Euknowia

The first game had much promise, despite some irksome bugs and gameplay mechanics. Maybe I’m just unlucky (doughtful given other criticisms) but the sequel is absolutely littered with game breaking bugs. Seriously, I’d highly recommend waiting for a significant patch. I can’t just willingly turn a blind eye to invisible zombies/items (granted I don’t need to given, well, they’re invisible), getting clipped into random terrain, permanently stuck in animations, falling through the world, etc., and pretend all is well. I could scarcely play enough of the game to speculate whether this buggy experience was remotely worth it’s price tag.

This game is an absolute catastrophe. Genuinely one of the worst games I’ve ever had the misfortune of playing failing in nearly every feasible aspect of game design. It is worth less than nothing considering it bored me at best and is dedicated to manifesting a perpetual headache within any poor **** who erroneously gave this dreadful AoT clone a chance. $60 is an utter insult. I often find that crappy steam games have an unintentional humor that makes them worth... something, but this game is, as of now, nothing but a pathetic disappointment. Seriously it should never have been made.

Best game world ever except not. Waves are blue sure but what other graphic is there? CRACKHEN HAS NO BODY! JUST BIG SQUISHY ARMS FLOATING! SO NOT REALITY! Looking for con tent but can I find? NO! Whole big game just finDING CHICKHEN AND FIGHTING BONES! I touch chest and grab booty and go to man with jewelry face and guess what? HE STEAL MY MONEY! I GET NO MONEY HE STEALED IT! Game has SO MANY iNSECTS! Sometimes I’m inside a ROCK! Takes two years to solve puzzle then other player comes after I grab booty and KILLS ME! I RELOAD SWORD and then it DISAPPEARS! INSECTS! So many INSECTS! Player stands on rocks and holds sword when suddenly FLYING TOWARDS ME LIKE LIGHTNING ACROSS WATER AND BAM DEAD! Game patch supposed to fix insects but theyre still there and now its always WRECKING. Does music have game? NO! Forced to MAKE OWN MUSIc! NOT EVEN KAZOO OR BANJOIEE just SQUIShY PIANO and TINY GUITAR! Game made by RARE feels so common. Also. How come shooting out cannon is POSSIBLE?! SO UNREALITY! Pressure built up PERSON CLOG THE TUBE CANNON EXPLODES BEHIND THEM SUPPOSED TO TEAMKILL. 60 dollhairs plus TAX FOR THIS! I SAY NIEGH! Maybe add space explorer and sexy alien and okay. I play with imaginary friend. GAME STILL IRRITATING! How supposed to AIM AND DRIVE!? I’M NOT OCTOPUS! Would rate 100 but too much water. You get MINUS INFINItY! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Another prosaic iteration in the COD series fulfilling the expectations of most – although the loot crates add a nice sinister touch (not to mention alluring players to the insidious and addictive temptation of gambling by incentivizing an exhibition of the virtually vain where lottery rewards are braggingly presented to varying onlookers assuring critics that Activision is indeed taking steps on realizing their daunting casino dream through a system which they so modestly patented). - The campaign is too short, although decent, forgettable. - Game modes are banal (big surprise), done much better in alternative games of the same genre - Zombies are still fairly entertaining to play with friends, but the game mode is quite like the nature of a zombie – lifeless, often pedestrian, and mostly uninspired. This time around, I’d say COD is lower than mediocre. I absolutely encourage waiting for a price drop (unless you absolutely adore COD multiplayer/zombies).

Stylish, charismatic, challenging, and addictive— Cuphead offers a superior experience at a more than reasonable price. I don’t have a strong liking for platformers or boss-rush games in general, but that disposition was entirely irrelevant because Cuphead was just that good. I’m being pedantic, but my only complaint (aside from the few bugs) concerns the design of some of the “platform centric” levels – at some parts, it felt as though I was playing an old Mario ROM hack where enemy spam was used as difficulty filler (it was never this bad, but I couldn’t help but wonder if it could’ve been done in a way that didn’t utilize as many enemies as it did). Other than that, the game was absolutely superb! I'd give it a 9.5 but I'll round up.

