[quote name='"Mogwai"'] I explained my reasoning. You just said no. Nice work though[/quote] He just said no Cause you're wrong. Saying skyrim is like oblivion is ridiculously retarded. CoD is just about running around shooting, plain and simple. Not much to add to the game. Shoulda stopped at MW1. The elder Scolls Is such a complicated game that can have so much different stuff added to it. Mind you I'm not hating on the COD campaign. Just multiplayer.
I dunno, it's still running around and blasting spells and swinging swords. Core game play is the same only now it has new quests and a new map with some new skills included. I'm not saying it's the same game, if you somehow didn't manage to catch that the first time around. I'm just saying that the argument in OP can be applied to almost any game today
except cod is the worst they straight up copy and pasted, changed some of the sentence structure, then maybe added a small body paragraph. other games at least go through and reword the essay so it is not an exact copy
if those additions are all you need to say its a new game then the industry is going in a really bad direction. If you think Skyrim is just a small improvement with minor additions then youre crazy. Look at Halo. Each game that comes out adds a ton of new content to the series and changes how the game plays. Now with call of duty all they add are a few new game types, and new maps. Basically what bungie does with halo for $10 every 4 months. The changes they made to CODs multiplayer could have been done in a 2 month dev cycle, and probably were since most of the changes were just copied from homefront. It's not a bad game, but activision is running it into the ground in the exact same way they destroyed guitar hero which sucks because COD was a monster 4 years ago.
[quote name='"Mogwai"'] I dunno, it's still running around and blasting spells and swinging swords. Core game play is the same only now it has new quests and a new map with some new skills included. I'm not saying it's the same game, if you somehow didn't manage to catch that the first time around. I'm just saying that the argument in OP can be applied to almost any game today[/quote] Your are correct my good sir. Haha I just think cod is too repetitive, since there is only do much one can do.
Oh I agree they're running it into the ground. That's Activision for you. I'll never forgive them for what they did to Guitar Hero. And I'm still not over what they did to the THPS series.. But still, I just don't get the 2.5 remarks still concerning CoD. It has an entirely new campaign which is enough for most games on its own (albeit CoD single player sucks in many peoples opinion, so fuck it). Maybe it's just because to me personally, it does feel different. With the way they changed killstreaks and the new ways you unlock shit, it s changes the flow of multiplayer progression, and progression is as fun as the gameplay itself to me haha. It doesn't feel brand new, but it feels like an acceptable sequel. I guess it's a difference in opinion and all that jazz... But if you really think MW3 doesn't offer significant new changes, you're an idiot or you're just trying too hard to down it.
It's not an acceptable sequel when you compare it to 90% of other game franchises out there and how much they improve their games between releases. if youre comparing it to EA sports games then yeah its pretty average.
Hahahahahaha, Everyone disputing with Mogwai is horrible at arguing. You're not even proving a point, you're just misinterpreting his analogy and saying that it's bad, you may as well just quit because you're not making a point at all. Anyone in their right mind would not make any major changes to COD. Why, they've found out what works and they're sticking with it. I don't see what you guys are bitching about, millions of people buy the COD for the gameplay. If they changed that everyone would be pissed. MW3 set record sales, wonder why. Beyond that, the gameplay is immensely changed. The only thing similiar to MW2 is the actualy gameplay, all the other killstreak,upgrades, etc bullshit is different. And keep in mind that everyone is coming off of black ops, not MW2.
Ok. Whoever the fuck likes modern warfare 3, liked the games series and will feel the game was upgraded, unlike someone who does NOT like the game series. Is it the same game? No, because someone who truly enjoys a game series with a gamers passion will find any game to be different in the series. Same with skyrim or battlefield 3, someone who doesnt like those game series will see them as the same game as well. I personally love the elder scrolls and battlefield series. I used to play a lot of cod, but got tired of the form of warfare (fast paced, sprinting around, etc.) i still wont say MW3 is a bad game.
agreed. infamous 2 is basically infamous 1 with a bit of new content. what the fuck i mean "2" of a game is always basically an extension of the first one with some new content.
If by a "bit of new content" you mean a brand new singleplayer story continuation, as would be expected in a singleplayer game like infamous.
MW3 also has a brand new single player story continuation. And to say "yeah well multiplayer is more popular" is a copout. I just got done playing some of the campaign. It's not that bad actually.
I think calling Skyrim Oblivion 1.5 is incredibly naive. I saw very little to no difference between MW2 and MW3. Wow, a double scope, that's innovative. A tank that moves and shoots from remote control? Nice job Activism. At least Skyrim updated its graphics rather than using the same graphics as Morrowind which would be the equivelant of what Activism has done.