Call of Duty: WWII
Discussion
t.
I don't understand why you are all so disappointed?
It's standard COD gameplay minus all the futuristic BS, rapid and fun to play and looks great. The war mode is a good addition to IMO.
I guess if you are a big battlefield fan then you might be disappointed that it's not as deep as BF, but for quick/short multiplayer sessions I think it hits the nail on the head perfectly.
It's standard COD gameplay minus all the futuristic BS, rapid and fun to play and looks great. The war mode is a good addition to IMO.
I guess if you are a big battlefield fan then you might be disappointed that it's not as deep as BF, but for quick/short multiplayer sessions I think it hits the nail on the head perfectly.
BaronVonVaderham said:
I don't understand why you are all so disappointed?
It's standard COD gameplay minus all the futuristic BS
That's what my friends said - as they cancelled their pre-orders. If you're not going forwards then you're going nowhere - there's been no solid innovation in the series, just a choice between jetpacks or flammenwerfer. Between the two i'd choose the latter - but it's just COD WAW with prettier graphics. It's standard COD gameplay minus all the futuristic BS
Havoc856-S said:
That's what my friends said - as they cancelled their pre-orders. If you're not going forwards then you're going nowhere - there's been no solid innovation in the series, just a choice between jetpacks or flammenwerfer. Between the two i'd choose the latter - but it's just COD WAW with prettier graphics.
yup. this is banking too hard on the old cod days. Cod has come a long way since COD4 and they've added small things over the years. This has nothing new. it might aswell be just any Cod, but with an old/WW2 skin on it. my last CoD was ghosts which i stopped playing once the first DLC came out. i quite liked it though tbh it was no different to the rest. sure you could jump some places but that wasn't much of a bad thing. even though these games got modern they still added something new to it, something different. this adds nothing new or nothing different. They could have saved COD by making this play like a quality game. improving the graphics, sound, map design and maybe new or different but there's none of that. they are trying to rely on a decade old formula.
also it seems (as you can tell from the map layouts) that they are more concerned with the annual competitive e-sports then making a good game.
Havoc856-S said:
BaronVonVaderham said:
I don't understand why you are all so disappointed?
It's standard COD gameplay minus all the futuristic BS
That's what my friends said - as they cancelled their pre-orders. If you're not going forwards then you're going nowhere........ It's standard COD gameplay minus all the futuristic BS
I got lost when COD started all the weird brainwashing and psycholigal drivel, with the long video sections that I could neither skip or understand particularly well. I just wanted to shoot 'em up, not talk about their PTSD and family feuds.
King Herald said:
So, where are we again, the game is out in the shops, or not yet? I get a disc for my £80, or not?
I was assuming buying the game for £80 means we get a copy of the game? If not, fair enough, I'm not a game guru or au fait with the whole 'scene'.
im assuming you are willing to pay £80 from the PSN Store, which is notoriously more expensive than going to a shop and buying a hard copy. Think its something to do with keeping the shops in business?!I was assuming buying the game for £80 means we get a copy of the game? If not, fair enough, I'm not a game guru or au fait with the whole 'scene'.
So if it is, then no you wont get a physical copy but just a digital that reamins in your account so you can swap it between consoles. People used to club together as you could get the game 3 times, set up a dummy account and do it this way. not sure if theyve cracked down on it or not as never done it
I used to love the original Medal of Honor and CoD 1 and 2 on PC, they had very decent single player campaigns that I thoroughly enjoyed playing through, as with the expansions.
It seems that now, single player campaigns are an afterthought at best, and I lost interest. I know the money for the developers comes mostly from multi-player, but as a casual player, I was never much good, as there seem to be hoards of online players who spend all of their waking lives playing the game, honing their 'skills'. With that in mind, and because I couldn't spend all my time playing, with a full time job, family etc., I drifted away from these games as I realised they were for the more 'hardcore' gamers.
It seems that good single player games of this ilk (and SW Battlefront) are now purely for online gamers and micro (and not so micro) transactions to suck out every Penny they can. However, I am probably in the minority preferring single player games, as so many seem more than happy to pay whatever it costs to play on the latest online.