Positives: The soundtrack (which is by far my favorite aspect of the game) is so stellar it’s jarring. The audio in general (from guns to a planet’s ambient soundscape) is immersive and suiting. The various environments are enchanting yet properly exhibit the magnitude of an enormous sci-fi war. Most “skyboxes” look glorious, though extensively littering the playable sandbox with innumerable crates/boxes and foliage still does not successfully hide how barren it can sometimes feel. Regardless, the landscape is a considerable improvement over vanilla Destiny. Level design is, overall, an upgrade from the first Destiny; although it still could use some renovations – objective routes could be even clearer, and, in my opinion, arenas could be even more interactive (this includes player controlled hazards/vehicles/turrets/environmental platforms) and further optimized to fully utilize a guardian’s abilities/mobility (more scenic parkour/platforming segments). Nearly all instances of voice acting matched the persona of their characters and was delivered quite well (looking at you Nathan Fillion). Gunplay, which is nearly completely identical to the first Destiny, is topnotch. Responsive, intuitive, and visually appealing (with respects to controller capabilities); it shines with a AAA polish. Negatives: The enemy A.I. is appalling. Perhaps the game’s MMO element creates a bit of lag inhibiting their awareness, or maybe they were designed to be extra passive as to make players feel super stealthy, but repetitively dancing a few inches behind them really makes me feel as though they aren’t really the threat that the story tries to convince me of. The pathing is equally horrendous (watching 100+ enemies funneling through a tight corridor to seemingly blind fire worse than bad guys from a Schwarzenegger film made me feel both humored and disappointed). The impression of engagements was anything but engaging. Post Taken King, most developments of “core gameplay” in Destiny’s sequel seemed fairly minimal. Really should expect more with a $60 price tag (as opposed to cheaper DLC) – particularly because there was certainly room for notable improvement (even from a creative standpoint, like completely new alternative classes). I did not find the “grind” too enjoyable. The monotony of easily slaying abysmal A.I. became a killjoy, especially after completing the story missions. Though the recent raid was fun, it came a bit late, and was not nearly a good enough payoff for the hours it took plowing through the same public events whilst praying to the RNGod’s for something beneficial. The threat of boredom is tenfold to solo players. The writing, from the plot to the dialogue, was unoriginal, tacky, and meek. I would assume most are content that there is at least an attempt at a story in Destiny 2 since there was an obvious lack of one in the first, but that doesn’t excuse how meager it is— being relatively better (story wise) does not inherently make it good. I’ve read plenty of free fan stories and theories discussing the Destiny universe that were leagues better than the oversimplified clichéd nothingness we paid for. Narrow F.O.V. 30 FPS. (Console capabilities really do hurt the potential experience in this regard). Various bugs (i.e. invisible enemies/players)/glitches/crashes. Aesthetically, endgame characters never really looked as “cool” as I wanted them to (nor as they probably could be) even with the shaders. I often felt various enemies looked much better than I ever could. Microtransactions/Consumable shaders. Greedy, unnecessary, and ultimately makes some consumers feel skeptical of being treated wallet-friendly by Bungie/Activision in the future. Story was much too short (took me 4.5/5ish hours casually). I’m expecting expensive DLC to satisfy that shortcoming. I would’ve liked to have experienced a newer and wider assortment of enemies/bosses. On PVP: some gun balancing issues, p2p is suboptimal, I’m not sure why 6v6 had to be dropped (even as an option) entirely, and arenas could be enhanced artistically (perhaps even redesigned for better combat flow). Conclusion: I was absolutely looking forward to purchasing this game on PC (despite my better judgment). Now I could care less, the console copy is enough.

