Google+

131 comments

  • RadgarLaser2 - November 15, 2012 10:34 p.m.

    And why should we place as much trust in professional reviews over butt hurt reviews. Every large gaming review site shares some bias and plays ball to appeal to certain gaming companies that have major worldwide releases. They fluff up all the positives and sympathize with the negative to the point it's just user specific. It's part of the game now and the politics gamers have to deal with. I doubt any professional reviewers will give this anything less than a 9 because they get pressured and practically bribed in many ways with job security, early access, free swag, etc. Then there's the sympathy points for charities like the Call of Duty Endowment. Ultimately if you say you hate this game or any popular franchise these days, everyone makes you feel unpatriotic like you are against America and some sort of monstrous bigot. You guys are just enablers, telling kids to eat Mt Dew flavored Doritos, who's the monster now?
  • Viron - November 16, 2012 7 a.m.

    What you are saying is that these games can't be good even though professionals reviewers give them a high score? Did it ever cross your mind some people may like the game? Did it ever cross your mind that all of that stuff they're exposed to is also a marketing test to see if their consumers are happy with their product? And don't say "Well their consumers aren't happy with their product." We both know that is bullshit, their consumers are happy with it, they bought it in massive numbers and people who talk about franchise fatigue shouldn't be buying it unless they are massive hypocrites. The reality is people are upset that Treyarch and Activision have found a niche they may never need to grow out of, that they don't have to try to appeal to a wider audience. Because the mode of people has become "I don't like it so no one should" and I'm not referring to just you, I'm referring to all of us, including me. We have become so absorbed into the tools of narcissism, that we now think that we are all special snowflakes, who are all important in the world. The reality is none of the snowflakes give a shit about each other's individuality. So you all can cry about how gaming is dying or why there are so many "insert internet buzzword here" playing games now, but the sad truth is that game companies are moving on, like the media, like Star Wars, like politics, to the new generation. Because this one has already been used up and no longer wants to pay for their "shit" anymore, but those kids do. And they will. Get used to being old.
  • MolokoVeck - November 16, 2012 11:08 a.m.

    I believe Radgar was saying that because of the politics involved in the game industry you cannot always trust professional reviews. How often do you take the opinion of a "professional" review over that of your peers? If you want to see a movie do you pay more attention to professional critics or do you get a feel from your friends or online user communities of people you identify with? Just because Million Dollar Baby got rave reviews does not mean it was a great movie (though I am not saying great professional reviews mean you should avoid the thing being reviewed). The reality, as you have stated, is that many game companies have found their niche. You are correct that Treyarch and Activision do not have to appeal to a broader audience, especially since they already develop their games to appeal to just about the broadest audience possible. This is why us "old" gamers get frustrated with series like this. It is the same with any media really. It frustrates me that every tween the world over thinks Twilight is the most epic saga to ever grace the silver screen, but that is today's reality. Those films appeal to the masses, just as these games appeal to the masses. Simple solution: if you don't like it then don't play it. Luckily the CoD franchise is not the only choice and there are quite a few excellent options out there...
  • zombi3grim - November 16, 2012 1 p.m.

    I ALWAYS trust proffesional reviews over user ones. Because of the simple fact that their proffesionals. They do this every day all day for a living. They know what to look for. Their not some butthurt pissed of 12 year old fanboy raging in a comment box.
  • MolokoVeck - November 16, 2012 1:49 p.m.

    That depends on the users. I would not consider butthurt pissed off 12 year olds to be my peers. I prefer to stay away from the ranting of commenters for that very reason. Instead, if I am wary of the "professional" reviews then I seek out serious gamer opinions. There are plenty of people out there who give their honest opinion and who also have experience playing lots of games. If I ask a CoD fan (professional reviewer or not) what they think of the latest CoD they will likely give me a favorable opinion. If I seek out the opinion of a gamer who plays a variety of games and appreciates them for their intricate stories, attention to details, exceptional art direction, and engaging sound, then I will probably get a different result. Since those are some of the things that I appreciate in games then I seek out gamers who have similar tastes. Remember that "professional" reviewers are just people. They are gamers who have their own opinions and their own favorite games. While they may have more experience reviewing games, and a deeper insight into the gaming industry, their opinions are not any more or less valid than another's. Well, I suppose they are more valid than the butthurt fanboys... "The graffix are soooooo bad!!!!!" Really? Do better.
  • zombi3grim - November 16, 2012 2:21 p.m.

