Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: COD BO II sells $1billion
  • Subject: COD BO II sells $1billion
Subject: COD BO II sells $1billion


Posted by: Gaara444
I don't know where to begin with this mess of a poorly constructed argument you have made. Okay let me see if I can break this down so I can make it somewhat more manageable to chew.

>Blops II is spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill
Okay, I have yet to see numerous threads on people who have played the game liberally to complain about spawn killing, so we can scratch that off. What's next?

>An FPS with no structure and zero replay value.
That explains why numerous titles have come out and millions have logged numerous hours of playtime on it. Am I right?

>No diversity or interaction.
I believe Halo is more cliqueish with it's group of players than CoD ever will be. Moving on.

>There's no skill to achieve in the game.
The same could be same for Halo 4 and Reach.

>It's a God awful game.
Opinion.

>I have no idea why people continue to buy CoD.
Maybe because it's FUN? Ever heard of that word? Fun? Fun is differing for many people.

>The hype just grew.
Because each game was more and more FUN.

Posted by: Drunky1993
I'm not a hipster. What in God's name is so damn intriguing about spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill. It's a frantic FPS with no structure and has zero replay value. There is absolutely no diversity in interaction. There is no skill to achieve in this game. It's a god awful game. Like a poster said on page 1, I honestly have no idea why people continue to purchase COD. Everything I mentioned above is attributed to COD 4. Yet with each release the hype just grew.

My mind is -blam!- blown.


Everything you said here is just proving my point. There is no clarification as to why the game sells. And then you go even farther to reinforce my point that Reach and H4 took no skill (and consequentially provided these two games with drastically declined population counts).

And P.S, not only are you enforcing my point, but your intended counter arguments weren't thought out at all. Spawn killing? Where did I mention this? Read a paragraph all together next time. A paragraph is meant to be coherent, meaning all things are tied together and flow accordingly.

(For your brain, "spawn-kill-spawn-kill..." is correlated to "frantic" in my paragraph, Now you decide what "Frantic" means and apply it to COD).

[Edited on 12.05.2012 10:33 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 10:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

X360 GT: Stro6es
PSN ID: iRBTR
NickIsBest Master Race.
Music Enthusiast. I adore all genres of music, even the ones you don't like, Subway is -blam!- amazing, and this is the greatest song ever created by one man IMO.
If I like you enough, I'll mail you a Subway Sandwich. If I hate you, expect a -blam!- nuke.


Posted by: Gaara444
I don't know where to begin with this mess of a poorly constructed argument you have made. Okay let me see if I can break this down so I can make it somewhat more manageable to chew.

>Blops II is spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill
Okay, I have yet to see numerous threads on people who have played the game liberally to complain about spawn killing, so we can scratch that off. What's next?

>An FPS with no structure and zero replay value.
That explains why numerous titles have come out and millions have logged numerous hours of playtime on it. Am I right?

>No diversity or interaction.
I believe Halo is more cliqueish with it's group of players than CoD ever will be. Moving on.

>There's no skill to achieve in the game.
The same could be same for Halo 4 and Reach.

>It's a God awful game.
Opinion.

>I have no idea why people continue to buy CoD.
Maybe because it's FUN? Ever heard of that word? Fun? Fun is differing for many people.

>The hype just grew.
Because each game was more and more FUN.

Posted by: Drunky1993
I'm not a hipster. What in God's name is so damn intriguing about spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill. It's a frantic FPS with no structure and has zero replay value. There is absolutely no diversity in interaction. There is no skill to achieve in this game. It's a god awful game. Like a poster said on page 1, I honestly have no idea why people continue to purchase COD. Everything I mentioned above is attributed to COD 4. Yet with each release the hype just grew.

My mind is -blam!- blown.


You didn't seem to catch his bias.

He is attacking the game from a balanced and competitive standpoint. That is where the game is broken, but that is because it isn't designed to be "balanced" and "competitive".

In other words, it really doesn't have a skill gap.

The real problem in his argument is rating it as a "competitive" game in the first place. He is essentially bashing the game for what it isn't.

In other words, blind hate.

However, it is undeniable what the game has done to the FPS genre as a whole.

I am actually disappointed with this game, and it is the first TreyArch game that I am disappointed with.

IMO.

  • 12.05.2012 10:29 PM PDT

The world is not beautiful: And that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty.

~Kino's Journey

"It's not trash if it sells well!"

