Gamers disagree with critics over 'Call of Duty: Ghosts' Read more:

'Call of Duty: Ghosts' was released on November 5 and has been highly praised by many critics. However it has also been heavily panned by most of the gamer community. The divide between critics and gamers may add fuel to the controversy that most of the video game media act as the public relations division of the industry.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
porkChop1687d ago

"'Call of Duty: Ghosts' was released on November 5 and has been highly praised by many critics."

Ghosts has a 74 on Metacritic right now for PS3 and 360. I wouldn't call that high praise at all. The general consensus seems to be that journalists are finally sick and tired of CoD being the same game every year, and that Ghosts is even less of an improvement then the other games have been.

-Foxtrot1687d ago (Edited 1687d ago )

Even though it looks like they are sick and tired why is it they still overlook most of it's flaws and ignore complaints which they would criticize in other games like it being the same old stuff which they would mark down in any other game

I still think despite the lower scores reviewers were too generous, especially IGN for example 8.8 I mean really? It's like they wanted to give it a 9 but knew gamers would get too suspicious and didn't want to give it an 8 or 8.5 because thats what Battlefield 4 got and Activision would be p*****. I think they didn't want to p*** Activision know how most journalists these days feel entitled to stuff so without high scores Activision would stop giving them free goodies or exclusive interviews/info for their next game.

Pintheshadows1687d ago

I think it is the worst game in the series.

The gameplay now feels adolescent compared to its competitors. And on a technical level, it is pretty damn broken and poorly optimised.

It is also entirely devoid of character. It feels so sterile and box tickingly dull.

Even Extinction takes itself so seriously it is actually difficult to enjoy.

1687d ago
1687d ago
mewhy321686d ago

call of duty is call of duty. it's a tried and true formula that makes activision billions of dollars. I personally prefer battlefield.

kneon1686d ago

It's not just COD, there are plenty of other franchises and developers that get a free pass from most of these reviewers.

That's why I don't bother reading most reviews, the only opinion that matters is mine.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1686d ago
TopDudeMan1687d ago

The issue with CoD being the same every year isn't the problem. It's a good series, but the problem is that they release a new one EVERY year. After a few years, people just started getting sick of it. So I don't think it deserves low scores just because some people are bored of it. The game should be judged on it's own merit.

1687d ago Replies(1)
Visiblemarc1687d ago

Add to that the fact that every single COD game has horrible user aggregate scores due
to tons of people posting zeros in some form of odd protest. So even if your point didn't invalidate the article, it would still not be news.

News4Noobs-1687d ago (Edited 1687d ago )

Not on the big journalists like IGN which almost got a 9/10

What I find funny is that for other games IGN, for example, they always talk about graphics, improvements, campaign hours/quality/story telling, even animations etc...

Gameplay: 8
Graphics: 7
Story telling: 6
Etc... and from that they get the final average

But for COD they just go... "oh even thought they have the same 2006 graphics and glitches, look now you can lean on walls which is really a step forward from the previous COD. Lets give it a 8.8/10"

And then they just miss the whole purpose of "rating"
Money talks.

Writing from my phone

frostypants1686d ago

It's sad what has happened to IGN in recent years. They used to be a very credible site. Now they're a joke.

assdan1686d ago

Yeah, I wouldn't say mixed reviews as being praised. with that being said, if this was a different game I wouldnt be surprised if it was getting sixes if it wasn't a COD game. It's about time critics call them out on their bs. And from what I'm hearing, this seems like one of the buggiest games ever launched.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1686d ago
aviator1891687d ago

Pretty much what porkChop said.
Having a metacritic in the 70s range does not equate to high praise, not even close.

1687d ago
liran1687d ago

New kids each year will buy this PURE crap, Activision did 1b$ over a product that not invested more then 1m$...

It's a shame how other companies work really hard on their games with new ideas and engines and Activision is doing all their money by selling same product each year (also each year it's getting shittier) for 60$, what a shame.

warczar1687d ago (Edited 1687d ago )

They didn't do 1 billion in sales, that article was bs. What they did do was sell 1 billion to RETAILERS not consumers. Be careful not to slip into any of Activisions shit.

BobBelcher1687d ago

hipsters will hate anything that's mainstream though so...

warczar1687d ago

and morons will love anything that's mainstream.

310dodo1687d ago

The Multiplayer in slower and toned down.
and it takes forever to level up in this COD
I am absolutely loving it.

hipsters will hate.

Show all comments (40)
The story is too old to be commented.