@bigruss730: True, but some offer more depth than others. I defend Star Wars Battlefront for not straying too far from its source material (there are only so many variations of blasters, for example) but I appreciate the criticism that it feels shallow and gets boring after only a few hours.
@valgua1977: Well said. I almost feel like they could reduce damage by like 10-20% and it would be a lot funner. You can do all this cool acrobatic, cybernetic enhanced human stuff, but get dropped by two shots in half a second.
The campaign was super bizarre and I doubt the reviewer actually finished it. no mention of the the surreal backward time looping WW2 level. No mention of the "Nightmares" mode that you unlock after beating the campaign. Yes, it's linear in the sense that its not a sandbox game or an RPG, but the areas are usually big and feature multiple paths and freedom in play styles.
@PS4andXoneGamer: I disagree. Many of his complaints were too subjective, opinions, and based on preferences than should be reflected in an objective review.
This is what bothers me about numbered reviews. ESPECIALLY for big games like COD and Halo that have PILLARS of content (MP, SP, Co-Op, special modes, etc.) in that if the reviewers opinion about ONE mode - the STORY of all things (really a small, small fraction of the overall content) is negative, they give it a low score.
For one thing, complaints about the story are exactly that: subjective complaints. opinions. there is a glimmer of truth that their isn't a variety of enemies. Which is why the POWERS selection in this iteration is so refreshing. Being able to replay missions with a vastly different set of abilities gives the story mode replay value lacking in previous COD games.
But the complaint about linearity makes me wonder if the reviewer even PLAYED the same COD I did; these are some of the more expansive, 'sandbox' type levels than we've seen in a COD game. it really felt more like a Halo or Crysis campaign sometimes.
Get rid of numbers. Say something like "MP is refreshingly different but it takes to long to unlock new things" and "the story is bewildering and a little overly complicated and is not my favorite mode" but "overall the game is awesome, full of content, and a must buy for every COD and shooter fan."
So strange. The cheapest Alienware would have been better off with an i7 and Iris Pro (integrated) graphics and no GPU. and it's not just Alienware, I've seen other Steam machines with i3 and it just makes me scratch my head.
@Thanatos2k: How am I "wrong" about comfort? last I checked, that was subjective. so of course I'm certain my OPINION is not wrong. keyboard gymnastics are NOT more comfortable than a controller. they ergonomically design controllers to BE comfortable.
but if you want to get into objectivity, show me a keyboard that allows *analog* movement. you can't. you can't creep on a keyboard like you can with a thumbstick. period. maybe some games allow you to hold down shift and while you're crouched you are "creeping" but it's not the same thing.
if you want to get speculative, I would guess MANY PC gamers that complain about how much they hate the "new" shooting games (Titanfall, Advanced Warfare, Black Ops 3) are probably NOT moving very well with their Master Race keyboards, and lets face it, mobility is WAY more important in these games than in previous generations of shooting games.
but I digress. PREFERENCE isn't right or wrong. I stated I prefer controller for movement over keyboard. and then you called me pathetic and a cripple.
@Thanatos2k: Yes. Not everyone can perform keyboard gymnastics and crouch with their pinkie finger. I much prefer a controller for movement. I'll concede that a mouse is better for aiming, but you'll never convince me a keyboard is more comfortable or more useful for movement than a controller.
Tekarukite's comments