I can't believe people actually think this way (unless they're talking about it from an economic standpoint)

  • 12.05.2012 10:34 PM PDT

The bible is the best book Ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I AM A PROUD CHRISTIAN. HALO IS AWESOME BUT GOD IS MUCH BETTER!!!!!!!!
Did you knew that JESUSdied for you?

umad op?

I can't wait to buy 3 copies of the game :)

  • 12.05.2012 10:35 PM PDT

No, the game sells because people enjoy it. And not because people have crap taste is games. You're just blindly jumping on the hate bandwagon for no reason. "Seriously kids, quit buying this trash...." That's not an argument proving the game is trash. That's just an obnoxious opinion that's being shoved down the throat of Bungie.net since MW2 and it's getting old fast.

Also, what the Hell does the structure of your paragraph have to do with your argument against CoD? You said "spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill". Now unless you meant you spawn, kill, die spawn, that's still not an argument since that's all you do an a FPS period.

Learn to argue before you play with the big boys kiddie, you're done here.

Posted by: Drunky1993
Everything you said here is just proving my point. There is no clarification as to why the game sells. And then you go even farther to reinforce my point that Reach and H4 took no skill (and consequentially provided these two games with drastically declined population counts).

And P.S, not only are you enforcing my point, but your intended counter arguments weren't thought out at all. Spawn killing? Where did I mention this? Read a paragraph all together next time. A paragraph is meant to be coherent, meaning all things are tied together and flow accordingly.


[Edited on 12.05.2012 10:41 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 10:35 PM PDT


Posted by: NickIsBest

Posted by: Gaara444
I don't know where to begin with this mess of a poorly constructed argument you have made. Okay let me see if I can break this down so I can make it somewhat more manageable to chew.

>Blops II is spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill
Okay, I have yet to see numerous threads on people who have played the game liberally to complain about spawn killing, so we can scratch that off. What's next?

>An FPS with no structure and zero replay value.
That explains why numerous titles have come out and millions have logged numerous hours of playtime on it. Am I right?

>No diversity or interaction.
I believe Halo is more cliqueish with it's group of players than CoD ever will be. Moving on.

>There's no skill to achieve in the game.
The same could be same for Halo 4 and Reach.

>It's a God awful game.
Opinion.

>I have no idea why people continue to buy CoD.
Maybe because it's FUN? Ever heard of that word? Fun? Fun is differing for many people.

>The hype just grew.
Because each game was more and more FUN.

Posted by: Drunky1993
I'm not a hipster. What in God's name is so damn intriguing about spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill. It's a frantic FPS with no structure and has zero replay value. There is absolutely no diversity in interaction. There is no skill to achieve in this game. It's a god awful game. Like a poster said on page 1, I honestly have no idea why people continue to purchase COD. Everything I mentioned above is attributed to COD 4. Yet with each release the hype just grew.

My mind is -blam!- blown.


You didn't seem to catch his bias.

He is attacking the game from a balanced and competitive standpoint. That is where the game is broken, but that is because it isn't designed to be "balanced" and "competitive".

In other words, it really doesn't have a skill gap.

The real problem in his argument is rating it as a "competitive" game in the first place. He is essentially bashing the game for what it isn't.

In other words, blind hate.

However, it is undeniable what the game has done to the FPS genre as a whole.

I am actually disappointed with this game, and it is the first TreyArch game that I am disappointed with.

IMO.


When you say that you acknowledge what COD has done to the FPS genre as a whole, are you implying that the FPS genre is innately competitive? Because that's what the fps genre is, and I hope that it is what you implied.

  • 12.05.2012 10:35 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

X360 GT: Stro6es
PSN ID: iRBTR
NickIsBest Master Race.
Music Enthusiast. I adore all genres of music, even the ones you don't like, Subway is -blam!- amazing, and this is the greatest song ever created by one man IMO.
If I like you enough, I'll mail you a Subway Sandwich. If I hate you, expect a -blam!- nuke.


Posted by: Drunky1993

Posted by: NickIsBest

Posted by: Gaara444
I don't know where to begin with this mess of a poorly constructed argument you have made. Okay let me see if I can break this down so I can make it somewhat more manageable to chew.

>Blops II is spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill
Okay, I have yet to see numerous threads on people who have played the game liberally to complain about spawn killing, so we can scratch that off. What's next?

>An FPS with no structure and zero replay value.
That explains why numerous titles have come out and millions have logged numerous hours of playtime on it. Am I right?

