It would be meaningless if they were both the same, but their not. I personally have very little/to no idea what they mean because I don't know how they work together and such. So in a way I kinda agree, as long as it plays games smoothly I'm fine. But I would not say they are meaningless by any stretch of the imagination. But if anyone is will to explain the specs in simple terms I'd be open to listen
@gilldominic @Dinostrich I have to agree with you and like I said I never played ME. I'd take this news with a grain of salt and wait for reviews/gameplay etc before purchasing; instead of buying it day 1. Hey if they did it right they might get me to play it
I haven't played ME, but if I'm not mistaken a lot of people were pissed off when Dead Space and RE6 took "into account the opportunity to reach a bigger group of people" and scored lower than their previous games, at least according to gamespot (if you care). So they seriously have to find the right balance
@marcheegsr COD4 was in my book the best all around COD, good campaign and multiplayer was fresh at the time. WaW, descent campaign (felt rushed), fun multiplayer, dismemberment (which i don't know why they didn't bring that back), and of course zombies. MW2 for me had an ok story, multiplayer was probably perfected except when everyone used noobtubes. After that it was really down hill for me. BO really had a main character I liked and the campaign was pretty good, but multiplayer was boring and I hated the maps except nuketown. MW3 i hated and wished I never spent money on it even though it was cheap on amazon. However I did like the support killstreaks and hey the campaign was better than BF3. After MW3 i stopped COD all together. I'll still keep an eye on it but I'm tired of it
Dinostrich's comments