The single player campaign is much too short, poorly voice acted, and horribly written. However, the combat was fluid and some of the cinematics were brutally splendid. Matchmaking is inconsistent and buggy. Peer to peer is certainly less preferable than dedicated servers. Character balancing is still an issue. Some are just too relatively weak [at the time of writing this] (Lawbringer) and others a tad too strong (Warden/Valkyrie). I wouldn’t consider any particular character to be outright broken, but tweaks to them here and there (general damage buffs/reductions, making minor changes to combos) might help balance the playing field for the better. I think I might enjoy an occasionally larger map in modes like Dominion. Worthwhile combat filler (perhaps boss spawns that drop unique weapons) could help bigger map sizes feel less empty (considering killing small foot soldiers is, in my opinion, fairly unsatisfying). The camera can behave awkwardly at times (notable when fighting multiple enemies at once). Insta-death environmental kills often don’t look or feel cool and are an unnecessarily cheesy (and pseudo- exploitable) combat tactic. I might not mind them so much if there were fewer maps that had large portions specifically tailored to them. In the current design, the ability to flee (especially in Elimination mode) is a bit of a problem. An entire team of four chasing after a single enemy continuously sprinting to various buffs in a futile attempt to revive their only non-executed comrade only to get cornered and die 2 minutes later simply feels like a waste of time. Strategically guarding bodies or stealthily reviving a teammate for an epic comeback is one thing, but that window of opportunity should be lowered in my opinion. The A.I. is all too frequently laughably useless. The U.I. (particularly in the menus) is a bit visually eclectic. The sounds, and in particular the soundtrack (i.e. the constant tribal drumbeat), are a bit underwhelming. Echoing battle cries, epic death screams, minion grunts, and the ambient sound of war could be amped up. Graphics are solid with minor fps hiccups here and there, though nothing too captivating aesthetically. Character customization is sweet (though a few other fighting games go even more in-depth in that regard). Not a fan of the “steel” micro transaction system (chiefly considering gear stats). There is a decently high skill ceiling already (which is absolutely fantastic), and it strongly determines the outcome of a match. However, it is still a bit lower compared to many other popular fighting games. For all intents and purposes, this game plays like a fighting game within a relatively larger arena alongside trivial background noise (i.e. borderline meaningless infantry battles). Allowing for players to gang up on one another is intended to be balanced by the “revenge” mechanic (and pulling out a win as the underdog in those situations feels great), but that and the fairly unique combat system itself are not quite compelling enough features to really make this game stand out overall compared to other mainstream fighting games. In fact, compared to those games, the lack of maps, modes, unique aesthetic, and characters makes me wonder if the bits that are supposed to make this game exceptional are really worth the AAA price. Coupled with the issues I noted earlier, they just aren’t enough (unless someone is a real diehard fan of both fighting and medieval games). I do think this game has potential to be good, but, as of right now, not much else.

I’m not entirely sure what the foresight was with regards to steadily incentivizing exploration- or even if there was one. With no real story, borderline nonexistent multiplayer, and a baffling lack of player implemented creativity (i.e. structures/bases, ship designs, and character designs) I found myself struggling to maintain the willpower to discover. Even though a bit of my journey was exciting and immersive in and of itself, my entertainment was exceptionally temporary as the looming realization of stagnant progress encroached evermore on my fleeting happiness. Further still: -There are several mechanical bugs/glitches, render distance/pop-in issues, texture and clipping bugs, screen tearing, frame drops, UI and AI problems, and audio glitches -Frequent game crashes -Game saves can occasionally fail to load/do not load properly -Unstable 30fps -Simple RNG, even at the beginning, weighs too heavily on game difficulty (balancing issues) -Cannot change (a remarkably zoomed) FOV, and options in general are fairly limited -Text “puzzles” are excessively easy - Inventory space is bizarrely small (and ease of management could be improved) -Combat (in space and on the ground) is exceedingly awkward- as are the controls in general -Planet, alien race/monster, structure, and ship designs too quickly exhibit their “copy and paste” similarities (perhaps inspect/change how planets in proximity are generated or add further biomes/textures/structures/races, etc.) -Proper trading (with price forecasting per location) is contradicted by procedural generation (which further conflicts with inventory management) -Interactions with aliens is simple, repetitive, and often completely trivial -Indications of player taking any damage too closely resembles typical indications of player taking fatal damage -Weather phenomenon is sometimes an underwhelming spectacle - And many, many more issues I personally would not value the game at $60, even with the proposal of future updates (most notably base building). I would recommend waiting until the price drops (by at least 50%), and several patches iron out the more detrimental bugs. To really determine whether or not my criticisms would be sufficiently reflected in others, however, I’d encourage one to watch streams or pure gameplay footage (as opposed to tailored marketing videos/trailers). Surely, I would expect some to find this experience much more enjoyable and valuable than I have. (Written after 18-19 hours of gameplay)

