Dante9 said:
Yep, perhaps they don't know their Roman numerals. IIII is not a number, it's just four lines... |
I think it has to deal with the typical prison trope where you count your days with lines on the wall.
Dante9 said:
Yep, perhaps they don't know their Roman numerals. IIII is not a number, it's just four lines... |
I think it has to deal with the typical prison trope where you count your days with lines on the wall.
Snoopy said:
Not good numbers at all |
...That's millions of gamers.
If the campaign is fun, people will play it.
ArchangelMadzz said: I got ghosts on the cheap second hand and played for a week and sold it, same with WW2 except it took almost a month. |
Ghosts was the last CoD Campaign I actually completed. Holy crap were the visuals bad.
The story was just the same tired rehashed rubbish too.
World at War was a ball of fun back in the day.
Only Call of Duty game I haven't gotten is World War 2, I buy the games for the off chance I might play the campaign when I have time/bored and to keep my game library consistent and complete.
If the titles shift to Multiplayer-only, then I won't be purchasing them anymore, I'll make the clean break.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
Pemalite said:
...That's millions of gamers.
Ghosts was the last CoD Campaign I actually completed. Holy crap were the visuals bad. |
Yeah, those millions of gamers didn't even beat the game which means they spend most of their time on multiplayer. Skip the campaign and focus on making multiplayer great. Also, it would be great if new COD were 40 dollars.
Last edited by Snoopy - on 20 April 2018Snoopy said: I think it has to deal with the typical prison trope where you count your days with lines on the wall. |
"It's a tally".
Of course that will only work/make sense if there IS a 5th game in the series.
Hmm, pie.
The Fury said:
"It's a tally". Of course that will only work/make sense if there IS a 5th game in the series. |
There will be and it will be multiplayer only. Single player campaigns aren't doing as well as they once did.
It needs a standard campaign. I find them always worth a play through and a steller multilayer with tons of unlocks and tons of weps
...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...
PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk
really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...
ArchangelMadzz said:
I got ghosts on the cheap second hand and played for a week and sold it, same with WW2 except it took almost a month. |
Fair enough. Life's too short, and there isn't enough time to play the games we want to play, let alone the games that turn us off.
That said, my pre-judgment of IW was way off the mark. After watching the trailer, I figured the game would be generic and uninspired. I found it to be pretty great. That's the campaign though. If you're a multiplayer guy, then you made the right choice skipping.
I'll be fine as long as they do a good job with their Zombie mode
Bristow9091 said: Call of Duty has been a "disaster" since after World at War in my opinion anyway... and if they made a Call of Duty game that plays more like Overwatch I'd probably buy it since it's my favourite FPS in a long time, lol :P |
Yeah cod4 was the series high point with modern warfare 2 being very good also and black ops 1 not bad Apart from the multilayer has been cack.
Bristow9091 said: Call of Duty has been a "disaster" since after World at War in my opinion anyway... and if they made a Call of Duty game that plays more like Overwatch I'd probably buy it since it's my favourite FPS in a long time, lol :P |
You've missed out on some good games. I enjoyed WW2 too. Felt like the old COD games.