The Call of Duty franchise has been under attack and heavy criticism for the past few years for its lack of innovation and stagnant visuals by many gamers. While the franchise might deserve some of the flack it gets, it receives it with no punches pulled. However, we as gamers, tend to turn a blind eye on many game series which do the exact same.
20°
60°
20°
20°
Ad 
40°
0°
0°
20°
30°
20°
I love pokemon games and I keep myself in the dark a little with every new game that releases. I only look up the new game mechanics and moves (if there are any that affect online battles) but when it comes to the new pokemon its so much more fun to randomly encounter a new one when playing!
I think this is what happens with a fair amount of the COD community. They dont actually know whats in the game. They just see an ad and think "oh sweet a new one's out!" and go down to the store and get it because like pokemon the changes are never too radical.
New Weapons = New Pokemon
and
A new Region = New maps.
That analogy can definitely work. There's more to it but it would require a great wall of text to explain ;)
Related image(s)
but other than that i can see it..
neither series really goes anywhere with new releases
and they are both kinda casual games
although there's nothing wrong with that IMO
Please explain how a game like COD is casual, because its easy to get into or because its played by millions? I simply don't understand how the gameplay mechanics are much different from any FPS over the last decade.
Super Meat Boy did a similar thing with their ability to quickly respawn--they used it to offset the frustration of having to try many times on one level. The TDM/Demolition respawn settings can work, but they're best used to offset some sort of problem (for example, an asymmetrical game mode, which allows the underdog team to respawn). Otherwise it just comes off like potato chips: Easy to just pop them in your mouth over and over again, but looked down upon by the general populous.
Now, Pokemon: You can get a decent pokemon for a tournament only after playing, like, 30-40 hours. That if you dont care about EV's points and stuff.
That said, from a technical standpoint, since you need a lot more effort and time to become a "professional Pokemon gamer", then, Pokemon is (in theory) more "hardcore" than COD. Now, you dont get blood in Pokemon, but, who cares?
and CoD games are very easily approachable
keeping it simple while still being enjoyable
and as was cited by mamotte
you're mixing up Casual and Mature games here
Now if I am to take the route of the adult gamer. Whether Call of Duty, Pokemon or any other franchise - Don't buy every entry of the series, or at the very least, don't do it at every release point. That way you will be less likely to become disillusioned with your game of choice. I still enjoy CoD somewhat, because I play maybe one out of every three entries.
For every one gamer sick of yearly entries of a franchise, there are ten for each of them that love them and their yearly releases. Do what is right for you as a person and as a gamer.
Not yet at least.
Its like tony hawk and guitar hero all over again
P.S. competitive Pokemon battles take more skill than COD does.
I kept buying them out of hype, and hated them.
In my eyes, Persona/SMT games are better than Pokemon. And battlefield is better than COD.
But I guess that's just me...
Pokemon is a great starting point for RPG beginners due to it's simple mechanics and light hearted formula. That being the case, it is still in depth enough for experiences rpg players to enjoy it. (Such as with the online battling, EV training, breeding. Etc.)
SMT is geared more toward the hardcore RPG players. The gameplay is generally harder and losing is much more punishing. I'll not go into detail into just how in depth the SMT series is because anyone who has played those games will know.
Point is, the two games are on the complete opposite ends of the RPG spectrum from one another.
For example most people know about breeding, but not that you can pass down moves of the father pokemon and IV stats of the mother pokemon.
Same goes for a lot of things in the pkmn games.
I havent played pokemon in a long time untill recently when i played emerald on my phone.
And it was way different as when i played it as a kid.
Looking of some stuff on the wiki shows how complex some parts of the games are, using math, crazy formulas.
And i only just found out there is something called STAB moves, which means that if you use a fire move with a fire pokemon it will do 1.5x damage.
I never knew that while i've played since red and blue.
Oh and in reply to the title: at least pokemon will have a new engine this year.. :p
at least that would take some more skill than COD actually has.
oh and btw I only buy a COD every two years and only play it inbetween my SP games, im certainly not a COD whre asd I havent played one in over a year now
cany deny they arent fun games to play tho