Find content
Female
QUOTE (Kamina-Yoshi @ Nov 15 2010, 02:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I've written it again,
and again,
and again,
AND AGAIN.
However, you seem to not grasp the general gist of what I am saying, so I'll just keep trolling you like this until you stop acting like I didn't post any real criticisms of this series. For every game, there is more glitches and campers. The games are just repetitions within themselves and nothing new to bring to the table except little sparkly toys that'll just amuse you for a few hours, then you'll just ignore it and go on to another thing that catches your eye. Just like World at War, just like Modern Warfare 2. There's nothing new here, it's just a testosterone injection through the rough-end of a Beretta Sniper Rifle. In every game, it gets fundamentally easier to kill each other, with no requirement of planning, tactics, or organized effort. Just run and shoot, run and shoot. Every plot line is basically 'GET TO POINT B FROM POINT A, THEN GO BACK AND FORTH UNTIL YOU SEE A PLOTLINE BETWEEN TOTALLY HETEROSEXUAL GRUNTS AND NON-NONSENSICAL EXPLOSIONS'. Can anyone here, anyone at all remember any memorable plot-points in World at War, or anything beyond the general gist of the Modern Warfare series? Barely, perhaps. But that's because you're being baa'ing sheep that're acting like I'm causing the holocaust a billion times over by disagreeing with your rabid cult-of-personality. Every game requires a higher-technological computer that is just silly beyond all reason. Half Life 2 kept having add-on's to its series, yet never stopped being quirky or exciting. Every add-on stayed within the same engine and even the same graphics specifications, whilst the Call of Duty series has not one, but two different author-companies working with different softwares. If Valve can keeps its head in the game and provide both plot and incredible multiplayer action for all, then what's wrong with you guys? Can't accept the fact that a story is as good as being able to shoot a Romanian twelve-year-old in the face while sitting in one spot and calling it 'skill'? Oh, and don't get me started on the amount of time between every useful update. Remember Modern Warfare 2's updates? Ah, rehashing old maps and trying to frame it as actual effort. Good times, good times. Oh, and what about World at War's fundamentally messed-up game-system where bayoneting and the general spamming of molotovs seemed to be more resourceful then actually fighting like a soldier by holding a position on the map with coordinated effort by a group of professionals, instead of running around a two-bit map like a Benny Hill's Sequence with weaponry? Please, answer as to how simply keeping your fingers down on the mouse-one key instead of trying to have actual fun by experiencing a fully-emersed story that would never get old, never stop amazing you, and would also provide a fun community to be part of would be better?
TWENTY BUCKS SAYS THIS COMMENT IS FRAMED AS BEING UNANSWERABLE.
and again,
and again,
AND AGAIN.
However, you seem to not grasp the general gist of what I am saying, so I'll just keep trolling you like this until you stop acting like I didn't post any real criticisms of this series. For every game, there is more glitches and campers. The games are just repetitions within themselves and nothing new to bring to the table except little sparkly toys that'll just amuse you for a few hours, then you'll just ignore it and go on to another thing that catches your eye. Just like World at War, just like Modern Warfare 2. There's nothing new here, it's just a testosterone injection through the rough-end of a Beretta Sniper Rifle. In every game, it gets fundamentally easier to kill each other, with no requirement of planning, tactics, or organized effort. Just run and shoot, run and shoot. Every plot line is basically 'GET TO POINT B FROM POINT A, THEN GO BACK AND FORTH UNTIL YOU SEE A PLOTLINE BETWEEN TOTALLY HETEROSEXUAL GRUNTS AND NON-NONSENSICAL EXPLOSIONS'. Can anyone here, anyone at all remember any memorable plot-points in World at War, or anything beyond the general gist of the Modern Warfare series? Barely, perhaps. But that's because you're being baa'ing sheep that're acting like I'm causing the holocaust a billion times over by disagreeing with your rabid cult-of-personality. Every game requires a higher-technological computer that is just silly beyond all reason. Half Life 2 kept having add-on's to its series, yet never stopped being quirky or exciting. Every add-on stayed within the same engine and even the same graphics specifications, whilst the Call of Duty series has not one, but two different author-companies working with different softwares. If Valve can keeps its head in the game and provide both plot and incredible multiplayer action for all, then what's wrong with you guys? Can't accept the fact that a story is as good as being able to shoot a Romanian twelve-year-old in the face while sitting in one spot and calling it 'skill'? Oh, and don't get me started on the amount of time between every useful update. Remember Modern Warfare 2's updates? Ah, rehashing old maps and trying to frame it as actual effort. Good times, good times. Oh, and what about World at War's fundamentally messed-up game-system where bayoneting and the general spamming of molotovs seemed to be more resourceful then actually fighting like a soldier by holding a position on the map with coordinated effort by a group of professionals, instead of running around a two-bit map like a Benny Hill's Sequence with weaponry? Please, answer as to how simply keeping your fingers down on the mouse-one key instead of trying to have actual fun by experiencing a fully-emersed story that would never get old, never stop amazing you, and would also provide a fun community to be part of would be better?
TWENTY BUCKS SAYS THIS COMMENT IS FRAMED AS BEING UNANSWERABLE.
K BYE.
Nobody is forcing you to play it. So move on.
