Dice did have that 2143 Easter Egg in the Back to Karkand pack on the side of a random building. Sadly Dice never said anything about it and it seems to just be a clever hidden item to mess with fans.
But man that would be a cool smaller game for them to release as a handful of maps as a XBLA download. I don't think that spin-off was a big success for them in memory serves me for them to make it a full retail game.
Cool concept, but as of yet, terrible execution. The original Black Ops only had bad explosions, but 2 seems to have bad, well, everything. I just hope that this is beta footage and not the real deal, because I actually welcome a change in pace with the CoD franchise.
I also hope they make their damned map packs an actually reasonable price--no way in hell am I paying fifteen bucks for maps that usually suck anyway
What are the chances Microsoft or Sony will allow that in our lifetime? I don't mind paying for maps if they're high quality (Looking at the Halo map packs, or the Gears packs.), but I've generally avoided CoD map packs like the plague ever since I made the terrible mistake of buying the Stimulus Package. Worst. maps. ever. Of all time.
I recently discovered that out of all three of the FPS games, Call of Duty is doing the worst. The order is Battlefield, Halo, then Call of Duty. I was really surprised because I enjoy this game and thought a lot of people played it. Apparently not enough people play Call of Duty.
As somebody that doesn't normally call themselves a fan of the "Call Of Duty" series. I think this next one has some promise, it looks like the Treyarch team is really trying to do something different. And the "Strike-Team" feature sounds pretty cool, but than again it could fail horribly
I don't understand why everyone is judging the entire game on the campaign trailer. Most of the people I know have all the Call of Duty games, play them everyday, but have never attempted to start the campaign. They told me they don't want to play multiplayer online because of the campaign trailer. I think it looks good.
Getting a new Call of Duty game for the multiplayer is worthless because it will be EXACTLY the same as the past three Call of Duty games. You're spending $60 for nothing. You're flushing it down a toilet.
When I first was the trailer for BO2 I was pretty sceptical. But credit where credit is due, they've done something different, like when COD 4 came out. The modern setting was different from what they had done previously, so at least it's not more of the exact same stuff as before.
I know. Thats why I only have one Call of Duty game. A friend of mine told me that out of all the FPS games, COD is doing the worst. This doesn't surprise me. That is why there is a Black Ops 2, because the first one did extremely well. I won't be surprised if the franchise stops after this game.
*levels look a lot more open than normal *Very few "Press X to not die" kind of moments. That's good. *I'm digging that super-piercing rifle. Although that seems like it'd be vastly OP in MP. *Dat aerial battle. *Can anyone pinpoint who's playing D. Mason? My mind was screaming Troy Baker, but I'm not 100% sure. If it is, he sure has been in a lot this past year and coming up (Saints 3, ME3, this, and Bioshock Infinite.) *I will now forever picture myself liberating LA from Machinageddon buddied up with Merle Dixon from the Walking Dead. Is there anything Michael Rooker can't bring an air of gravitas (or offensive hilarity) to?
Yeah, no, I'm not gonna get this one. I really didn't like Black ops. The gameplay was annoying and I really didn't like the story. I would always describe it as a Call of Duty story for a made for the SyFy channel. And they're all running together. If I complain about people buying yearly sports remakes, I'm gonna stop buying yearly Call of Duty rehashes.