|
Its the best for one big reason. You can set up custom matches with bots and your friends. When you do custom matches, everything is unlocked for you in create a class. No leveling to unlock stuff. No stat tracking. I don't care about any of that stuff. Also, no dealing with annoying online BS. I can play how I want to play right from the start.
Still not worth that ridiculous price. But cool that they added bots.
I love the offline parts to this. The campaign is one of the best of the whole CoD series. And adding bots to private matches is an idea that long overdue to the franchise. However, the online multiplayer took a huge step backwards in graphics and in playability. (I truly hate their create a class system.) Normally I dont complain about graphics too much in video games, but online shooters require the ability to quickly differentiate friend from foe and it fails, IMO, in this regard. Without good online multiplayer, there is very limited replay value here, unless you have some good, always-on-when-you-are friends to group up with. I'd recommend renting instead of buying.
Still not worth that ridiculous price. But cool that they added bots.
What's ridiculous about the price? I see it for the 360 on Amazon for approximately $60. That's not free but it's from what I can tell almost the default new game price for a console game these days. I'm curious if I'm missing something here like bonus content or something else you're including.
This will probably be the next game I get for my 360 since my brother and a lot of my online gang have this one. I'll have it before Halo 4.
That's why I don't own a console buddy. :D #steamsaleftw
Still not worth that ridiculous price. But cool that they added bots.What's ridiculous about the price? I see it for the 360 on Amazon for approximately $60. That's not free but it's from what I can tell almost the default new game price for a console game these days. I'm curious if I'm missing something here like bonus content or something else you're including.
This will probably be the next game I get for my 360 since my brother and a lot of my online gang have this one. I'll have it before Halo 4.
Marginal advances as a franchise with a shiny new $60 price tag seems a little ridiculous to me. If I'm dropping half a bill on a new game I'd like it to be something either new as a whole, or a large upgrade from what came before. I'm not convinced that Black Ops 2 is a huge upgrade from MW 3.
Yeah, I stopped playing pretty much as soon as they made it a yearly franchise. It's not just the base price of the game. You also have to keep up with the map packs, so it's closer to $80-90 for the game over the year, then you have to buy the new one and no one plays the old one any more.
"The best CoD yet" is like being the prettiest dog at the annual "World's Ugliest Dog Show".
Don't get me wrong, I like CoD 4 and MW2 but the series has always been utterly and completely broken multiplayer-wise, and their pitiful attempts to fix that just end up breaking the game even more while getting rid of all the fun stuff.
Because obviously being able to chuck a throwing knife without flinging your shield at arms length in the opposite direction is super OP and needs to be removed, but that shotgun with the 18 round magazine, balls loads of damage, near perfect accuracy, and insane fire rate?
The EPITOME of balance. No no, let's get rid of the knife thing first.
Call me old fashioned, but I remember when Super Mario Bros. 2 was $80 freakin dollars. My uncle paid $70+ for Space Invaders on the Atari 2600. $60 for a new console game isn't exactly chump change, but this isn't a revolutionary price change either.
/bitter cuz my PC sucks
Yes. Games from way back are a good measure for today's prices.
...
XD
I'm not worried about the $60, though on my budget it's steep, it's the yearly $60, then another $10 every two months if you want to stay current and still play with your friends. I know it's a business, it just feels like they're trying to milk me.
Part of the problem is the man hours have drastically increased to make these games. I'd guess a lot of these take upwards of 200 people, a year or two of development is pretty expensive with that kind of staff.
Its one reason I like Minecraft. The game is a lot of fun, but they can sell it cheaper because their staff was just a handful of people, with some of them being added AFTER they made their first million. But with a total of 3-4 programmers and artists, that's what a game looks like.
http://www.ign.com/games/final-fantasy-anthologies-europa-edition/snes-6214
Note the price for this cartridge based game in 1991.
Trust me, I'm not a fan of the $60 base price for video games these days but it's not a new ting at all. I wish it were cheaper but I remember paying $70-$80 for FFIII and Chrono Trigger.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I just don't like paying ANOTHER $60 for basically the same game just a year later, plus $25 worth of new map packs, because the old ones are obsolete. I also like football games, but I only buy them every 3 years or so, and then I get them used, since other people seem to like buying the newest one all the time.
I don't mind the price of games. I just don't feel like shelling out for them constantly because they want more money.
As Irontruth says, the price tag isn't the problem. It's the price tag with marginal advancement. Same reason I don't buy Madden every year.