Pittski
Recruit
CoD gets hate, and complaints because it has no definition of a game. Every year they are throwing something different, or adding more then they need to be a shooter. You can even consider, which to me is really true. The game is not a shooter. It is a RPG fan base. Majority don't play the game like a shooter. They play to level up, and unlock stuff, which is the majority there is no competition. This is where it gets mixed up in headlines. People will jump the MLG card. MLG is a very I mean extremely small group of people in the world that compete, and a lot of that small group are just good enough to where they do it for the money.
As for PC people always complaining about not get PC support. They are 100% right in doing so. Activision claims a 2 year development cycle, which is equivalent to a year from their game release to when they actually start. CoD started as a answer to MoH series that they created. It had at the time nothing to do with Battlefield. CoD2 had a huge fan base, and still was going well into middle of CoD4. CoD 3 was rushed into the 360 market when the 360 arrived had 0 support, and no PC release at all, was a overall terrible game that is not even acknowledged into the CoD series. CoD 4 was a hit because it was when everyone was talking about how tired of WW2 games, which just increased the hype. The game was good, it also had a PC priority, and included everything that was included in CoD2. That was on a 2 year cycle. But what about now? We go 6 games in, and none of those 6 games have 0 PC support. Yet, CoD 4 was made on a 2 year development cycle and had everything. PC players have every right to complain every year, something that was done, and easily done in years prior to "matchmaking" is no excuse to the fan base. They would have much bigger sales if they included those things.
Game critiques on the other hand are nothing more of a bunch of tools. Most of them are just writing majors, and they are not even gamers. They play a dev copy and just the graphics and weapons and what is hinted at them to focus on. They agree, or disagree with the game based on their feelings for the game what companies hint at. That is just that, their feelings. "Writers feelings on a video game." That sentence alone leads down a dark path people don't want to go down. Critiques mean nothing, even ones that are advertised by a game company. You can use Destiny as a prime example. One of their trailers before release, started with "The Escapist" review a one line positive review. I so happen to browse that site often. Which if you look the review was not positive at all. You even go to Zero Punctuation which is the comedy written review on The Escapist site. Absolutely trashes the game. Which I agree with their views on their reviews after playing the game myself for a month. as off note.
The point CoD is Madden, and people are going to complain. Majority of the complaints are valid. The simple fact that would shut majority complaints down is if they did a proper development, and not a yearly cycle of games using same assets and lying about a engine that is 9 years old. You make a game on at a minimum 3 year cycle. You can have a polished, complete game as long as you don't continue to throw unnecessary stuff into it.
As for PC people always complaining about not get PC support. They are 100% right in doing so. Activision claims a 2 year development cycle, which is equivalent to a year from their game release to when they actually start. CoD started as a answer to MoH series that they created. It had at the time nothing to do with Battlefield. CoD2 had a huge fan base, and still was going well into middle of CoD4. CoD 3 was rushed into the 360 market when the 360 arrived had 0 support, and no PC release at all, was a overall terrible game that is not even acknowledged into the CoD series. CoD 4 was a hit because it was when everyone was talking about how tired of WW2 games, which just increased the hype. The game was good, it also had a PC priority, and included everything that was included in CoD2. That was on a 2 year cycle. But what about now? We go 6 games in, and none of those 6 games have 0 PC support. Yet, CoD 4 was made on a 2 year development cycle and had everything. PC players have every right to complain every year, something that was done, and easily done in years prior to "matchmaking" is no excuse to the fan base. They would have much bigger sales if they included those things.
Game critiques on the other hand are nothing more of a bunch of tools. Most of them are just writing majors, and they are not even gamers. They play a dev copy and just the graphics and weapons and what is hinted at them to focus on. They agree, or disagree with the game based on their feelings for the game what companies hint at. That is just that, their feelings. "Writers feelings on a video game." That sentence alone leads down a dark path people don't want to go down. Critiques mean nothing, even ones that are advertised by a game company. You can use Destiny as a prime example. One of their trailers before release, started with "The Escapist" review a one line positive review. I so happen to browse that site often. Which if you look the review was not positive at all. You even go to Zero Punctuation which is the comedy written review on The Escapist site. Absolutely trashes the game. Which I agree with their views on their reviews after playing the game myself for a month. as off note.
The point CoD is Madden, and people are going to complain. Majority of the complaints are valid. The simple fact that would shut majority complaints down is if they did a proper development, and not a yearly cycle of games using same assets and lying about a engine that is 9 years old. You make a game on at a minimum 3 year cycle. You can have a polished, complete game as long as you don't continue to throw unnecessary stuff into it.