The Witness markets itself on being, at least somewhat, a stereotypical Brainiac’s game. It seemed tailored to meet a debatably naïve and rather pretentious misconception of intellect, though even in that delusion I thought it to be lacking. Apparently it takes several easy ten second puzzles to convey rules that could be derived from one mildly challenging puzzle, which I think was either an implementation arising after speculating it’s audience's assessment capabilities and measuring their enjoyment accordingly, or filler. For me, it was failure either way. If the puzzles were intended to be rewarding in and of themselves, or if they were to spark my curiosity, then a good portion of them needed to be much more challenging (i.e. cut out the redundancy). On the other hand, some of the more “challenging” puzzles were only tedious- and did not require any pragmatic definition of the term “critical thinking” to be solved. That said-- there were a few puzzles (mainly near the end) that I did enjoy and which also felt interactive enough to justify its placement within a virtual world as opposed to belonging in an amateur made puzzle book. Difficulty levels might have addressed some of my dissatisfaction with this. Aside from the graphics, this game was unexceptional as “art.” Ignoring the necessary discussion at properly identifying my interpretation of the term “art” because that dives deep within the whirlwind of philosophy of aesthetics- I will note briefly that the game had no music (which I think it desperately needed), poor voice acting, and both the dialogue and story was dripping in purple prose. It was the kind of thinking conveyed from the cliché art student poorly illustrated in your general cheap comedies (i.e. like wearing a GoPro and pretending to do strange things). Though I don’t think the game took itself that seriously, mocking those typecasts hardly makes for an engaging story. Overall- the game had pretty graphics, and a few of the interactive puzzles were genuinely fun. Aside from that a good portion of puzzles were redundant (refinement problems), a few others were unnecessarily tedious (interactive problems), and the story was rather shabby. I’d wait for the price to drop on this one, even if you are a bit of a **** for puzzles.

In all installments of Guitar Hero, the music set list has always baffled me to some extent, though with Guitar Hero Live I’m undoubtedly feeling mocked (as if a plastic toy guitar wasn’t goofy enough). Skrillexs’ “Bangarang” and Eminem’s “Berzerk?” Relative to all other possible songs, why choose an outlier so dissimilar and distinct from those that offer a more “relevant” Guitar Hero experience? Perhaps still unused but classic, guitar focused songs are intentionally left out for micro-transaction purposes, or maybe these were selected based off a misconception of consumer taste (or what I hope is a misconception). I understand that something as subjective as music taste will inevitably raise my brow for some song choices, but does that ambiguity really mean there isn’t some pragmatic line to be drawn, especially given the near unfathomably large(and yet still growing) pool of music that illustrate the guitar much more prominently? There are certainly some calibration issues. I eventually became acclimated to the delay, but the system that “automatically corrects” latency and the like created more of a headache than help. The “Play” micro-transaction system is, well, concerning to say the least. You no longer permanently unlock DLC songs, you use a type of currency (which you can get more of by grinding or using real $$) to “play” them a select amount of times. Wondering whether a “Play” of a song is worth grind time felt revolting. Some may feel indifferent, but I hated it. Compared to how Rock Band 4 implemented their past DLC and, well, yeah… this method seems much worse. In the past, I often perceived DLC songs to be a bit overpriced, though it always seemed like a vague evaluation—but I certainly don’t have the faintest of ideas as to properly valuing a singular “Play” of a song. Also, pre-order song bonuses is, and will continue to be, disgusting. No real practice mode. Not a huge detriment since I usually played by trial and error, but still absent. GHTV 24/7 music playlist is neat. Channels play a variety of different music (including several familiar GH tracks) non-stop and allow you to jump in at your discretion. It desperately needs more music and channels, but it’s an interesting idea. The whole “Live” background thing was cringe, awkwardly disingenuous, and unnecessary. That said, I thought it was sort of hilarious and I kind of liked it for that reason. I don’t necessarily prefer it, but at least it was refreshingly different. New guitar was “Meh.” Not all that bad, but certainly not all that innovative. Re-instilled some difficulty which curtailed some interest, but only briefly. I would have been just as content with the old guitar to be honest. If you played on expert in the previous GH games like I have, I’m inclined to think you will be also be able to start on the highest difficulty and do fine (with some learning of new chords). Online multiplayer is score only (real-time and leaderboards). Not so different, but I appreciated the older matchmaking a bit better. Overall, GH Live is a presently mediocre game which has the potential to get better (increased GHTV channels and library), but not currently worth its price. Simply “throw away” any ideas of purchasing this game, as Activision Jackson so keenly recognizes as part of our modern societal nature- or at least until the growing pains have finished. Unless you actually like the music set list!! Then go get your ears checked...

