MW3 made 400 million bucks.

Bieber makes a fuck load more money than anyone else, does that make him good?

Further instating that it's overhyped as fuck.

Just because a game sells doesn't make it good. How many of those people do you think still play the game?

I know two people that don't. Me and my friend.

I never knew. Thanks man.

I don't think you should ask a question like that if you've already decided that you totally dislike Cod, from what I've read down there, you seem to be asking too much from the developers and you just disregard any opinions of others.

Not starting anything,just kind of saying

Well, I did say "Prove to me" Which does suggest that I have my own opinion, and I want it to be challenged.

I haven't disregarded their opinions, I talked with them about it.

It's to much to ask for a game that isn't totally broken and inane? lol.

You say that, and then claim it's 'fact' when it isn't

You did kinda.. 'But that is honestly personal preference.' Eleven minutes later 'Welllll. It isn't all opinions...

CoD is over hyped, and redundant. And the weapons are broken. Those are pretty much factual.'

Like I said, not starting anything. 'lol'

I meant that the fact that I like the slower paced gameplay is personal preference. Not that what I said about the game isn't factual.

What I said about the story line is my opinion. It's true that there are a bunch of shit heads running around blowing the hell out of people with sniper rifles at close range. And one of the most annoying scenarios I have ever experienced in a game. And that they can spawn with these ridiculously over powered weapons. Whats the point? If I wanted a ridiculous frag fest, I would go play Quake online, any of the unreal games, or even Halo.

I don't know why you keep saying you don't want to "Start something" This is the internet, I'm not going to get mad because someone doesn't agree with my opinion. I wouldn't have posted this if I would.

I agree that the community of CoD is a bit shit and full of mongtards, I personally dislike CoD a fair bit, apart from World At War.

The story line is fairly monotonous and doesn't interest me in the slightest.

But the multiplayer is what it is, you know what to expect when entering a game, if there's player running around blasting the shit out of everything you aren't going to be able to tactics your way around it. So knowing what your getting yourself into, really prevents you of being able to complain, because you know what goes down on CoD.

Unlike BF3 for example. With that, every game seems to be different, for me anyway

But every game I play I come across some kid doing stupid shit *_* And I get tired of it.

Everyone has gotten tired of it. We just get mad when we play it because we get bullshited all the time.

It's because most of the maps on BF3 are large enough that, you probably won't get people camping in the same spots very often. And I feel like camping in that game is a lot more acceptable, because unless it's a cqc map, you can just walk around them. Or drive around them. Or fly around them. There also aren't the same spots where conflict happens all the time. It wildly depends on the skill of the players, and what everyone is doing.

I think I bought MW3 and then it must have been like a week and a half later, I just stopped playing and haven't played since.

I've only ever seen one frequent use of camping on BF3, and that's on Operation Firestorm when you get snipers on the big ass hill near the attackers spawn, but that doesn't bother me at all. To play BF3 well you need to know what you're doing, I'd say a little bit of skill comes into play when playing it

Well, I don't want to say that CoD Doesn't require skill. It does take fast reflexes to play it.

But yes, BF3 does require that you actually think about what you need to do. Especially because they don't allow every class to have a rocket launcher, or sniper rifle. Which makes sense.

You can't run down to an objective with a sniper rifle and expect to hold it, you'll get wrecked by people with mid-close range weaponry. Or blasted by a vehicle.

I'd say fast reflexes are more of a natural thing though

I don't think I'd be able to play BF3 if it included kill streaks etc. they were the most annoying thing ever playing CoD, they basically decided the game even if your team were dominating but that one guy gets lucky and then you're getting destroyed by a helicopter and the guy goes into hiding.

It depends. If you play CoD, and then BattleField, it feels like things take for ever.

If you play Battlefield, and then CoD, You end up getting destroyed because everything happened so fast.

I had been playing BF for months, and we decided to give CoD a try again. I got sick to my stomach because everything was moving so fucking fast.

It takes time to hone those fast reflexes, and if you let them dull down, you can really feel it.

And yes, Killstreaks are kind of bullshit. xD

I can't bring myself to put a CoD disc into my xbox, because I know I'll end up raging at it because I've adapted to BF3, even though I haven't played that either for a few months.

I'll accept CoD 4 was a brilliant game at the time, but since I've grown bored of it and the whole franchise since. Only one to impress me was W@W like I said earlier, but I don't think CoD has brought anything new to the table, what do you think?

