Yeah but they will most likely have a standalone release in the form of a digital copy. Give it a year after the initial sales rush of IW then they will sell it separately as an option. Then you can wait for MW2 remaster, BO, MW3, etc.
It's hard to differentiate IW with Infinite Warfare or Infinity Ward. Damn you COD.
Adding MW to Infinite Warfare might've been a desperate attempt seeing that they are almost likely out of ideas for yearly installments. How do you innovate when you're forced to make a game every year?
I still liked Ghosts the most contrary to what others may say. The MP was better balanced (although still having its issues), I liked the perk system, and the contextual lean made the game feel more tactical. I wished they'd make a COD more like Ghosts but m...
Is it really that difficult for an old PS2 game?
I'll wait for Division 2 when Ubisoft steps up their game.
That's another epic game I can't wait for. But the graphics do seem a bit downgraded but maybe that's just me.
Another game I'm looking forward too. Love cyberpunks. Just want to see gameplay.
I'll admit, Drake and his crew are mostly vagabonds and slightly criminal. I think I like the narrative being that there really is no such thing as a good vs evil plot that is normally portrayed in the media and that people are ultimately trying to survive, even if it doesn't come off as heroic. The world is a stoic place.
The gameplay is awesome. It just needs customizable weapons, first person zoom/ADS, and possibly crouch and prone options. It would make the game feel much more tactical if they did this but its still fun.
One thing I do like about Rise of the Tomb Raider is the weapon stats and upgrading. They should include that in all campaigns for shooters. I remember RE4 being like that and it gave the game a more RPG like feel.
They're ok for games that can take a long time to complete. RPGs and MMO's especially I can understand seeing that some games you may never complete or would net you over 100's of hours of gameplay.
Yet they've given 9's for the COD releases which are practically re-skins. This is called a double standard which is why IGN's scores are non-objective and inconsistent.
Yeah, in other words the reviewer probably knew the game was better than even the 9 she gave but due to cognitive dissonance and bias probably couldn't bring herself to admit it.
At the same time she knew he couldn't just blatantly score it low as it would be obvious fanboyism.
I hear this happening a lot of with Game Informer too, especially when the 360 was the most popular console. At one point they didn't want to rate PS3 exclusives with ...
It was alluding to being an 8 score even though its atleast a 9. The .2 difference in score is so minute that you couldn't even tell the difference. They want the game to be perceived as a "B" rather than the "A" it is. Its a form trickery and sly deception using psychology.
They got more click bait with the .1 decimal scoring. Bunch of troll hards.
The messed up part is that apparently they originally scored it an 8.8 then changed it to a 9. Like someone else stated, it was just a set up for click bait hits/income then changed the score to appease advertising for the game.
IGN can go crawl in a hole and rot. Their scoring system isn't only dumb (how do you differentiate an 8.8 with a 9) but many of their scores have been downright bad.
IGN is a bunch of haters.
EDIT: @Senor...
So they really gave it an 8.8 then a 9? What a bunch of pricks. IGN can go screw themselves.
Which is why everyone hates the practice. Online gaming, as cool as its evolved, has also created many setbacks. One of them being holding back content for the sake of extra sales, especially when the content is already on the disc. We are essentially paying for a key which is BS.