Conceptual, and at this point conventional, parts (Matrix meets Bioshock meets Alien Isolation) are combined into a melting pot, warmed to varying degrees, and served as a dish that is aromatically familiar yet still tastes fresh and appetizing. Yes, I am hungry. Unoriginality isn’t something I generally critique in and of itself- but I couldn’t help but feel a bit unsatisfied that Soma’s story consisted, dare I say fairly largely, as a composite of “key themes” from many other stories, theories, or just widely popularized ideas spread throughout all kinds of media. Simply put, there are a plethora of conditions that usually help filter my mental process of discerning whether or not a story is too cliché and I expect they are not identical to, and also vary from person to person. So I doubt it is the games fault that I found its plot to be, well, a tad unimaginative (seeing as my imagination has already considered simulation theory, Bernard Williams’ “The Self and The Future,” I Robot, the Matrix trilogy, works of Descartes, etc.) For me, I thought that the (actually poor) questions of personal identity composed too much of the “main story line” whereas the more unique (as I see it) bits- like WAU’s monsters, were left on the backburner when they deserved the limelight. So, the entertainment value of this game was undermined, only partly, by my perception (however misconceived) of this… Aesthetically, I found the atmospheric environment to be quite enjoyable, though also not so innovative, certainly engrossing. The monster animations needed some work- I caught them a few times moonwalking around. Sounds seemed solid, voice acting was at least decent, and dialogue was written in a way that seemed genuine or appropriate considering the fluctuating circumstances. Graphics, in general, were fairly par- though there were certainly some frame drops here and there. Gameplay had its thrilling moments (though less than what I desired), however, and this is my biggest critique of the game, the puzzles were MUCH TOO EASY. They were indubitably laughable. Perhaps the underwhelming horror aspect highlighted their over simplicity, but either way, awful. Everything else seems nitpicky compared to this particular criticism. Fairly good game by Frictional, nonetheless (especially if you find the story to be unique or interesting)..

This game is so outstandingly atrocious that appealing to the willful ignorance of the most adamant of Godzilla fans is like asking your best friend to forget about that one time you brutally murdered everyone they ever loved. Godzilla is more than just a failure in nearly every feasible facet of game design—it’s the denotation of apathy greedily overpriced and shaped into a giant middle finger traitorously served to those inclined to love it most. Forgiving this monstrosity would require both the willpower of Leonidas and obliviousness of Bill O’Reilly.