>No diversity or interaction.
I believe Halo is more cliqueish with it's group of players than CoD ever will be. Moving on.

>There's no skill to achieve in the game.
The same could be same for Halo 4 and Reach.

>It's a God awful game.
Opinion.

>I have no idea why people continue to buy CoD.
Maybe because it's FUN? Ever heard of that word? Fun? Fun is differing for many people.

>The hype just grew.
Because each game was more and more FUN.

Posted by: Drunky1993
I'm not a hipster. What in God's name is so damn intriguing about spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill. It's a frantic FPS with no structure and has zero replay value. There is absolutely no diversity in interaction. There is no skill to achieve in this game. It's a god awful game. Like a poster said on page 1, I honestly have no idea why people continue to purchase COD. Everything I mentioned above is attributed to COD 4. Yet with each release the hype just grew.

My mind is -blam!- blown.


You didn't seem to catch his bias.

He is attacking the game from a balanced and competitive standpoint. That is where the game is broken, but that is because it isn't designed to be "balanced" and "competitive".

In other words, it really doesn't have a skill gap.

The real problem in his argument is rating it as a "competitive" game in the first place. He is essentially bashing the game for what it isn't.

In other words, blind hate.

However, it is undeniable what the game has done to the FPS genre as a whole.

I am actually disappointed with this game, and it is the first TreyArch game that I am disappointed with.

IMO.


When you say that you acknowledge what COD has done to the FPS genre as a whole, are you implying that the FPS genre is innately competitive? Because that's what the fps genre is, and I hope that it is what you implied.


Of course.

The monopolization that CoD has done to the FPS genre has ultimately been detrimental to the competitive aspect of every FPS as of recent times.

I would even go as far as to say that overall quality has been detrimental as well in a lot of the games I have played.

However, competitive gaming is dead to me. Thus, I somewhat enjoy being a filthy casual and will remain that way for quite some time.

[Edited on 12.05.2012 10:39 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 10:37 PM PDT

Vae Victis!

Personally I think BO2 is alright.

Story mode was good imo, and playing Custom Games with bots and friends is a blast. I don't interact with the online community though.

It would great if Halo 5 or 6 had bots for Custom Games.

[Edited on 12.05.2012 10:40 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 10:40 PM PDT

If we disagree, it's nothing personal, opinions are opinions.
Antagonizing me to build a false sense of worth is so damn cute.

Brighten your day with science.

Posted by: Gaara444
Learn to argue before you play with the big boys kiddie, your done here.

Come ahhhhhhhhhn.

  • 12.05.2012 10:40 PM PDT


Posted by: Drunky1993

Posted by: Gaara444
I don't know where to begin with this mess of a poorly constructed argument you have made. Okay let me see if I can break this down so I can make it somewhat more manageable to chew.

>Blops II is spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill
Okay, I have yet to see numerous threads on people who have played the game liberally to complain about spawn killing, so we can scratch that off. What's next?

>An FPS with no structure and zero replay value.
That explains why numerous titles have come out and millions have logged numerous hours of playtime on it. Am I right?

>No diversity or interaction.
I believe Halo is more cliqueish with it's group of players than CoD ever will be. Moving on.

>There's no skill to achieve in the game.
The same could be same for Halo 4 and Reach.

>It's a God awful game.
Opinion.

>I have no idea why people continue to buy CoD.
Maybe because it's FUN? Ever heard of that word? Fun? Fun is differing for many people.

>The hype just grew.
Because each game was more and more FUN.

Posted by: Drunky1993
I'm not a hipster. What in God's name is so damn intriguing about spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill. It's a frantic FPS with no structure and has zero replay value. There is absolutely no diversity in interaction. There is no skill to achieve in this game. It's a god awful game. Like a poster said on page 1, I honestly have no idea why people continue to purchase COD. Everything I mentioned above is attributed to COD 4. Yet with each release the hype just grew.

My mind is -blam!- blown.


Everything you said here is just proving my point. There is no clarification as to why the game sells. And then you go even farther to reinforce my point that Reach and H4 took no skill (and consequentially provided these two games with drastically declined population counts).

And P.S, not only are you enforcing my point, but your intended counter arguments weren't thought out at all. Spawn killing? Where did I mention this? Read a paragraph all together next time. A paragraph is meant to be coherent, meaning all things are tied together and flow accordingly.

