138
rate

Modern Warfare 3: Why The Hate?

November 10, 2011 in Blog comments 5

Ah, Call of Duty. The only franchise that can invoke rage in people around the same time every year. It's like a holiday, really. Why is that? Is the Call of Duty franchise really as bad as people make it sound?

Part of me wants to believe that the people that dislike Call of Duty are in the minority and that minority is made up of the loudest people to ever exist. Anywhere.
Keroyx via defaultprime.com »
Favourite this article Add source
| More
Report!
News story attached to:

Comments

Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 2
    Red 9 Nov 10, 11
    Each game as an individual entity is not bad, it's just that together you can blatantly see that almost nothing has been altered since COD4. The campaigns are always shallow, full of overused cinematic cliches, and ridiculously short, and the multiplayer, while a little more evolving, still has not been changed that much since the first iteration.

    Yet people still buy it in throngs. Who'da thunk it.
    • 0
      Drogo Baggins Nov 10, 11
      quote Red 9
      Who'da thunk it.
      I would have, for one.

      I don't understand what's so baffling about COD's success. People enjoy the games, and people tend to put money towards participating in things they enjoy.

      I got MW1 because I enjoyed previous COD's. I enjoyed MW1 so I got MW2. I enjoyed MW2, so I got MW3.

      I didn't like Black Ops, so I probably won't get it's sequel if it has one.

      What's confusing about this concept? I'm not just singling you out or attacking you either; I'm talking to anyone who holds your views and I'm legitimately asking why it's some profound enigma that people are buying sequels to games they enjoyed.

      I like root beer, and I keep buying it because I enjoy it. I don't buy a case of root beer in the hopes that it's something completely different to the case of root beer I got before, because that would be stupid. If I one day got some root beer and hated it, I'd buy something else. Until then, I'll stick to what I know and love.

      tl;dr - I like root beer.
      • 0
        Red 9 Nov 10, 11
        The idea of getting something you love makes sense, but you can't really compare root beer to video games. Sure you have to keep a game series within certain boundaries so that people know what to expect. Now don't get me wrong, Modern Warfare is certainly not the worst game in creation. But it's the expectancy that is precisely the problem, and that's actually what a lot of critics are pointing out with MW3; it was so certain that a name alone could sell itself that they really didn't bother to change a single thing about the game.

        My point? If COD4, MW2 and MW3 are all pretty much the same, why should I drop $60 every time a new one comes out? I could stick with the previous game and still get largely the same experience.
        • 0
          Drogo Baggins Nov 11, 11
          As funny as the meme is that all COD games are just a copy and paste of it's predecessor, it's a gross exaggeration, though I'll admit it's not entirely false.

          I won't go into too much specific detail (that would take a while), so I'll have to sort of generalize some things, but here goes:

          MW1 brought the series into the present day, which, in itself, changed things quite a bit for the franchise. It also introduced the perk system, added killstreaks, added an arcade mode to give the campaign more replay value, and began a whole new campaign storyline with a much more cinematic feeling and actual characters instead of just some random guys in WW2.

          MW2 added callsigns and emblems, introduced customizable killstreaks, new perks, new maps, new weapons, new attachments, slightly improved graphics, and spec-ops mode.

          MW3 made major changes to the killstreak system, offering three different tiers this time, each with different choices and each with it's own pros and cons. Spec-Ops mode was also completely changed, offering brand new missions, and also a survival mode with it's own leveling and money system. Additionally, they added more customization for your guns than what was allowed in MW2, another slight graphical improvement, new maps, new perks, new weapons, new game modes, theater mode, a level up system for your weapons, and weapon proficiencies.

          All of this while keeping the same simple, fast-paced, and fun core gameplay mechanics people play the game for in the first place.

          I think that's a relatively decent answer to why people keep buying these games.
  • 1
    Dragoon* Nov 11, 11
    They're games pumped out for profit only and one that relies too heavily on the success of multiplayer. Games such as ES: Skyrim, Arham City and Skyward Sword prove that MP isn't or rather shouldn't be a necessity on the success of an entire franchise.

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.