As with any f2p game, whether it is properly identified as “pay 2 win” is often a primary concern to a potential newcomer. Though I do think this game is more readily identifiable as “pay 2 win” than not, I’ll elaborate a bit on what p2w means to me to both justify, and better accommodate critics, of my view. However, I do not think being moderately p2w is Planetside 2’s biggest problem… To me, the phrase “pay 2 win” describes a system, typically within free-to-play games, that encourages players to purchase relative “advantages” by not making them “reasonably accessible” without paying. In this case: guns, abilities/perks, upgrades, vehicle parts, weapon attachments, etc. F2p games operate a bit awkwardly in that they often search for a certain sweet spot where determining the strength of the “advantage” and what constitutes as “reasonably accessible” are both as ambiguous as necessary to render the most revenue. They want to make the player feel as though their money wasn’t wasted on a crappy new gun, but they don’t want lower-geared players to feel helpless. They also want to reward long term player commitment and make progression towards upgrades seem reachable, but not so close to the player’s grasp that enough of them will feel satisfied without ever paying a dime. It is also important to note that the changing, subjective vagueness people may have with regards to identifying what is either an “advantage” or “reasonably accessible” entails constant forecasting and rebalancing in order to soothe such a temperamental economy and mold it in the most profitable favor. Whether it’s operating as a medic during a stalemate, playing a topnotch infiltrator, or just accumulating a massive amount of kills- from my experience, certification points are certainly acquirable and pseudo-farmable (I can make over 1000 certs on a good, fairly long day). But, relative to the cost of much of the equipment (and the advantages they bring), specifically for vehicles, Planetside 2 surely plays more on the grindy side. For new players, I generally think it is a bit too much. Ceteris paribus, certain weapon upgrades for infantry and vehicles alike are too relatively advantageous to those without, and they are accessible, but I have my doubts as to “reasonably” so (10+ hours a day, with great effort and experience often yields less than 1000 certs). As such, Planetside 2’s monetary system is at least moderately describable as P2W, in my honest opinion. This, though, is not my chief concern with the game… Planetside 2 is littered with an overwhelming amount of high impact/game breaking bugs, glitches, and occasional connectivity issues: overly intrusive outdoor/indoor(?) sun glare, audio bugs, distance render glitches, clipping underground/through walls, continual insta-killed at Sunderer spawn, fire-rate glitches, rubber-banding combined with enemies suddenly appearing, unable to respawn glitch, constant red hit locator on screen bug, out-of-bounds when inbounds bug, unable to respawn bug, vehicle will not deploy bug, no shield/shield will not recharge bug, cannot redeploy bug, cannot accept revive bug, cannot refill ammo bug, cannot change fire mode on primary infantry weapon glitch, and the list goes on and on and on and on- these are merely the ones I’ve had and remember, mind you. I understand that the game is in beta, and that it’s a HUGE mmo, but these glitches almost always ruin my experience when they occur (and they occur far too often). Also, the “spot” system is still a bit shoddy, if I die with my secondary out I do not want to spawn with it out, bullet spread could be a bit tighter for nearly all weapons, several animations could be improved, friendly fire should just be off, player profile (particularly for headshots) could use a tad of work, better spawn protection would be appreciated, and a **** ton of other personally picky things that tantamount into frustration all need “fixing.” Battles are big, however. For an fps mmo on the ps4, they are **** GARGANTUAN. Like 12v12 tanks with 5v5 air vehicles and 50 v 50 infantry is consistently found nearly, I don’t know, everywhere! It felt genuinely fun and unique (for the ps4) to take part in experiences I thought I could only have on my PC (though, albeit, I much prefer playing the PC version). Still, weak core gunplay (little strafe/dodge mechanics outside of hip-fire/jet-packing) and an overwhelming amount of glitches/bugs make this game borderline unplayable for me (though hopefully they are temporary issues). Without the bugs, the game would be at least a 7 (not much higher because I do not care for the mediocre gunplay). As is, it is initially impressive on scale- but, rarely have I ever felt a more appropriate time to echo the grandpaian proverb “quantity (even of this magnitude) certainly does not equal quality,” than when discussing this game. If you are asking people to spend money on your game then FIX THE DAMN BUGS! Slapping the word “beta” onto the title will not protect you forever!