    So a gamer who likes a variety of games is going to tell you CoD is terrible? Well, heres a shocker. Im 25 years old. Ive been gaming since the NES. I play everything from Final Fantasy to Halo to Diablo 3. I love Skyrim, I love GTA and I also love CoD. I have probably the most mixed collection out of everyone on this entire site, a collection thats been growing since I was in middle school.
  • MolokoVeck - November 16, 2012 3:05 p.m.

    I have nothing against CoD games, and I understand why people like them, they just are not games that I enjoy. Yes, a lot of people like these games. Yes, they get great reviews. My point is that you cannot say that because a game gets great reviews that it is inherently a great game. Also, just because a lot of people like something does not make it good. The qualities of a game itself are what make the game good. The fact that you play and enjoy all of those games as well as CoD also does not have anything to do with how good the game is. You have your tastes, and I have mine. Making bold claims about your video game library does not add to your argument. You like CoD, and that is fine. I only posted in defense of Radgar's original post because I felt he had a good, though somewhat tongue-in-cheek point.
  • winner2 - November 16, 2012 8:53 p.m.

    You get my nomination for best argument and coolheadedness on the whole site today. You've summed up what I believe should be common sense in a few paragraphs, kudos.
  • zombi3grim - November 16, 2012 8:55 p.m.

    His post could be condensed down into a giant "meh, idc, do what you want." If thats all it takes to impress you, you need to raise your standards.
  • winner2 - November 17, 2012 6:31 a.m.

    Are you upset?
  • zombi3grim - November 17, 2012 12:41 p.m.

    Nevermind the fact that I used no adjectives to describe my feelings, the fact that in your mind someone you have never met is mad at another person they have never met is fucking amazing. So a better question would be how the hell can you tell someones feelings based on text on your screen?
  • winner2 - November 17, 2012 2:15 p.m.

    Context and observation of past behavior. Are you coming away enlightened? Also, I think it says something about a person when they decide to attack those who agree with their opponent because they failed to come up with a sufficient counter argument to said opponent.
  • zombi3grim - November 17, 2012 8:20 p.m.

    Um, there is no context. And behavior? You can determine behavior from text on a screen? Let me let you in on a little something. If I dont use any adjectives to describe how Im feeling, your intepreting it how you ASSUME Im feeling. How Im acting in person you have no idea. You cant see my face to read my facial expressions. You cant hear my voice to recognize tone. Im not letting you know how I feel with adjectives. I could be laughing my ass off. I could be crying. I could be frothing at the mouth. I could be distracted eating and watching tv and typing this one handed. But YOU choose to believe Im frothing at the mouth because it fits with your pre conceived notions of how you WANT me to act. Hate to burst your bubble. Also, my said "opponent" had no argument. Like I said, he said his opinion and let it rest. Wasnt anything left to say at that point. He conceded. Again, raise your standards.
  • winner2 - November 17, 2012 9:20 p.m.

    So your continued ranting is now consisting of repeating what anyone reading already knows (up to a certain point)? I think we already understand the concept of assumptions on the Internet, oh wise one. But please, bless us with your ever expanding comprehension.
  • zombi3grim - November 18, 2012 5:14 a.m.

    Well now that we both understand that you have no idea how Im acting or feeling, we can all move on now, right? Since your ranting just boiled down to an ad hominem, lets just all be simple and let this go.
  • winner2 - November 18, 2012 2:27 p.m.

    I don't believe many people would actually consider my past few posts to be ranting. They've all been prett short, simple, clear, and non-threatening. Is there anything else you'd like to clear up (using that phrase sort of looseley)?
  • zombi3grim - November 18, 2012 5:42 p.m.

    Clear up? What the fuck is looseley? I dont care what "many people" would consider. Welcome to internet, fuck face. Its what I consider that matters. And your ranting. You cant be threatening on the internet. Exactly the same way you cant differ someones attitude through text on a screen. Theres nothing you cleared up for me. You still havent answered how you were able to determine my attitude based upon text with no adjectives, no way to hear my voice or read my facial expressions. You said context and past behavior, but I shot that right the fuck down and you sort of just hopped over it. So, if you want to keep responding to me and playing this little game, we can deff. do that. Now answer the fucking question. Pop quiz, was that last sentence delivered angrily? Or sarcastically? No adjectives! So its up to you! seewutididthar
  • winner2 - November 18, 2012 8:03 p.m.

