Sunday, December 1, 2013

Call of Duty: Ghosts review

"Call of Duty" is a series that I have been familiar with for nearly 10 years. Unlike the "Modern Warfare" bandwagon jumpers, I stuck with the series since it hit it big in the mainstream in 2005 with "Call of Duty 2." I even went back and played the original one and its expansion pack, which while hits were not as popular because they were only on PC. Throughout high school, I played the spinoff games and watched as it evolved from a WWII series to a modern warfare series. At the time, it was revolutionary, but since then it has become kind of stale, with each entry bringing little new to the table.

"Ghosts" is the franchise attempt at a major reboot. The "Modern Warfare" saga is over, and I highly doubt they'll be able to squeeze anything out of the "Black Ops" saga after last year's Black Ops 2 seemingly ended things. "Ghosts" manages to be closer to "Modern Warfare" than "Black Ops," but it makes the story more personal. Rather than following a typical squad of soldiers, it makes the squad of soldiers a family. Literally, like a father and his two sons. The story is different in that the bad guys this time come from a unified South America, but come on, how different does it really make it? They all go down the same if they get shot.

Gameplay-wise, it's the same song and dance from "Modern Warfare." I had this same rant two years ago about how Modern Warfare 3 had the same gameplay as 2. Well "Ghosts" has the same gameplay as 3. Nothing new has been brought to the table. At all.

The graphics are the same as in the "Modern Warfare" series. Some people are telling me they've noticed an improvement. Maybe on the PS4 and Xbox One, but not on current-gen 360 and PS3. That's all I have to say.

As I'm one of the few people who plays the campaign in "Call of Duty," I was more interested in playing this one's campaign. I mean, I'd rather follow the semblance of a story than go online and listen to 12-year-olds talk about their sexual intercourse with each other's mothers. "Ghosts" has a few good moments in its otherwise very cookie-cutter campaign. Especially the villain. After Raul Menendez from "Black Ops 2," Gabriel Rorke is probably one of the better villains in the the franchise, partially because he's actually likeable. And dangerous. Nothing makes a deadlier villain than one who used to be one of your own. Imagine a guy who knows every move you're going to make because he trained you. That's Rorke. An extra shout-out goes to the blatant "Dark Knight Rises" moment that occurs a little more than halfway through. Also, the "Gravity"-inspired bits were amusing.

The multiplayer is where "Ghosts" really doesn't shine. It's the same as in "Modern Warfare 3," only now the maps are bigger and are more sniper and camper-friendly, which, yeah, gets really old really fast. Killstreaks are the same, hell everything is the same except for the overly big maps. During my recent visit home, my brother and I got so tired of the campers we actually switched back to playing "Black Ops."

Activision, how long do you intend to slap a different label on the same product and calling it a new game? Eventually, people are going to get tired of this shit.


No comments:

Post a Comment