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.
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.
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.