No, they haven't brought anything new. I'm only interested in Black Ops 2 Because it's a Sci-Fi game, not a Modern Shooter. But there are already plenty of Sci-fi shooters that are better, and have a much more science fictiony than what they are coming out with.

It'll still be the same CoD feel though, but with a makeover. I don't think the milking of the franchise will end any time soon.

I'm unsure about BO2, hoping they'll show something at E3. If that's what they do? I don't actually know much about that haha

Some parts of that trailer looked like Metal Gear though

Yeah, or Terminator status. Even though it's someone else controlling the machines, it's still machines running around blowing shit up.

They'll probably show something off at E3. Theirs no reason for them not to x3.

I'll probably buy it one day, I have no reason to but I probably will

Should be interesting whatever they show anyway

Me and my friend are really into video games. So when A new one comes out, we usually buy it just to judge it for ourselves.

It's probably the best way, some reviews can be totally wrong and obviously the game could be really appealing to you then some review says it's shit then you miss out on a decent game. Bad times

Exactly.

Although, we really need to start renting games, instead of outright buying them. Because we have a bunch of games we don't play anymore.

Mainly CoD games xD.

It appears somebody doesn't like conversations and has thumbed this whole thread down. How strange haha

That is rather odd...

the story is always pretty entertaining, Black Ops 2 seems interesting.

Also, too mad, bro, too mad

The story is horrid xD.

Same with Black Ops 2. But I'm happy they are doing something different with the franchise for once. Even if it's a bit ridiculous.

who plays CoD for something profound? when i bought black ops i just wanted a mash of the Mandchurian Candidate with russian goulags and shooting Castro in the face. It filled its purpose perfectly. If I want to play something profound i'll go play Deus Ex, but in the meantime if i want a popcorn movie in the form of a video game, CoD is the way to go.

Meh, Trey Arch has always been better at making games in my opinion.

The story for Black ops is entertaining. And that's about it, as far As CoD has been for the past 4 games.

WaW Had some great multiplayer, I love WWII Shooters. But other than that, it was just another war game.

isn't black ops from treyarch?

Yes, that's why is said they make better games.

I'd prefer Black Ops to MW any day. But I'd rather play WaW over any of them.

Trey Arch, is alright. I mean, the multiplayer is the same experience, but at least the story line is a bit better than MW's. And they did it in one game. Which I am happy about.

i just remember trey(no space)arch as a let downs for their spiderman games..

I didn't even know they made spiderman games xD

ok i am not even a cod fan boy, i hate the multiplayer. but i actually like the story. i find it to be A MILLION times better than the piece of shit single player in battlefield 3. i love the characters. the modern warfare story line kept me wanting more. but the multiplayer kept on wanting less

and in homefront some how both north korea an south korea become friends and take over japan and U.S. but nobody gives that game shit.

Ah, misread. Sorry.

Pretty much stays the same, though. That game's story is shit, too.

oh and i get the games for free so i dont waste 60 bucks on a 6 hour cod story. i love the story but if i was to just play that i would pay for it at all. flashing my xbox man, best thing ever

i just saw you dis gears characters...i love gears more than cod

The characters, don't actually have much character or personality until the last game.

The only one with any kind of character until 3 was Dominic. I love the game, and the story. But the characters kind of sucked x3.

eh, ya i could see how some people would see that. a lot of people critisize the characters and writing. but i always love THE COLE TRAIN!!! but number 3 definitely had more emotion and personality than the other 2. so lets hope they do a good job on GoW Judgement

Ah, is that the name of the new Gears?

I'm hoping it's about the Pendulum Wars, and E-day. Otherwise, I'll be pretty pissed if they pull some other game out of there ass out of the storyline they already finished, twice.

Gears was never meant to be a trilogy, just btw. It was suppose to end with the bomb in the first one.

It got pretty emotional when Dom sacrificed himself for the rest of the group. That was ill as fuck.

it takes place before the events of number 1. not that long after E-day. like really shortly after it. it follows kilo squad which consists of Baird, Cole train, and two others. they have been arrested for treason. they stole a bunch of weapons and let a lot of people die. something like that. here ill link you the ign article

www.ign.com/articles/2012/06/02/e3-2012-first-gears-of-war-judgment-story-details

Alright, that seems really chill. I'm kind of looking forward to this now.

wow somebody doesnt like gears and thumbed us down. ill be ggg and thumb you back up

You just said you liked the game's story.

