Sort of how if you played Uncharted 2's online you've played Uncharted 3's? Or Gears 1, then you've obviously played Gears 3's online already.
Guess we can stop buying sequels now.
*Edit* @Amazingmrbrock
How in the world would they have simply "patched" MW3 from MW2? There is so many aspects added. Oh and lets not forget the 20+ million people who want and buy these games every year. Lets just ignore them right? Because internet hipsters are pissed because COD has gone global, they preferred it when it wasn't as popular.
Sequels should only be for single player aspects, or for multiplayer games when the changes could not be supported in patches.
They could easily release a pay to play cod multiplayer only and just patch in all the changes they want to make. Then sell the single player part on the side.
I guess you don't know how patches work. Lets take for example the most played game on planet earth. World of warcraft;
When the game started out it did not have a great deal of the content it has today. The graphics, classes, story lines, areas, items, sounds, everything has been updated.
Modern warfare 2, and one to be honest could have been patched all the way to where blops has gone today. Well the multiplayer parts in any case. Since they wouldn't have been releasing the other games they would have been incrementally updating modern warfare. They could have updated the graphics, maps, sounds, gameplay all they wanted without much hassle. Each console and the pc do have systems designed to update the games.
As for your last part about the "people" that buy cod every year, and what would they do. Oh the internet hipsters hate my hoby :'(. Well as I plainly said in my last comment
"They could easily release a pay to play cod multiplayer only and just patch in all the changes they want to make. Then sell the single player part on the side."
Which would satisfy everybody involved. The people that activision that want your money, the people that waste their money on cod each year, and probably another group of people that really like paying subscriptions to things.
If you honesty think Blops2 is going to play any different (or even feel any different) than any other cod game, you're in for a huge disappointment my friend. The cod franchise hasn't changed since cod4.... You're blind if you think any differently.
There are too many little whiners that try to be unique by not going mainstream, its ok to like black ops 2, nobody is going to make fun of you little crybabies. Put the controller down and put your thumb back in your mouth.
Amazing, you don't live up to your name when trying to argue about "patches". You use a game were you fucking pay a $15 per month subscription, so they better patch the game, both in updates and in content. Bigger expansions are sold for retail prices.
CoD sells each year at retail, then you can pick and choose what expansions you want, if any.
Hey Dbag, this lame retarded argument has been used by COD hater perma douche for ages. But because you are just a kid who does nothing but trolls, I'll tell you now you will end up in life one big fckin loser.
what's the point, it's going to play like any other cod shooter in the past. the devs barely change a thing, anyways. they just come up with new names for the perks.
Can we at least give Call of Duty a chance to see what they will change. Game-trailers says the multi player is just as radically different as the single player.
I'd rather see the game before blindly bashing the game out of animosity.
From the trailers I've seen for it the game looks pretty rough. Re used textures for various broken objects and environments. Granted the trailers were pretty early versions but at this point all they really have to do is change textures and build maps.
Understandable and I respect your opinion but lets just wait. If we get a look and play and it is still garbage sure it will be bad but I hate judging products before they even come out and I get my hands on.
Example Madden 13 I got to play it as E3 and it was phenomenal and a drastic change but before I played it I was like same thing different year but I was wrong.
Hey, if I'm wrong about it you can tell me you told me so lol.
I'm going play devil advocate and say that I agree with Gametrailers on this one. This is coming from a guy who hate the rehash of Call of Duty, but I think Treyarch reinvent Call of Duty for the better. There is hints of Drone vehicles and strike force modes in Multiplayer!!!! They set to change multiplayer for Call of Duty, hopefully for the better. Getting this on PC, and can't wait to play this on Nvidia GTX 690, with the 60 fps gameplay we see in Call of Duty. Plus you get to face against zombies on the second campaign. 2 games in one.
>Believes Treyarch does better work on the series.
Yep, you should definitely not be able to spend your own money, because you are a sheep. Plus you won't need anywhere near that graphics card to run COD. A mobile 4250 should work fine for it. Lol.
People should be allowed to buy and play whatever makes them happy. If something else were popular, then those people would be the "sheep". There is always going to be something to hate on.