(For your brain, "spawn-kill-spawn-kill..." is correlated to "frantic" in my paragraph, Now you decide what "Frantic" means and apply it to COD).

I'm just going to pop in here and say, if you don't mean spawn kill, when you say the words "spawn kill-spawn kill-spawn kill" then some people will most likely get confused.

[Edited on 12.05.2012 10:43 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 10:41 PM PDT

Posted by: x Foman123 x

Posted by: TH3_AV3NG3R
What house has a rocket pod, has legs, and has a long narrow barrel that probably shoots something powerful?

Sounds like you're describing the lower half of my body, actually.

I wonder if Bungie's "Destiny" will be able to beat that.

  • 12.05.2012 10:44 PM PDT

If we disagree, it's nothing personal, opinions are opinions.
Antagonizing me to build a false sense of worth is so damn cute.

Brighten your day with science.

Posted by: TH3_AV3NG3R
I wonder if Bungie's "Destiny" will be able to beat that.

I have great doubts.

  • 12.05.2012 10:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

X360 GT: Stro6es
PSN ID: iRBTR
NickIsBest Master Race.
Music Enthusiast. I adore all genres of music, even the ones you don't like, Subway is -blam!- amazing, and this is the greatest song ever created by one man IMO.
If I like you enough, I'll mail you a Subway Sandwich. If I hate you, expect a -blam!- nuke.


Posted by: TH3_AV3NG3R
I wonder if Bungie's "Destiny" will be able to beat that.


Don't hold your breath...

  • 12.05.2012 10:46 PM PDT

Go back to Runescape.

The executive said that if Activision wants to keep the Call of Duty series relevant and compelling, the company must bring fresh ideas and innovation to each new entry while simultaneously balancing the core tenets of the series.

the company must bring fresh ideas and innovation

fresh ideas and innovation

Call of Duty

Hahahahahaha

hahaha

ha.

  • 12.05.2012 10:48 PM PDT


Posted by: Gaara444
No, the game sells because people enjoy it. And not because people have crap taste is games. You're just blindly jumping on the hate bandwagon for no reason. "Seriously kids, quit buying this trash...." That's not an argument proving the game is trash. That's just an obnoxious opinion that's being shoved down the throat of Bungie.net since MW2 and it's getting old fast.

Also, what the Hell does the structure of your paragraph have to do with your argument against CoD? You said "spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill". Now unless you meant you spawn, kill, die spawn, that's still not an argument since that's all you do an a FPS period.

Learn to argue before you play with the big boys kiddie, your done here.

Posted by: Drunky1993
Everything you said here is just proving my point. There is no clarification as to why the game sells. And then you go even farther to reinforce my point that Reach and H4 took no skill (and consequentially provided these two games with drastically declined population counts).

And P.S, not only are you enforcing my point, but your intended counter arguments weren't thought out at all. Spawn killing? Where did I mention this? Read a paragraph all together next time. A paragraph is meant to be coherent, meaning all things are tied together and flow accordingly.


But....you still haven't proved a point. And it's worse because, again, you contradicted yourself. If Halo Reach and H4 both fail(ed) in the competitive aspect (and have sequentially fell to mediocre population counts, meaning nobody likes the game anymore) then wouldn't it be logical for a game like COD to fall drastically in popularity the way it's been since COD 4?

This is assuming an understanding that FPS games are innately competitive.

I said in another thread (sort of relevant):

Different genres are tailored to different audiences. FPS, for one, is innately competitive. Though K/D is stupid, I care to win and try my best. I'll definitely enjoy pooping on kids in social and just screwing around, but the real thrill and drive in a FPS is the competition. Not to mention it has me playing the longest.

Think of League of Legends dude. Not competing (or not trying to best your opponent) in that game is like not even playing it.


And COD doesn't provide any kind of structure to allow you to "win and try your best." The essence of the FPS has been mortified beyond belief in COD and this is why its popularity is unsettling. Extremely baffling.

  • 12.05.2012 10:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Maybe cause new halo sucks and blops 2 is awesome.

  • 12.05.2012 10:49 PM PDT

Yes I have you are just so BLIND with hate that you can't see it. You are asking why it is selling so much. The answer is as simple as I gave it to you. BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE IT. You say that people play it without trying your best. You could not be anymore wrong. If that were the case, every game in CoD in TD would have scores low with people with just screwing around all game. That isn't the case, people play the way it's meant to, to win. That's not just an FPS. It's in every title in Multiplayer that has a win/lose scenario.

