@sinjunb said:
@xpolymorphic said:
@vrikk said:
Call of Duty as #1. What the hell. This year was weird.
It's a fantastic game, nothing weird about it.
Fuck no it wasn't. It was more of the same linear shooting crap only with double jump. Wolfenstein was a million times better, and it had some actually good writing to back it up.
First of all, that's being purposefully reductive and completely undersells how much that game has done to push forward that series, which is no small task given that it's being controlled by the world's largest publisher who is keen on pumping them out as fast as possible with as little change as possible. Choosing Advanced Warfare doesn't send a message that innovation doesn't matter; it sends precisely the opposite message. That game does a ton more than adding a double jump.
Second of all, you mention in another comment that you don't like multiplayer. Cool. Jeff has already said on numerous occasions "don't buy Advanced Warfare if you don't like multiplayer; it's not worth it." Your argument is not new and is completely tangential to why Jeff picked it. The multiplayer in that game is really, really good.
Lastly, I don't understand why everyone has such a chip on their shoulder about Call of Duty. If you don't want to play it, if you feel like it's over saturating the market, then whatever, fine, don't play it. But a lot of people like it. Personally, I have only ever played the Modern Warfare games and now Advanced Warfare, so I have years in between each game to recharge, and then each game feels as fresh and new as any other sequel. No one is forcing anyone to play Call of Duty every year, and usually the games have little to do with each other story-wise anyway. If you're burned out on it, just skip a year or two.
Advanced Warfare was an awesome game, and I think it's great that Jeff picked it as his number one.
Log in to comment