| happydolphin said: I haven't played B/W and B/W2, and I haven't played MW3, but I've played some pokemon before and COD:BO. I realize that MW2 is very similar to BO, and so I'd be surprised there would be much of a diff between BO and MW3. So, I'm not sure why gamespot sould judge COD more kindly for continuing what works and not pokemon. It seems unfair. UltimateUnknown, would your point be applicable to MW3? |
BO shouldn't be compated to MW3 because is of a different timeline as well as having certain gameplay elements (such as zombies) which sets it apart from the MW series.
Now do I think MW3 could be an expansion pack for MW2? Most definitely. But you have to wonder exactly how much content is going to be inside that expansion pack as well. For MW3 it would be an entire new campaign (since you aren't going through the same levels as in MW2's campaign and its a new narrative), 16 spec ops missions, 15 multiplayer maps, survival mode and a gun pack for the newer guns online/offline. All this assuming that any tweaks made to the gameplay mechanics would be included as free to everyone buying the pack.
Would this DLC pack cost significantly less than $60 because if it does then it should be released as DLC. If it costs about the same as a full priced game or more then it should be released as a full priced retail game. Now as for the value of the product, that is the hard part to discern and is mostly left up to the individual consumer. What would have been nice was if they had separated out the SP, MP and SO/Survival. Then the consumer could choose what they want, but unfortunately rarely do we get such liberty or choice.
All this said, I have played every iteration of pokemon ever released (and play competitively), but the tweaks to BW2 are very little to warrant a new release. It isn't a matter of simply the gameplay mechanics remaining the same (which I myself wouldn't want changed), but this is a problem of you going through the exact same areas, doing the exact same battles and following a narrative that is very similar to the previous games (the last we have been excusing in the name of nostalgia for almost 2 decades now). I personally hope that since dlc is now an option for nintendo in all their consoles, they will make full use of it to release expansion packs rather than charging full price for games where huge chunks are copied from the previous iteration. Mario atleast has new levels and no repeat ones, so if you are tired of the formula then don't buy the game. It would have been somewhat fine if they released BW2 on 3DS and called it a remake with newer assets/models/animation, but as it is, it's simply inexcusable since it's a matter of content being the same, not just the gameplay mechanics (the latter being the case for many games such as Mario, COD, etc). We should be very clear on distinguishing between the two.