To say CoD doesn't provide any sort of structure to "win and try your best" is also baffling. Have you ever even played CoD?! Comparing CoD to Halo is like comparing fruits to vegetables. One offers you to try your best through what the game plops in your hands and whats on the map (Halo). The other offers you to try your best by making you work towards the customization of letting you play the way you want too (CoD). Both have a max rank to achieve yet people still play to win after the reach it.

I play CoD with my aim to win, and so has everyone I have ever been matched with in the game. It's an FPS that's easy to learn difficult to master. Yet you somehow believe that is "Trash". Obviously 16 million people disagree with you, and saying they all have bad taste in games is far from being somewhat believable.

Posted by: Drunky1993
But....you still haven't proved a point. And it's worse because, again, you contradicted yourself. If Halo Reach and H4 both fail(ed) in the competitive aspect (and have sequentially fell to mediocre population counts, meaning nobody likes the game anymore) then wouldn't it be logical for a game like COD to fall drastically in popularity the way it's been since COD 4?

This is assuming an understanding that FPS games are innately competitive.

I said in another thread (sort of relevant):

Different genres are tailored to different audiences. FPS, for one, is innately competitive. Though K/D is stupid, I care to win and try my best. I'll definitely enjoy pooping on kids in social and just screwing around, but the real thrill and drive in a FPS is the competition. Not to mention it has me playing the longest.

Think of League of Legends dude. Not competing (or not trying to best your opponent) in that game is like not even playing it.


And COD doesn't provide any kind of structure to allow you to "win and try your best." The essence of the FPS has been mortified beyond belief in COD and this is why its popularity is unsettling. Extremely baffling.

  • 12.05.2012 10:57 PM PDT


Posted by: NickIsBest

Posted by: Drunky1993

Posted by: NickIsBest

Posted by: Gaara444
I don't know where to begin with this mess of a poorly constructed argument you have made. Okay let me see if I can break this down so I can make it somewhat more manageable to chew.

>Blops II is spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill
Okay, I have yet to see numerous threads on people who have played the game liberally to complain about spawn killing, so we can scratch that off. What's next?

>An FPS with no structure and zero replay value.
That explains why numerous titles have come out and millions have logged numerous hours of playtime on it. Am I right?

>No diversity or interaction.
I believe Halo is more cliqueish with it's group of players than CoD ever will be. Moving on.

>There's no skill to achieve in the game.
The same could be same for Halo 4 and Reach.

>It's a God awful game.
Opinion.

>I have no idea why people continue to buy CoD.
Maybe because it's FUN? Ever heard of that word? Fun? Fun is differing for many people.

>The hype just grew.
Because each game was more and more FUN.

Posted by: Drunky1993
I'm not a hipster. What in God's name is so damn intriguing about spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill-spawn-kill. It's a frantic FPS with no structure and has zero replay value. There is absolutely no diversity in interaction. There is no skill to achieve in this game. It's a god awful game. Like a poster said on page 1, I honestly have no idea why people continue to purchase COD. Everything I mentioned above is attributed to COD 4. Yet with each release the hype just grew.

My mind is -blam!- blown.


You didn't seem to catch his bias.

He is attacking the game from a balanced and competitive standpoint. That is where the game is broken, but that is because it isn't designed to be "balanced" and "competitive".

In other words, it really doesn't have a skill gap.

The real problem in his argument is rating it as a "competitive" game in the first place. He is essentially bashing the game for what it isn't.

In other words, blind hate.

However, it is undeniable what the game has done to the FPS genre as a whole.

I am actually disappointed with this game, and it is the first TreyArch game that I am disappointed with.

IMO.


When you say that you acknowledge what COD has done to the FPS genre as a whole, are you implying that the FPS genre is innately competitive? Because that's what the fps genre is, and I hope that it is what you implied.


Of course.

The monopolization that CoD has done to the FPS genre has ultimately been detrimental to the competitive aspect of every FPS as of recent times.

I would even go as far as to say that overall quality has been detrimental as well in a lot of the games I have played.

However, competitive gaming is dead to me. Thus, I somewhat enjoy being a filthy casual and will remain that way for quite some time.


Alright nice.

  • 12.05.2012 10:58 PM PDT

Signatures are for little kids.

I'm going to trade it in so some kid buys a used copy instead of a new copy.

I don't know what I was thinking. At least I didn't buy MW3 last year.

