This was the first Call of Duty I haven't purchased on release in years.
I've been hesitant due to the releases over the past few years.
I don't play CoD for multiplayer, as I feel there are other games that have better FPS mp offerings. I prefer the Battlefield type, having large open areas with vehicles and whatnot, and If I want more CQ action i'll play something like Halo.
I always played CoD for the campaign. Over time, ...
I'm not too sure about that.
AC3 dealt with a fair chunk of Connor's life, and it seems like he has already completed the most important parts of his story.
But then again, Ubi could always make up some further narrative.
I think his decreased popularity will not see him back.
Also, how can we have another Connor game with the ending to AC3?
I'm not keen on having everything unlocked from the beginning. Feels like challenge has been taken away.
I love how the Holograms T-bag dead players in multiplayer.
Now that's attention to detail.
Noble intentions, poor execution.
I'm enjoying the game, but like the author suggests, it's just mssing that certain something from the previous games.
Although, I do like Connor much more than Altair, but can't compete with Ezio.
Lego Pirates of the Caribbean was cool IMO.
Never held any hope for this game if I'm being honest.
Michael Madsen also voiced Tanner in Driver, as well as Daud in Dishonored.
Too bad the game will no doubt be in the shadow of the blockbuster titles of the season.
Hopefully it gets a bit more recognition once the gaming landscape is a bit more quiet.
I'm all for playing dirty if everyone else is doing the same. Turn-about is fair play.
While I loved it when it orignally was released on PC and Xbox, I'd rather be playing DOOM 4.
Exactly, reviews exist as a point of reference to an experience with the game.
You don't make your mind up after reading one review, seeing one score. You take it on board, and compile it with other experiences to get a general feeling on the game.
However, they'll never be as good as personally playing a game yourself.
I've lost count how many times I've loved a game after it's received negative press, and vice versa.
Just like everything else, politics is the name of the game.
It's all about positive press. Publishers and PR don't really care for the truth, only how high the review score will be, and how great the praise is for the game.
HOW HAVE YOU NOT PLAYED SUCH A GAME YET?
Totally not biased towards it or anything....
From what I've seen and heard, I don't think Legends would have had much of a chance regardless.
That's what competing companies do I guess, release their big name games around the same time as others to provide some competition.
Nobody is forcing people to buy all these games.
Sure, I could buy them all now. But then some people tend to rush through one game just so they can move onto the next.
I'd rather take my time say, playing AC3, then move onto Halo 4 eventually, before going onto FC3.
Sounds eerily similar to CoD
I think it's funny that people are already slamming the game before release, saying they shouldn't even bother competing with COD/Halo.
Why do you guys want less competition?
Competition forces companies to adapt and change. If COD had no competition, it would probably have even less innovation than it already does.
Always been a longtime wrestling fan, glad to hear the games have picked up once again similar to the glory days of the N64.