You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
Seem a bit ironic. I consider myself a true gamer, no "amateur". Yet gameplay always comes first for me, before graphics. Graphics seems more catered to the masses. You like the eye candy. This game isn't meant to be a competitor to a game with graphics like Crysis.
With the millions upon millions of dollars each rehashed CoD profits, they can't even improve graphics from 6 years ago? Can't do proper ragdolls? No dedicated servers.
Guess this franchise really does appeal to the mass public and amateur gamer, or typical sheep that buys what everyone else does.
So many corners cut graphically just to have 60fps , which in all honesty from my 20+ years of gaming, makes no significant difference from a consistent 30 fps.
This franchise needs to take some serious notes from Halo 4 and Battlefield.
And I don't care about sales, like I said above, this franchise caters to the mass public and amateur gamer, does not make it a good game.
I actually thought the game looked much crisper. MP anyways
As to the game being good.... it's exactly what its supposed to be. A blockbuster that reaps tons of profit. Activision isn't in business to create a product that appeals to less. Cod has always been about the mp gameplay not graphics.