Totally agree. It would be one thing if GB actually "broke" stories, but as Jeff mentioned in the beginning, they don't have the resources to really do that. My biggest problem is that only the most recent 6 or 7 stories are posted in the news section on the front page, so I have to dig for the meat beyond the fluff.
Both games are amazing, and they each have strengths and weaknesses. I'm just really excited that WaW is really getting the credit it deserves, and people aren't just blindly assuming MW:2 is a gift from God. I have hope in humanity.
"You're all nuts if you think that IW had no idea about those features. If they included some other features like those, but not exactly the same, I could believe that.
But again, these aren't gameplay features, they're just UI and matchmaking features that were good. They weren't game changing, they were conveniences. IW has either purposefully or ignorantly left out these features, and it has not made the game any better to omit them. They have been omitted because they blindly swear that their own system is better, which hey, if you've got a conviction more power to ya. But the fact remains that Treyarch developed small UI and matchmaking conveniences that would not have hurt IW to include in this game as is, or further work on better versions of. "
I am not intending to bash IW or Treyarch, I think that they are both great studios. It's just disapointing that it seems IW is so angry at Treyarch for being assigned to work on the CoD franchise that they either don't play their games, or they refuse to fix things that Treyarch did better. I realize that these small things don't make or break a game, but it's the principle of the matter...
Yes, and it was a better game because of it. Why would Infinity Ward not take a couple of small things that Treyarch discovered to make their own game better?
Also, I think WaW had significantly better MP map design, at least with the maps shipped on the disc.
Log in to comment