  • 12.05.2012 11:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Sometimes, I dream about cheese.


Posted by: Drunky1993
While Halo bites the dust (but for good reason).
no good reason? the sword sucked in each game after Halo 2

  • 12.05.2012 11:08 PM PDT


Posted by: Gaara444
Yes I have you are just so BLIND with hate that you can't see it. You are asking why it is selling so much. The answer is as simple as I gave it to you. BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE IT. You say that people play it without trying your best. You could not be anymore wrong. If that were the case, every game in CoD in TD would have scores low with people with just screwing around all game. That isn't the case, people play the way it's meant to, to win. That's not just an FPS. It's in every title in Multiplayer that has a win/lose scenario.

To say CoD doesn't provide any sort of structure to "win and try your best" is also baffling. Have you ever even played CoD?! Comparing CoD to Halo is like comparing fruits to vegetables. One offers you to try your best through what the game plops in your hands and whats on the map (Halo). The other offers you to try your best by making you work towards the customization of letting you play the way you want too (CoD). Both have a max rank to achieve yet people still play to win after the reach it.

I play CoD with my aim to win, and so has everyone I have ever been matched with in the game. It's an FPS that's easy to learn difficult to master. Yet you somehow believe that is "Trash". Obviously 16 million people disagree with you, and saying they all have bad taste in games is far from being somewhat believable.

Posted by: Drunky1993
But....you still haven't proved a point. And it's worse because, again, you contradicted yourself. If Halo Reach and H4 both fail(ed) in the competitive aspect (and have sequentially fell to mediocre population counts, meaning nobody likes the game anymore) then wouldn't it be logical for a game like COD to fall drastically in popularity the way it's been since COD 4?

This is assuming an understanding that FPS games are innately competitive.

I said in another thread (sort of relevant):

Different genres are tailored to different audiences. FPS, for one, is innately competitive. Though K/D is stupid, I care to win and try my best. I'll definitely enjoy pooping on kids in social and just screwing around, but the real thrill and drive in a FPS is the competition. Not to mention it has me playing the longest.

Think of League of Legends dude. Not competing (or not trying to best your opponent) in that game is like not even playing it.


And COD doesn't provide any kind of structure to allow you to "win and try your best." The essence of the FPS has been mortified beyond belief in COD and this is why its popularity is unsettling. Extremely baffling.


...but a game doesn't allow you to "win and try your best." Performance cannot be measured in a game like COD. Imbalances and unpredictability: these core FPS elements hamper the ability to provide an illustration of our performance as a player. To win and try your best has no meaning in a game like COD.

If you don't get this i'm probably just going to pull out threads from waypoint that deal with this.


Btw I should say that those two "elements" are like anti-elements.

The core elements are balance and predictability.

[Edited on 12.05.2012 11:13 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 11:10 PM PDT

Posted by: Drunky1993
If you don't get this I'm probably just going to pull out threads from Waypoint that deal with this.
Posted by: Drunky1993
Threads from Waypoint that deal with this.
Posted by: Drunky1993
Waypoint that deal with this.
Posted by: Drunky1993
Waypoint


Why didn't I see this fool proof evidence earlier? How could I have been so blind?! Please forgive me!

Seriously? Pulling up arguments on CoD from a Halo Fanboy site? You're trolling. Blocked.

  • 12.05.2012 11:14 PM PDT


Posted by: Gaara444
Posted by: Drunky1993
If you don't get this I'm probably just going to pull out threads from Waypoint that deal with this.
Posted by: Drunky1993
Threads from Waypoint that deal with this.
Posted by: Drunky1993
Waypoint that deal with this.
Posted by: Drunky1993
Waypoint


Why didn't I see this fool proof evidence earlier? How could I have been so blind?! Please forgive me!

Seriously? Pulling up arguments on CoD from a Halo Fanboy site? You're trolling. Blocked.


But i'm not a fanboy. I dislike Halo 4 in every aspect. I post there to piss off the fanboys....

But it's cool. At least I know you acknowledge my intellectual superiority over you.

  • 12.05.2012 11:19 PM PDT

I make a living of selling my body, and I don't mean sex.


Posted by: boomdeyadah
Posted by: Drunky1993
Posted by: boomdeyadah
lol Halo 4 bottomed out at 15k at one point. That is hilarious.


November 26: 11,000
lmao
I bet some of the least played CoD playlists have a higher population at midnight.

  • 12.05.2012 11:21 PM PDT