To be fair, the connection between “Modern Warfare” as a franchise and actual gamers is becoming increasingly tenuous. It took the Dudebrah Game of Choice crown from Halo, really.
And every year, I sit and wonder why. Why people are paying 60 bucks for the same game they paid 60 bucks for last year. Just like with sports games, there’s no real innovation going on, they’re the same games year after year, with what basically amounts to the “new” game being glorified DLC. That you pay 60 bucks for. And then, pay even more per month to be called “nigger faggot” by a 10 year old 30 times in as many seconds. I just don’t get the appeal.
In general the comments about the first Modern Warfare were overwhelmingly positive. Things were a little more mixed for the second one, but most of the negativity came from folks not into military shooters in general who were tired of hearing about CoD. I got the sense most fans were pretty pleased by it.
This was the first time I really started to see a lot of negativity coming from the core MW fans themselves. It was definitely on a different level this year.
To be fair, the first MW was actually good, I noticed I was holding my breath during the nuke scene, I actually connected with the characters, oddly enough. It was well written, and held my interest very well. It wasn’t anything ground breaking as far as the gameplay, but it was an amazing single-player campaign.
The rest of them? Single player was an afterthought, a tacked-on practice mode for a multiplayer shooter. MW 2, Black Ops, MW3, all of ‘em, even WaW were just basically multiplayer games with a practice mode that had the semblance of a story. That’s the reason MW was so great, because the single player was as good as, if not better than the multi.
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/global/images/default-avatar.jpg){kind=avatar}
![[image]](http://cdn.gs.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/05/gammasquadblogging8-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.gs.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/05/gammasquadpokemoncards2-150x150.jpg)
You realize that the comments about people hating Call Of Duty happens every year right? Yet every year the game sells more then one before it.
To be fair, the connection between “Modern Warfare” as a franchise and actual gamers is becoming increasingly tenuous. It took the Dudebrah Game of Choice crown from Halo, really.
And every year, I sit and wonder why. Why people are paying 60 bucks for the same game they paid 60 bucks for last year. Just like with sports games, there’s no real innovation going on, they’re the same games year after year, with what basically amounts to the “new” game being glorified DLC. That you pay 60 bucks for. And then, pay even more per month to be called “nigger faggot” by a 10 year old 30 times in as many seconds. I just don’t get the appeal.
In general the comments about the first Modern Warfare were overwhelmingly positive. Things were a little more mixed for the second one, but most of the negativity came from folks not into military shooters in general who were tired of hearing about CoD. I got the sense most fans were pretty pleased by it.
This was the first time I really started to see a lot of negativity coming from the core MW fans themselves. It was definitely on a different level this year.
To be fair, the first MW was actually good, I noticed I was holding my breath during the nuke scene, I actually connected with the characters, oddly enough. It was well written, and held my interest very well. It wasn’t anything ground breaking as far as the gameplay, but it was an amazing single-player campaign.
The rest of them? Single player was an afterthought, a tacked-on practice mode for a multiplayer shooter. MW 2, Black Ops, MW3, all of ‘em, even WaW were just basically multiplayer games with a practice mode that had the semblance of a story. That’s the reason MW was so great, because the single player was as good as, if not better than the multi.