Support NeoGAF

[Jigsaah]

I didn't need a review to tell me not to buy this. So obviously a money grab. Not rewarding this shit.

 

[chessy_08]

Greedy Activision could of charged $40 for this and everyone one or atleast most would have been happy.

 

[SportsFan581]

For me it's how you literally boot up MW2 to play it. Imagine paying $70 for this piece of shit.

Seriously? You'd think they would have just repackaged what they needed so that they were separate games (even if a lot of the old game moved over, LOL). Weird choice.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

The development length was incredibly short compared to the norm, so it was bound to happen. It's just absurd that it's glorified DLC and they still charged $70 for it, lol. I wish fans would retaliate against this behavior, but unfortunately they're not going to.

And this is how you generate more profit.

Game has 50% of dev time, which dramatically affects the amount of salaries you pay.
Game sells well enough.

There is a reason why “revenue per employee” exists as a metric, and I’m sure on this game it’s higher than the average.

 

[sinnergy]

Sounds like the typical management story, clueless as fuck and always wanting more money.

 

[kikkis]

And this is how you generate more profit.

Game has 50% of dev time, which dramatically affects the amount of salaries you pay.
Game sells well enough.

There is a reason why “revenue per employee” exists as a metric, and I’m sure on this game it’s higher than the average.

I think the cost is pretty much the same. It's three main studios working on the games even is they fucked up the 3 years per team.

 

[genesisblock]

Jesus, even with a formula in place for over a decade, they still manage to fuck it up by delays? This generation has proven to be the breaking point of AAA development.

 

[Spukc]

The only thing that matters to me is the zombie mode..
and it’s fun!

 

[calistan]

New ‘Call of Duty’ Draws Harsh Reviews After Rushed Development Microsoft Acquisition​

Not saying the campaign is amazing, or has ever been (IGN mentions "heights of old" - FFS)
But this is a guaranteed way to ensure the gaming "community" turns on you.

 

[Dr. Samuel Hayden]

This is why I laugh when I see people say MS will "ruin" Activision. There's nothing to ruin. They've been garbage and an embarrassment for ages.

 

[Whitecrow]

New ‘Call of Duty’ Draws Harsh Reviews After Rushed Development Microsoft Acquisition​

Not saying the campaign is amazing, or has ever been (IGN mentions "heights of old" - FFS)
But this is a guaranteed way to ensure the gaming "community" turns on you.

I would laugh so hard if this results to be the first post.aquisition example of MS 'missmanaging' their studios. Too soon...

 

[F0rneus]

It'll sell better than any game this year. People want to shoot at the doody. It's a call. They could add microtransations for reloading and people will still buy it en masse.

Last good one was Black Ops 3. It's ass but I like it. But it's nowhere near as ass, as the new games.

 

[F0rneus]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'd like to see COD succeed. I have not been interested in the last 3 iterations. But I'd like to see them change the formula and make something new and worthwhile.

Idk if it's possible at this point with what they've been producing lately, but I'd like to be proven wrong.

I'd reboot the whole thing. Start anew. New gameplay style, more focus on a good story with tons of side objectives ala Goldeneye, and MP more like Counter-Strike.

Name it the Call, or The Duty whatever. The ship is sinking. Build a new one.

 

[Stare-Bear]

This will only get worse with their new MS bosses...

 

[Ceadeus]

It'll sell better than any game this year. People want to shoot at the doody. It's a call. They could add microtransations for reloading and people will still buy it en masse.

Last good one was Black Ops 3. It's ass but I like it. But it's nowhere near as ass, as the new games.

Lol at mtx for reloading. I could totally see mtx for tracer bullets.... wait a minute

 

[splattered]

I wonder how Phil Spencer is feeling- all the time and money put into closing the ABK acquisition, and the first COD game to release post acquisition is complete shit.

Maybe that's how MS got the purchase pushed through... They gave everyone an early glimpse at the new COD so people figured nothing lost

 

[adamsapple]

I wonder how Phil Spencer is feeling- all the time and money put into closing the ABK acquisition, and the first COD game to release post acquisition is complete shit.

Current mood:

 

[LordBlodgett]

Should have been sold as the DLC it was. Heck I think the best plan for COD in the future is a game platform that gets updated every 5-6 years, and then has new "games" using that platform dropped every two years or so, with porting of all previous content to the new engine as time goes by. Think of how Hitman 3 has the ability to buy all of the Hitman 2 and Hitman 1 content built in the Hitman 3 engine, and then they are constantly releasing new maps or DLC. Probably just wishful thinking though.

 

[TrebleShot]

People bang on as if COD has been the pinnacle of single player campaign games and been ultra entertaining for decades.

Truth is the SP has always been crap the best one was COD2 and since then it’s been chasing its tail.


if you want to blame anyone blame yourselves do buying this crap year on year myself included.

I don’t see anything different here it’s just the next evolution or experiment.

Last year we had the crafting shite year before was return to WW2 and everyone moaned. Then year before was a remake.

 

[EDMIX]

yea, this doesn't hold much weight.

I think a bad game can happen regardless of how long someone took on it, but I don't see "rushed" development as being some issue here, this game was literally in development for years btw, folks ran with this "DLC" thing with little evidence to support it.

I think its simply not that great compared to last year's MW2......thats it.