• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 PC Review
#11
It sounds like you guys are talking about something I don't know about (yet).
  Reply
#12
BF V - it is in early release until the 15th when I expect to get a reviewer's key.

It would be the reason the price dropped on its competitor CoD
  Reply
#13
I have determined that the Battlefield games just aren't really my thing. It's something about the gameplay. The COD games just do it better and they get the gameplay right, IMO. There is something lacking in the BF games. I love the graphics and the realism; those games are often technical marvels. However the COD games are more fun, and that's what counts IMO. It's kind of like having good writers and artists as opposed to technical experts. That's how I see it between those two development teams. I prefer good writing and art over technological superiority.
  Reply
#14
The only thing I am disappointed in is CoD Black Ops III's IV's lack of a SP campaign. The little specialist things don't do it for me. I am looking forward to (hopefully) getting a low-ping Internet provider next week (hopefully) so maybe I can join you on-line.

TYPO: IV, not III.
  Reply
#15
Sounds good. I think you’re mixing up Black OPs 3 and 4 by the way. I do not own 4. And I’m not sure I will buy it with no campaign. I will wait for your thoughts on the game first.
  Reply
#16
(11-10-2018, 10:56 PM)SickBeast Wrote: I have determined that the Battlefield games just aren't really my thing.  It's something about the gameplay.  The COD games just do it better and they get the gameplay right, IMO.  There is something lacking in the BF games.  I love the graphics and the realism; those games are often technical marvels.  However the COD games are more fun, and that's what counts IMO.  It's kind of like having good writers and artists as opposed to technical experts.  That's how I see it between those two development teams.  I prefer good writing and art over technological superiority.

If I had to give a quickie review of BF:V its pretty simple:

1. They tried to be "different" but those that grew up with storming the beach at Normandy, russians, Nazi's, M1 Garands, and typical ally campaigns will feel weird here. There is a lot that us "older" gamers come to expect from WW2 games.

2. The team based gameplay is the best it has ever been, gunplay is amazing and something only Battlefield can do really well.

3. There is no writing in COD, I prefer the stories of BF and tech like wading through water, crawling through fields of grass, etc all looks and feels incredible and COD does not even come close to the grand scale or epic moments or use of modern technology in the frostbite engine.

4."Something is missing" is an understatement. PR was a fucking mess here. Still, it feels like its missing a lot at launch: there are no classic war stories to fight through which means little to no classic maps. Little elements like the missing guns and overall "classic" WW2 themes and vibe is missing for some reason its very weird. Its sad to say but in a year I bet we get to have the best Battlefield of all time. The core is there, the rest is not. :(
  Reply
#17
The difference is realism versus creativity. I suppose the storylines in the COD games are somewhat simplistic but they are incredibly imaginary. The Battlefield games recreate reality and things that have already happened. I find that boring by comparison, personally.
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)