Who said that is the only game I am running it on troll!!! What is wrong with running an updated graphic card that shits on that 4250 you mention? Plus I got a good deal from Alienware(Desktop Aurora R4) where I can get it for a huge discount(College discount and the 15 percent off going on now!!! Til August 10th).
And don't tell me you can build the same rig for much cheaper than this, cause a GTX 690 or 2 680s(SLI) is about $1000, plus a expense CPU could cost just as much and etc. Best to get it build by a company like Alienware, because you get the GTX 690 added on for just $500 bucks and more stuff added on for cheap.
Cant wait to go to that expo, already got my tickets. Oh and by the way the tickets are not free to gamestop poweruprewards members they are still $35. And also why do the call of duty haters read all the Call of duty articles.
Treyarch is a lot better than infinity ward at PC versions. I think its only treyarch games that have dedicated servers and mods but I could be wrong as I don't play COD.
It's gonna be a stupid battle between MOH fans and blkops fans. This is ridiculous, all the time spent comparing the two could be converted into actual gameplay. Complain to the developers, not the people spending their own money on these games.
complain to the developers. That would not work, they are making money from blind customers who buy sequels and believe that they are getting their moneys worth. I only buy games If I believe that what they are asking for is worth the content that it has. £40 for a few maps and a 4 hr singleplayer has never worked for me.
50°
90°
30°
40°
Ad 
190°
10°
10°
10°
10°
Ad 
30°
Guess we can stop buying sequels now.
*Edit*
@Amazingmrbrock
How in the world would they have simply "patched" MW3 from MW2? There is so many aspects added. Oh and lets not forget the 20+ million people who want and buy these games every year. Lets just ignore them right? Because internet hipsters are pissed because COD has gone global, they preferred it when it wasn't as popular.
They could easily release a pay to play cod multiplayer only and just patch in all the changes they want to make. Then sell the single player part on the side.
When the game started out it did not have a great deal of the content it has today. The graphics, classes, story lines, areas, items, sounds, everything has been updated.
Modern warfare 2, and one to be honest could have been patched all the way to where blops has gone today. Well the multiplayer parts in any case. Since they wouldn't have been releasing the other games they would have been incrementally updating modern warfare. They could have updated the graphics, maps, sounds, gameplay all they wanted without much hassle. Each console and the pc do have systems designed to update the games.
As for your last part about the "people" that buy cod every year, and what would they do. Oh the internet hipsters hate my hoby :'(. Well as I plainly said in my last comment
"They could easily release a pay to play cod multiplayer only and just patch in all the changes they want to make. Then sell the single player part on the side."
Which would satisfy everybody involved. The people that activision that want your money, the people that waste their money on cod each year, and probably another group of people that really like paying subscriptions to things.
CoD sells each year at retail, then you can pick and choose what expansions you want, if any.
Get over it.
Your argument fails horribly.
Clearly so many people disagree with you including me.
But because you are just a kid who does nothing but trolls, I'll tell you now you will end up in life one big fckin loser.
I'd rather see the game before blindly bashing the game out of animosity.
From the trailers I've seen for it the game looks pretty rough. Re used textures for various broken objects and environments. Granted the trailers were pretty early versions but at this point all they really have to do is change textures and build maps.
Example Madden 13 I got to play it as E3 and it was phenomenal and a drastic change but before I played it I was like same thing different year but I was wrong.
Hey, if I'm wrong about it you can tell me you told me so lol.
I highly doubt there is any mindblowing stuff to see
>Believes Treyarch does better work on the series.
Yep, you should definitely not be able to spend your own money, because you are a sheep. Plus you won't need anywhere near that graphics card to run COD. A mobile 4250 should work fine for it. Lol.
http://alienware.com/
And don't tell me you can build the same rig for much cheaper than this, cause a GTX 690 or 2 680s(SLI) is about $1000, plus a expense CPU could cost just as much and etc. Best to get it build by a company like Alienware, because you get the GTX 690 added on for just $500 bucks and more stuff added on for cheap.
CoD Black Ops 2 should be interesting and it will be worth 40 pounds because i will stil be playing zombies long after release.