ve had enough. The Call of Duty franchise has become one big, repurposed offering that gets customers to pay too much for what is essentially a bunch of new maps launched annually in November. Sure, there’s a bit of a storyline and the updates to online gaming are nice enough, but are they enough to justify calling the game an entirely new entry into the franchise? As far as I’m concerned, it’s just more of the same.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 21. |
Re: Op Ed |
Nov 19, 2012, 18:19 |
Prez |
|
|
Dades wrote on Nov 19, 2012, 18:07:
It means I get less FPS games I like and there are more FPS games like Call of Duty. It might be the market speaking but the market sucks and I'm going to say that even if someone has children who like it.
That's probably the most convincing argument to be made about why peoples' lack of discriminating tastes are up for criticism. However, publishers basically know (THQ and EA learned it the hard way with Homefront and Medal of Honor respectively) that trying to make a "CoD-killer" game only yields a sub-par clone without an identity of its own that will end up a costly and forgettable commercial flop. People want CoD, not a CoD clone wannabe. Furthermore, in my opinion it's doubtful that even if Activision moved away from making yearly CoD games they would instead fund anything any more appetizing to PC gamers' tastes, so it's hard to make the argument that people buying CoD are somehow depriving us of anything of any more substance or depth.
That could apply to everything, including complaining about Call of Duty.
True, so if you get a real charge out of complaining then by all means carry on. 
However, insulting a huge swathe of people by calling everyone who enjoys something idiots starts to drift into unsavory territory. It certainly doesn't paint a very impressive picture of the person who claims it anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Twitter 
