Rumors about COD 2016 will be Ghosts 2

#1

Freak

VolNation's Grand Poobah
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2003
Messages
95,241
Likes
102,675
#1
Any thoughts? Saw where some magazine article supposedly leaked this into.

Personally I thought Ghosts had a lot if issues, mostly that the majority of the maps really sucked.
 
#3
#3
Don't play COD anymore, it sucks IMO

I understand. And a lot of people agree with you. I still like to play from time to time.

BO3 seems to be pretty well received, though. I think it's better than Ghosts or AW.
 
#5
#5
Wish it was Modern Warfare 4. Kind of tired of the futuristic type stuff.

Same. We're due for a a WW2 shooter again. But it seems like FPS games are still adamant about creating futuristic games with gadgets and jump packs and what not. At what point is this futuristic stuff going to hit a wall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7
#7
Battlefield 5 is supposed to be WW1 based and people got mad over that. Funny how the fan bases are.
 
#9
#9
I understand. And a lot of people agree with you. I still like to play from time to time.

BO3 seems to be pretty well received, though. I think it's better than Ghosts or AW.

I like COD. I just don't think it needs to be an annualized franchise. I'd rather see them release it every 2-3 years and have a really good single player campaign attached to it.
 
#12
#12
Ghosts did some things right IMO . I loved the vset and insane amount of perks . Maps were straight hot garbage tho
 
#14
#14
Eh I don't love the idea, but who knows it could work out. If H1Z1: King of the Kill drops on console this summer that's all I'll be playing anyway.
 
#15
#15
I don't think I'll buy another COD unless Treyarch is involved.

Like many others I want to get away from the double jumping, wall running nonsense.

Not really a fan of the specialists that BO3 has introduced either.

Players can navigate maps faster than ever and the maps just keep getting smaller.
 
#18
#18
Their last three games are garbage. Need to go back to ww2 korea or vietnam. I hate the experience suit stuff
 
#21
#21
Totally disagree... just needs to quit focusing on silly made up tech

Why does this franchise need a yearly release? They've already rendered the single player "story" campaign as nothing more than an afterthought. The multiplayer doesn't change all THAT much year in and year out. If multiplayer is all you care about, it would seem to me that the better thing to do would be to release COD as a "service" based game and then just release new 20.00 season passes with added maps and features every year. If I were a COD player, I'd rather see them do that than make me spend 60.00 every year for essentially the same thing. Sports games should adopt that same model.
 
#22
#22
Why does this franchise need a yearly release? They've already rendered the single player "story" campaign as nothing more than an afterthought. The multiplayer doesn't change all THAT much year in and year out. If multiplayer is all you care about, it would seem to me that the better thing to do would be to release COD as a "service" based game and then just release new 20.00 season passes with added maps and features every year. If I were a COD player, I'd rather see them do that than make me spend 60.00 every year for essentially the same thing. Sports games should adopt that same model.

I wish sports game would come out every other year. Pay $20 for updated rosters in the year they don't release it. I only buy sports games when they are like half off since they don't really innovate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#23
#23
Why does this franchise need a yearly release? They've already rendered the single player "story" campaign as nothing more than an afterthought. The multiplayer doesn't change all THAT much year in and year out. If multiplayer is all you care about, it would seem to me that the better thing to do would be to release COD as a "service" based game and then just release new 20.00 season passes with added maps and features every year. If I were a COD player, I'd rather see them do that than make me spend 60.00 every year for essentially the same thing. Sports games should adopt that same model.

There is a COD Online in China that is just a multiplayer mish mash of different maps and guns from past CODs. I'd rather pay $40 a year or whatever for an online only COD. I don't play campaign or Zombies. I agree that the past few have been underwhelming, but BO3 is the best since MW 1-2, BO 1-2, and WAW. It sucks compared to all of these. Ghosts and AW were so bad.
 
#24
#24
I wish sports game would come out every other year. Pay $20 for updated rosters in the year they don't release it. I only buy sports games when they are like half off since they don't really innovate.

Agreed. Annual sports releases are a complete waste of time and money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#25
#25
There is a COD Online in China that is just a multiplayer mish mash of different maps and guns from past CODs. I'd rather pay $40 a year or whatever for an online only COD. I don't play campaign or Zombies. I agree that the past few have been underwhelming, but BO3 is the best since MW 1-2, BO 1-2, and WAW. It sucks compared to all of these. Ghosts and AW were so bad.


Bo3 is right in there with with ghost and aw... there are all awful. They even gOT lazy this year and made like 8 characters. I loath bo3. Hit markers suck takes a clip to kill a guy... corny kill streaks. It's lazy. Another thing, these games that only release a small portion of the game for 70 bucks then turn around and drain you for another 70 for all the dlc over a year... I mean that trend needs to stop in all games
 

VN Store



Back
Top