Which would you choose with the future of CoD? Not a "Micro-Trans" topic

#1olmansilverpantPosted 3/14/2013 9:40:51 AM
Which would you rather have? - Results (12 votes)
Option 1- Current Method
41.67% (5 votes)
5
Option 2- New Method
58.33% (7 votes)
7
This poll is now closed.
Im curious as to how people would feel about CoD trying out a new business plan. This is purely hypothetical and just a scenario i'd like some opinions on.

Ok the first option is pretty straight forward. Keep it the way it is, $60 for a new game CoD that comes out every year with $50 in DLC. Primarily A Campaign, Multiplayer and some other side mode(i.e Zombies/Survival)

The New Method is something I've been contemplating. Would you be interested in a CoD which comes out every 2 years but is MP only and $60. The game would come loaded, on disc, with as many maps that the current method has at the end of its DLC life cycle. Also the game would feature nearly flawless balancing due to each iteration having a public beta period.



Its too easy to just say " would you rather have a CoD come out every 2 years with more content all around", Gotta lose something and lets face it Campaign is the least played option of the 3. I'd Like to hear the boards opinion on this. If there are any questions I'll try and clarify
---
Hulk using X-Factor is like Hulk smoking PCP. There is no stopping him after that.
XBL GT: LHR Kev Mac
#2AxCUNNINGxSTUNTPosted 3/14/2013 1:22:24 PM
I would say option 2, but with more maps.

Would love a COD all stars game, with all the maps from COD games on it, but with BLOPS II pick ten system.
#3DvoloS88Posted 3/14/2013 1:30:21 PM
New developer, new physics, new animations, new ai preferably the terrible friendly ai in every CoD, new net coding. How you say? A new ENGINE!