-Predetermined load-outs worsen the player’s odds of getting the specific class setup they desire (particularly irksome relative to the possibility of tying full/some customization access with the credit system). Ultimately, if a class is relatively unbalanced- word usually gets out, and players tend to abuse it (regardless if it was developer or player made). -high pricing issues (especially concerning boosters) -visuals (like some gun models, map textures, and animations) could be improved. -I wonder what game requirements need to be met in order for it to be classified as “competitive” (as this one is occasionally advertised as being). Pragmatically speaking, within the realm of other multiplayer FPS games considered by most of the gamming community as “competitive,” this felt moderately easy and a tad ****. -Various bugs, glitches -Region lock issues ** Dirty Bomb certainly seemed decent. Sadly, I think there are many other first-person shooters that arguably capture the “important” aspects of Dirty Bomb and implicate them a bit better (be it large maps

-music will likely be unappreciated by those that dislike dubstep. -levels, aside from bonus levels, are consistently basic, repetitive. and unenticing. -some earlier levels seemed harder than later levels (i.e. awkward difficulty transitions/designs). -controls are not immediately intuitive. -aside from the ship's neon color trail and boost animation, the general visual aesthetic seemed amateur and empty. -some distance rendering and clipping issues. **I think this game would have greatly benefited from a level editor/designer. Similarly, a multiplayer addition would make up for the fairly lacking singleplayer experience. Overall, a mediocre contemporary take on Uridium.

- Generally, pending on player skill, most entertaining engagements are too frequently episodic which is particularly problematic b/c there is not much worthwhile combat filler during chase downtime. To me, finding the sweet spot b/w consistent action (in varying degrees) and fulfilling the objective was largely missed in most game modes. - Too many maps felt excessively familiar. Traversing oppressive, monochromatic chasms grew tiresome. - Various bugs, glitches, and connectivity issues. - A.I. aptitude is sub par - Warranted public odium concerning microtransactions - After new game awe dissipated, gameplay overall felt repetitive and mundane. - Graphics are mediocre ** From my perspective the game lacked generic competitive fps depth to satisfy me, and although there were certainly fun moments, I'm hard pressed to agree the accumulative day one price is justified for such an unexceptional, multiplayer focused game.

This game is the wet dream of an adolescent anime addict partly obsessed with fight scenes from the Matrix. The story was fished from a puddle left by a single raindrop. The dialog was as tasteless as the cheap takeout bag in which it was delivered (not that I've ever tried to eat that). The gamework was assigned by a spiteful mechanic maniacally laughing as you drudge through QTE's. Unless, maybe the game was a melodramatic comedy??? In which case... ha....

On Multiplayer *Da Bad* - Spawn system often works against consistent playability, and does not seem to coincide well with quick, dynamic gameplay. - Most, if not all maps encourage a kind of frantic, overwhelming randomness to combat flow. Variety in map design (such as limiting flanking routes, fortifying objective points, or forcing face to face confrontation) would help decrease paranoia and player vulnerability. On the other hand, a map or two that capitalizes a bit more on “verticality” might make jump boosting feel less gimmicky and more essential overall. - Gun balancing issues (some guns are blatantly too circumstantial to be practical). - The loot reward system is ultimately an uninspired attempt at gamer crack. - Melee feels notably awkward a bit too frequently. - Audio is nothing special (headsets do seem a bit less advantageous than they were in previous COD’s). - Graphics are nothing special - Game mechanics are nothing special - Various connectivity issues as well as a few glitches/bugs. *Da Good(ish)* - The jump boosting mechanic and a few other design choices (in part) attempt to dissolve what is otherwise a widely reinforced idea (to some degree), that the COD series (after 4) is generally camper friendly, and requires little to no “skill” to play relatively well. Though I think the attempt is a step in the right direction (a wee little baby step), Sledge still has much further to go if they wish to reinstate the competitive nature of MW while maintaining innovation- and by now, many people are losing hope, if they haven’t lost it all already. On campaign - Too short, cinematic, generally decent.