Call of Duty: Ghosts Reviews
When the story is this abysmal and the multiplayer is this stagnant, there's really no reason to buy what basically amounts to a $60 multiplayer map pack, even if it does come with fifteen maps.
So, while the game looks the best Call of Duty ever has, it also carries too many flaws to make it a must-have title for next-gen console owners, or casual Call of Duty fans for that matter. Die-hards will still log countless hours, but long-time detractors will finally have new ground from which to criticize the franchise.
Call of Duty is a series that's getting stagnant. This latest edition is a solid shooter, with highly tuned mechanics, an addictive multiplayer offering, and a plethora of content to play through – but it very much feels like a familiar game with a few minor adjustments. The new Extinction mode is particularly good, but it's the highlight in a title that's following a tired recipe. Fans of the series will enjoy Call of Duty: Ghosts regardless, but those of you looking for something new will have to dig out those night vision goggles and search elsewhere.
Call of Duty: Ghosts will be remembered for many things, but few in the ways that it had hoped. It's a rare stumble for one of gaming's most consistently entertaining franchises, showing a lack of focus and confidence in itself.
There's far too much focus on the family dynamic in Ghosts, with the theatrics laid on thick from the get-go, and with the strained relationship between Elias and his children acting as an unstable anchor for the remainder of the story.
Call Of Duty: Ghosts is a surprisingly tough sell on current-gen consoles, and wastes the opportunity to push the franchise forward in any meaningful way. Though still a solidly-built shooter that offers the kitchen sink, the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions lack players and features compared to both the next-gen editions, PC and even - most damningly of all - Black Ops II.
Call of Duty: Ghosts is everything that Call of Duty titles have been in the past: fast-paced action and the usual competitive multiplayer with a few twists thrown in. Single-player is interesting to a point, if a little too short this time around, multiplayer will keep players coming back for more, but does little to push the series forwards, and Extinction is a nice little distraction but nowhere near as fleshed out as it could be. For anyone thinking of getting the PC version, though, knock the score down to 4/10 as in good faith it certainly cannot be recommended until it's fixed. Right now it is plagued with performance issues that would make many consumers' heads ache and even the most average system die a death. At current it feels like only 1/3rd of the game is playable and that isn't good value for money.
The 'Call of Duty' franchise is firmly entrenched in a rut, and attempting to find fresh aspects requires a fine-tooth comb. While it can be remarkable to find where some creativity has shown through, it's difficult to escape one conclusion. All of the development might and resources that is poured into each new version reflects a group of highly-skilled, creatively hampered individuals who spend two years at a time playing with dials and adjusting statistics in order to justify delivering the same game over and over again. At $60 a pop, the distinction in a subtitle, like going from 'Modern Warfare' to 'Ghosts' for the non-Call of Duty Elite means just one thing: this one starts with a 'G'. Multiplayer changes are clinical and direct, encouraging the hardest of the hardcore to play hard and score mad kills on all the noobs, while the word newcomer has no place in such an uninviting place. The classic recipe still works. It's still enthralling in spurts, but seems as unchanging as any past glory. The single player retains its status as placeholder trailer-maker, while Extinction is a gem buried under bulletin points that could have come from any of the recent 'Call of Duty' installments.
Call of Duty: Ghosts isn't a terrible game. It just happens to be a small, yearly released cog in a franchise that continues to resist innovation at every turn. Coming back to this title after playing Modern Warfare 2 in 2009, I should have been overwhelmed by a multitude of exciting new changes. Instead I was hit with the realization that I hadn't missed a thing.
"Call of Duty: Ghosts" embodies every lazy trope of which the franchise has ever been accused.
...an unfortunately lacking game.
An utterly horrible PC port mars an otherwise very, very average Call of Duty game. Nothing to see here.
Call of Duty: Ghosts offers very few reasons for all but the most obsessed fans to take a look. Most of the time it revels in being mediocre and cowardly by the numbers rather than outright terrible, though there are moments where it manages to be both. If this isn't a wake up call, showing once and for all that churning out more or less the same stuff year after year only serves to dilute the quality of a franchise, then I don't know what is. It's completely shameless, and it's undoubtedly going to sell phenomenally well.
In the end Ghosts is indeed another Call of Duty game, but one of the weaker releases over the past few years. The new multiplayer modes are exciting, but they are bogged down by the low quality maps. If you just need a game to scratch your FPS itch, Ghosts will tide you over till another Call of Duty comes out, but if you are looking for a shooter that is surprising and profound, you are better off passing on Ghosts.
The single player attempts to be bombastic, but will leave you feeling cold. The multiplayer is signature COD, but we're waiting until public servers are up to make a judgement.
It'll make another billion dollars, and they're already making the next one that will be exactly the same, and the incredible potential will yet again consume its own fetid tail. The circlejerk of life.
There's no point in detailing Ghosts' plot because Infinity Ward didn't put much work into writing it.