I have been playing video games for a while also, since the Atari 2600, that's beside the point.
What I have noticed is the same people I know who were good at prior COD games are good at this one, those who were not are not..
Yes of course they are targeting casuals, that's where the money is, but the better players still get the better of the casuals. That's has been my experience..
What do you think a creative designer does, exactly? He barely used twitter, he never used the forums, and he got on stage and lied to the entire fanbase, he was a troll. Why do you think he was nicknamed the Stealth Clown? He was a phantom. He didnt want to push the franchise, he wanted to release a free map pack and Kotick said no. The Clown left, and later they released Terminal for free and played like absolute crap. You obviously are clueless.
WAR x BORN wrote:
Oh, trust me, big boy. I will leave the game. The future is looking bright for the FPS genre and Call of Duty isn't included. It's going to take a miracle for COD developers to make the game take skill again. I will buy you a steak dinner if we see another COD4.
So, it took my ex girlfreind 4 years to leave me after she promised me one day she will leave. so what is stopping you.
Lets see you man up and leave. We dont need any false promises.
We dont need to see you make promises like a politician trying to get votes. Lets see some honest ACTION.
I still would classify myself as good in this game. Doesn't mean much, though. When you compare BO2 with previous COD's, you notice heaps of differences. If you can't notice them, you are a casual. You don't pay attention to small details. That's a fact. I can see them. Many others can, too. Why can't you?
It was a bad way to express it, I will give you that... but the argument about making it so that anybody can succeed is a flawed one. I do believe they have evened the playing field somewhat, but by making it so that good players can be successful, where in past games some people were successful by exploiting flaws in the system, and those who played honestly were stuck amongst the "average" players because of that. I think this game has exposed some of the "good" players from past games and allowed those who were marginalized to shine.
I think Jayson's point is that good players are still good, bad players are still bad. I still see a lot of consistency in the scoreboards. The same players tend to be near the top, others may have a good game here or there but will usually be closer to the middle or bottom. If the game was made so anyone could be good, this wouldn't be so. Veteran/experienced/"good" players would benefit as well as the "lesser" players.