darkSpyro

Many don't like Call of Duty. I don't like Call of Duty myself but mostly because the rest of the thought it be good to turn everything into Call of Duty. People buying CoD don't about imitations and others would be pissed.

There's been a bigger consensus that the Call of Duty franchise has finally gotten stale with the yearly formula. Ghosts being uninspired and mediocre, Advanced Warfare for that dumb QTE at a funeral and there's Black Ops III that somehow does even less than Ghosts.

It's now Infinity Ward's turn this year. Rather than Ghosts 2, I rather if they remastered the Modern Warfare trilogy for current-gen consoles, especially with three exciting campaigns than a new mediocre one because those games were made when developers gave a damn... at least with the first one, the other two had ones at Infinity Ward fall out with Activision but they're still good nonetheless... or least better than the idea of a Ghosts 2.

Quote: StevemacQ

There's been a bigger consensus that the Call of Duty franchise has finally gotten stale with the yearly formula. Ghosts being uninspired and mediocre, Advanced Warfare for that dumb QTE at a funeral and there's Black Ops III that somehow does even less than Ghosts.

I don't see how a single QTE in the campaign takes away from what was otherwise a great CoD game that felt a lot more fast paced and fluid than past titles.

And how does BO3 do even less than Ghosts? Ghosts was a continuation of MW3 while BO3 is basically Titanfall but CoD and less (no) mechs.

Don't think Ghosts and MW3 are in anyway connected. Since the Ghosts disaster was do to a satellite hack/firing, not World War III. BO3 was bad because those android things and their AI is surprisingly...well...dumb. They're really only walking tanks. Not saying go back to MW series, but they should head back in time, to something like World War I, that'd be cool.

World War I isn't known for any ideal spectacle for motion picture and Activision would refuse to stray away from interactive Michael Bay formula of explosions and "oorah murica". As for WWI settings, I think Valiant Hearts is good enough.

Quote: KnightArtorias

Don't think Ghosts and MW3 are in anyway connected. Since the Ghosts disaster was do to a satellite hack/firing, not World War III. BO3 was bad because those android things and their AI is surprisingly...well...dumb. They're really only walking tanks. Not saying go back to MW series, but they should head back in time, to something like World War I, that'd be cool.

I didn't mean in terms of story but more in that Infinity Ward did very little to improve upon their last CoD title, whereas Treyarch is constantly changing and Sledgehammer debuted in a big way.

Quote: CAV

Quote: KnightArtorias

Don't think Ghosts and MW3 are in anyway connected. Since the Ghosts disaster was do to a satellite hack/firing, not World War III. BO3 was bad because those android things and their AI is surprisingly...well...dumb. They're really only walking tanks. Not saying go back to MW series, but they should head back in time, to something like World War I, that'd be cool.

I didn't mean in terms of story but more in that Infinity Ward did very little to improve upon their last CoD title, whereas Treyarch is constantly changing and Sledgehammer debuted in a big way.

Ah, I get what you mean now. Quite frankly, I've really lost interest in CoD, was disappointed in how MW3 turned out. Ghosts was my last chance, but it didn't impress so I stopped playing it. Brother got AW and BO3, so I've seen him play. Bored of most triple A games actually. I generally don't leave my RPGs or simulation anymore.

Quote: CAV

Quote: KnightArtorias

Don't think Ghosts and MW3 are in anyway connected. Since the Ghosts disaster was do to a satellite hack/firing, not World War III. BO3 was bad because those android things and their AI is surprisingly...well...dumb. They're really only walking tanks. Not saying go back to MW series, but they should head back in time, to something like World War I, that'd be cool.

I didn't mean in terms of story but more in that Infinity Ward did very little to improve upon their last CoD title, whereas Treyarch is constantly changing and Sledgehammer debuted in a big way.

Aesthetics matter. Ghosts is filled with nothing but murky swamps and forests that all look murky and muted.

Quote: StevemacQ

Quote: CAV

Quote: KnightArtorias

Don't think Ghosts and MW3 are in anyway connected. Since the Ghosts disaster was do to a satellite hack/firing, not World War III. BO3 was bad because those android things and their AI is surprisingly...well...dumb. They're really only walking tanks. Not saying go back to MW series, but they should head back in time, to something like World War I, that'd be cool.

I didn't mean in terms of story but more in that Infinity Ward did very little to improve upon their last CoD title, whereas Treyarch is constantly changing and Sledgehammer debuted in a big way.

Aesthetics matter. Ghosts is filled with nothing but murky swamps and forests that all look murky and muted.

So is Skyrim, but damn is it gorgeous.

I dunno what it was about Ghosts, but it just wasn't good. There were no characters I grew attached to, and the story just felt tacked on. Example, the Modern Warfare trilogy, there was some semblance of a story (at least in the case of 2 and 3, although 3 had more filler missions than 2 did). AW was at least somewhat redeemable because some of the places did look pretty (the Greek level looked beautiful), and there were some characters I grew attached to, like Gideon. Haven't played BO3 nor have I seen much, but from what I HAVE seen, it just looks really confusing.

Also getting really tired of the future stuff. One of my favorite parts about the older CoD games was for weapons such as the Barette .50 cal or the scoped mosin nagant, the crack of a sniper rifle. The older guns sounded powerful, even in MW, the future ones just sound really tinny and weak.