It seems that now, single player campaigns are an afterthought at best, and I lost interest. I know the money for the developers comes mostly from multi-player, but as a casual player, I was never much good, as there seem to be hoards of online players who spend all of their waking lives playing the game, honing their 'skills'. With that in mind, and because I couldn't spend all my time playing, with a full time job, family etc., I drifted away from these games as I realised they were for the more 'hardcore' gamers.
It seems that good single player games of this ilk (and SW Battlefront) are now purely for online gamers and micro (and not so micro) transactions to suck out every Penny they can. However, I am probably in the minority preferring single player games, as so many seem more than happy to pay whatever it costs to play on the latest online.
chris watton said:
I used to love the original Medal of Honor and CoD 1 and 2 on PC, they had very decent single player campaigns that I thoroughly enjoyed playing through, as with the expansions.
It seems that now, single player campaigns are an afterthought at best, and I lost interest. I know the money for the developers comes mostly from multi-player, but as a casual player, I was never much good, as there seem to be hoards of online players who spend all of their waking lives playing the game, honing their 'skills'. With that in mind, and because I couldn't spend all my time playing, with a full time job, family etc., I drifted away from these games as I realised they were for the more 'hardcore' gamers.
It seems that good single player games of this ilk (and SW Battlefront) are now purely for online gamers and micro (and not so micro) transactions to suck out every Penny they can. However, I am probably in the minority preferring single player games, as so many seem more than happy to pay whatever it costs to play on the latest online.
I know exactly where you're coming from. I played MW 1, WaW and MW 2 purely in campaign mode and really enjoyed them. I dipped my toes with BO online and was terrible. The hardcore gamers picked me off like the noob I was. I started to learn the maps a bit and got a few killstreaks and started enjoying the game more. That's when I got addicted to online. I played campaign on MW 3 but played online TDM to death. That's when I got good at it and really started to enjoy my sessions. I got Ghosts and didn't even bother with the campaign mode. I'll do the same with WW2. Online only. It seems that now, single player campaigns are an afterthought at best, and I lost interest. I know the money for the developers comes mostly from multi-player, but as a casual player, I was never much good, as there seem to be hoards of online players who spend all of their waking lives playing the game, honing their 'skills'. With that in mind, and because I couldn't spend all my time playing, with a full time job, family etc., I drifted away from these games as I realised they were for the more 'hardcore' gamers.
It seems that good single player games of this ilk (and SW Battlefront) are now purely for online gamers and micro (and not so micro) transactions to suck out every Penny they can. However, I am probably in the minority preferring single player games, as so many seem more than happy to pay whatever it costs to play on the latest online.
I squeeze in a good hour or two on Ghosts TDM pretty much every day much to the annoyance of my better half. You do need time and on the rare occasion I get an empty house, I can lose hours at a time on there.
The newer games really aren't aimed at the casual player wanting to do a couple of campaign missions. It's a shame as there's scope for both types of player.
lemmingjames said:
im assuming you are willing to pay £80 from the PSN Store, which is notoriously more expensive than going to a shop and buying a hard copy.....
Why do you assume that? I was assuming the game that was in question was the game from a store, bought in a box with a disc.King Herald said:
Why do you assume that? I was assuming the game that was in question was the game from a store, bought in a box with a disc.
Because a physical copy of the game doesn't cost 80 quid unless you buy a special edition with a season pass or book or some other tat. 47.99 seems to be the going rate.DoctorX said:
King Herald said:
Why do you assume that? I was assuming the game that was in question was the game from a store, bought in a box with a disc.
Because a physical copy of the game doesn't cost 80 quid unless you buy a special edition with a season pass or book or some other tat. 47.99 seems to be the going rate.King Herald said:
So, where are we again, the game is out in the shops, or not yet? I get a disc for my £80, or not?
I was assuming buying the game for £80 means we get a copy of the game? If not, fair enough, I'm not a game guru or au fait with the whole 'scene'.
I was assuming buying the game for £80 means we get a copy of the game? If not, fair enough, I'm not a game guru or au fait with the whole 'scene'.
Gassing Station | Video Games | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff