My Theory on why COD may always be popular

[fighter]

evolution_1ne said:

fighter said:

Your theory is flawed at several levels :

 

If the game below average why does it get top critics and popularity ?

The fact "everyone" has it does create inertia for both the title itself and the franchise, but it doesn't explain how it got there.

There weren't many realistic & successful shooters before COD, and since COD4 the genre has become THE genre. How do you explain a below average game would develop a genre almost by itself ?

critics are fucking stupid, MW2 story made no fucking sense what so ever and was damn short, and the multiplayer is so fun/popular/and addictive because it's an effortless, skill less, meaningless, empty, hollow experience masked by challenges and tons of unnecessary bullshit to unlock, that even the most brain dead of gamers can be good at and feel a sense of accomplishment, why do you think every thing was put on a 10x multiplier for MW2... answer: brain dead gamers see 100 and go O_O oooo big numbers. COD multiplayer is literally fps for dummies, so now the casuals can say look I'm good, 

Hey, I agree with you, the story is stupid. The point is it's still better than 90 % of realistic shooters out there. Wake your brain up and remember : reviews are comparison guides, not absolute judgements that would transcend time and space. 

ok first fail is saying COD is realistic........ this is your first generation of gaming and you ARE an xbox owner for sure, ARMA is realistic, COD isn't even realistic in practice, even the mechanics(zero recoil, perks, teleporting knives) are casual, ohhh 2 bullet kills, yeah not meant for realism, it's meant because because noobs would suck if they actually had to lead their targets and hold a firing position.

Snap out of it. Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Counter-Strike, etc. are labelled realistic as opposed to Halo / Haze / Killzone / Doom / Quake / Unreal Tournament / Tribes etc.

Again, you have the point of view of a fanatic thinking in absolutes when it's about re-la-ti-vi-ty. Have you tried punching yourself ? That's a realistic game right there.

second fail is saying cod 4 established the fps genre, are you joking, established it for who??? stupid new wave gamers who suck shit at shooters, and don't know a damn thing about them and honestly think cod 4 established the genre??? is so then I'm inclined to agree, but for someone who's been here since unreal and quake, and the realistic shooters of battlefield (not bad company) and counter strike, that's just f**king insult.

since facts insult you - allow me to add these :

- VgChartz is about sales

- Counter Strike (2000) : 4.2M

- Counter Strike Condition Zero (2004) : 2.9M

- Counter Strike Source (2006) : 2.1M

- Lol

- Call of Duty 4 : 13M

- Call of Duty 5 : 11M

- Call of Duty 6 : 20M

call of duty is below below average shooter, and a game that only noob to the genre and or people who have never ever ever ever ever played an fps before in their lives would find good, and this includes COD 4, but to it's credit, at least the story made sense.  and that's why it's so popular,  battlefield, and counterstrike and many other fps games weren't stupid enough to cultivate the massive idiot market the COD franchise is pioneering today.

- and now you're saying COD franchise is pioneering the genre

edit: and to be completely honest, they have them, because as a true fps fan, we know there is no worse player than a Call of Duty fan playing ANY FPS NOT call of duty.

- you seem more than a true fps fan, "caricatural archetype" would fit you better.