    Are you upset now? I'm using my all seeing powers to come to the conclusion that you are. Am I wrong?
  • zombi3grim - November 18, 2012 8:18 p.m.

    Okay, this is going way over your head. Im done.
  • winner2 - November 18, 2012 8:35 p.m.

    Well it was nice chatting with you (honestly, it was). But if you ever manage to work it into your schedule, I'd love to recommend taking some English classes. I've taken some (high school of course) and they taught me how to derive tones and moods without always needing adjectives. I just thought I'd pass on the tip in case you're still wondering how I, you know, read your mind.
  • zombi3grim - November 19, 2012 4:41 a.m.

    Yes, you can derive tones with SOUND and moods with facial expressions. Which you have none of those. So, you still havent anwered how you did it. "English class taught me" is not a fucking answer. Try again.
  • winner2 - November 19, 2012 5:26 a.m.

    You still think I didn't answer your question? But I did, in the post you just replied to, silly. Would you like some free lessons? Come on, let's explore English together. You will come away better prepared to understand people, including myself. And you'll be able to do it with text alone! Neat, huh?
  • zombi3grim - November 19, 2012 9:44 a.m.

    "English class taught me" is not an answer. Taught you what? How did it teach you to deduce feelings from text that has no adjectives whatsoever? You keep insulting, but I still see no answer. You keep digging yourself a hole with this instead of just admitting that the reason we HAVE adjectives is so you can tell how someone is feeling when they write it down. If you didnt need them we wouldnt HAVE them. This is a comment board. There is no context. I didnt set up a scenario with an enviroment and characters for you to assume how Im feeling. I simply responded to a comment and you asked if I was upset. How the fuck you can tell if someone is upset by me simple stating that all the guy did was condense his argument down into a "huh, whatever" is BEYOND me. I'll give you a hint. You CANT tell how Im feeling unless I let you KNOW how Im feeling. Otherwise, its all interpretation from YOUR end. How am I feeling right now writing this paragraph? Am I pissed off? Am I laughing? Am I distracted? Am I amused? Am I bored? You have NO IDEA. Your only reading this how you ASSUME Im feeling. So please, if you know of another magical way to tell someones feelings online through text without them describing it to you, I would love to know and so would all the literary proffesors in the world.
  • Viron - November 19, 2012 11:53 p.m.

    I love it when children think someone getting mad ends a discussion, it's almost as amusing as seeing children troll and thinking it's funny.
  • zombi3grim - November 20, 2012 6:13 a.m.

    Well he stopped responding so I think he got the fuckin message...
  • ZpeherX - November 25, 2012 6:46 p.m.

    Or he might have decided to celebrated Thanksgiving with family and friends instead of arguing over the internet. That's viable. And sweetie, while I would normally take your side because I don't like trolls, winner2 was right about being able to derive certain tones/moods/emotions in WRITING (not face-to-face convos, which I think you meant). Adjectives, adverbs, etc. are nice but not necessary. EX: "Jacob glared at his brother and left the room, slamming the door as he went." No adjective/adjective-like words, but you still get the sense that Jacob's upset with his brother. That's how literary professors do it. :) That, um, chat was entertaining, but I think some things were taken out of context. You're 25 right? I bet winner2 just some younger kid using you as cheap entertainment. You shouldn't let it get to you.
  • zombi3grim - November 25, 2012 8:56 p.m.

    Sweetie? The fuck is this? Who the fuck are you? Necro post, FTW. Anyways, he stopped responding WAY before thanksgiving. Hes posted since then on other articles. Your "example" is exactly what Im talking about. You used the word "glared." Guess what that is? A word that indicates emotion. Your DESCRIBING the situation. Your SETTING a mood. I did none of those things. I didnt say "as im angrily typing this." or "as i glare at my monitor with seething rage." No, Im typing this as if Im speaking. Im not describing any sort of context or situation. And since you cant hear or see me and Im typing as if Im speaking, you have to rely on what I tell you to determine my tone/mood/emotion in WRITING. Which is EXACTLY what I meant. I was an english side major during surgical tech school. It helps to write reports which is very essential in my job. So now you can drop this as well, and let this post die like it was supposed to. Thanks, sweetie.

Showing 61-80 of 131 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.