Why bring it up, if you say you aren't going to give a shit about it? Of course we give a shit, characters mean nothing if the story they are in blows.

Besides, when it comes down to it, Multiplayer is what ends up selling a game. After people beat single player, the only other experience is multiplayer. And I don't even deal with most games single player any more, honestly. Because the story sucks.

Like, in Gears of War, the characters are stupid. But the story was alright, even if the characters couldn't really handle the job that well. It was fun to take it to the end, because I wanted to know what happened to their world.

If the story sucks, who gives a shit about the characters? I see great characters in every day life. I want a story that I will never experience in my life, a good story, not something stupid like Russia invading the entire planet. That doesn't make sense.

Because people see it as a "war simulator" like Battlefield when it isn't.

COD is an arena shooter, like Unreal Tournament (though not as epic). You're in an enclosed area, running around killing as many people as possible. You can't expect a game like COD to provide an accurate simulator of war, or even think about comparing it to Battlefield.

I'm not a fanboy, but I do enjoy play COD every now and then, it's just pure mindless fun.

Of course it gets overhyped, what game isn't? Assassin's Creed, Elder Scrolls, Battlefield etc. all get overhyped.

A lot of good computer games don't get over hyped actually. Even though it was only a free weekend, I played around 17 hours of it. And I have to say, Red Orchestra 2:Heroes of Stalingrad is probably my favorite FPS.

I can't enjoy CoD because I get killed by some shit head that's using cheap tactics, in every match I play. Unreal Tournament is different, You have to fight over all the power weapons and shit. And in CoD, you can simply spawn with a totally broken weapon and fuck people over.

I'm a cod fanboy, I love the series, but...

The community is full of retards. I refuse to classify it as a any kind of combat game, and the story development is horrible. It's still the best online game in my opinion.

I prefer BF's online to CoD's.

I was a CoD fanboy for awhile too. I just finally got tired of it and realized there are some better games out there.

It's good but for me it's not arcade enough to be interesting.

And the funny thing about the bf fandom is that tehy think they are soooo much better than the cod fandom, when in fact they're just as bad or worse for thinking like that.

I don't really think we're "Better"

It's just a completely different kind of game.

Battlefield is a slower paced game, with much larger maps.

CoD is a Much faster paced game, on very small maps.

The thing I don't like about CoD is it tries to jam all this insane shit down your throat in a matter of minutes. And half the time, kids are running around with broken weapons, that they spawned with, adding to the total incoherent chaos.

Thats what I have Halo and Gears of War for, when I want over the top games.

In Battlefield, since the game is much slower, I can actually think out what I want to do, and how I want to approach something. But that is honestly personal preference.

Exactly, opinions.

Welllll. It isn't all opinions...

CoD is over hyped, and redundant. And the weapons are broken. Those are pretty much factual.

What I said about the games pacing, is factual.

I don't mind a game where weapons are brutal, I'd prefer it if in all games, you died in one or two shots. But most fps games are really weird with how they design weapons, damage and health. Like in BattleField, you can get blown apart by a fucking tank. Which is pretty cool.

But then you can get revived by a defibrillator, and that's kind of gay.

In CoD, you can one shot people with sniper rifles. And that's pretty cool, because when a 50.cal bullet hits you, it's highly unlikely you will be getting back up.

But then you can run around with it like it's made of fucking plastic. And that's pretty gay.

Especially because in MW3, Most of the maps so far have been pretty CQC'ish. And it makes the sniper useless unless you plan on no scoping with it.

People don't play it because the gameplay is innovative, or even slightly different from the last game. They play it because they like the formula enough that a minor update is worth a purchase to them. People play CoD because they think it's fun.
4/10 trolling
10/10 stupid question

I never asked why they bought it, or why the play it. I know they don't care if it's slightly different, or people wouldn't buy it.

I said prove to me why it isn't stupid as fuck. Because it is, honestly.

It's stupid for being simple run-n-gun madness in the same way Battlefield is stupid for trying and failing to be even remotely strategic.

The only reason Battlefield isn't strategic is because you can't actually co-ordinate with your entire team.

But yes, you are correct. Although I don't get bullshited as much in Battlefield, and thats why I prefer to play that over CoD.

Red Orchestra has to be my favorite FPS though.