Is CoD: Ghosts worth the money?

[The Eternal]

To me, this is not a fantastic game by any means, and I'm not here to talk about how great it is or how bad it is. I'm here to simply make some points and see if I think if it was worth my money.

Short answer: Yes, I believe it is worth my money.

Why?

- Is this the best game ever? Definitely not in my eyes.

- Is this the best call of duty made? In my opinion, and probably most peoples', no.

- Does this game run (if you meet the system requirements)? For most people, yes.

- Does this game run well? For most people, no.

Almost all of the questions above seem to have negative answers. So why is it worth my money?
Typically I like to get at least 1 hour of playtime for every $1 I spend on a game. I spent $45 on this game through a special gamestop had (25% off download games). That means I should get at least 45 hours of gameplay for it to be worth my money. Through the campaign, extinction, and multiplayer (not including squads because to me, that's in the same category as multiplayer), I can easily get 45 hours of out this game. If I spent $60, I have no doubt I would be able to get 60 hours of out this game either.

Overall I think the game feels like a traditional CoD game. Yes, there are changes, and yes it is more innovative than previous CoDs, but it still has a similar feel to it. Even though the game has its problems, I still have fun playing with it. I have almost 30 hours put into the game already, and I've barely touched extinction or campaign.

I can understand if you just don't like the game, but for everyone coming on here complaining about things like "It has worse graphics than BF4" or "The maps are smaller than BF4" or even "The maps aren't as destrictible as BF4", I have no sympathy. What did you expect? It's CoD, not Battlefield. Each game is going to keep its general gameplay, and that won't change much. As a CoD player since CoD4, I feel that this game is about what I expected it to be (gameplay wise) as a tradtional Call of Duty.


TL;DR:

This game has many problems, most of which seem to be quality and performance issues, such a texture glitches, framerate drops, etc. These do need to be fixed immediately. However, I believe Ghosts is worth my money because it is fun (if you liked previous Call of Duty games) and has a high replayability (essentially how much time I'll be able to put into the game).

[DETERMINOLOGY]

引用自 The Eternal：

To me, this is not a fantastic game by any means, and I'm not here to talk about how great it is or how bad it is. I'm here to simply make some points and see if I think if it was worth my money.

Short answer: Yes, I believe it is worth my money.

Why?

- Is this the best game ever? Definitely not in my eyes.

- Is this the best call of duty made? In my opinion, and probably most peoples', no.

- Does this game run (if you meet the system requirements)? For most people, yes.

- Does this game run well? For most people, no.

Almost all of the questions above seem to have negative answers. So why is it worth my money?
Typically I like to get at least 1 hour of playtime for every $1 I spend on a game. I spent $45 on this game through a special gamestop had (25% off download games). That means I should get at least 45 hours of gameplay for it to be worth my money. Through the campaign, extinction, and multiplayer (not including squads because to me, that's in the same category as multiplayer), I can easily get 45 hours of out this game. If I spent $60, I have no doubt I would be able to get 60 hours of out this game either.

Overall I think the game feels like a traditional CoD game. Yes, there are changes, and yes it is more innovative than previous CoDs, but it still has a similar feel to it. Even though the game has its problems, I still have fun playing with it. I have almost 30 hours put into the game already, and I've barely touched extinction or campaign.

I can understand if you just don't like the game, but for everyone coming on here complaining about things like "It has worse graphics than BF4" or "The maps are smaller than BF4" or even "The maps aren't as destrictible as BF4", I have no sympathy. What did you expect? It's CoD, not Battlefield. Each game is going to keep its general gameplay, and that won't change much. As a CoD player since CoD4, I feel that this game is about what I expected it to be (gameplay wise) as a tradtional Call of Duty.


TL;DR:

This game has many problems, most of which seem to be quality and performance issues, such a texture glitches, framerate drops, etc. These do need to be fixed immediately. However, I believe Ghosts is worth my money because it is fun (if you liked previous Call of Duty games) and has a high replayability (essentially how much time I'll be able to put into the game).

You should really wait untill the game is patched before buying unless you wanna have buyers remorse which i find alot of people dont mind it on here

[Ironfire]

Was refunded by steam, thank god

[ZƐZZƐX]

It amazes me how many people visit a forum for a game they dont own, dont like or dont care about. People need to get a life. If i visited forums for every game i didn't like i wouldn't have any free time to play the games I do like.

[Tox Laximus]

Wait for a couple of months and pick it up cheap on retail when its fixed.

[Wok-Ur-Katt]

COD game cheap a few monts after release. Give me some of what you are smoking 8-)

[Tox Laximus]

LOL, try amazon I bet it will be half price in 2 months, all bugged out game are.

[gscualo]

引用自 The Eternal：

As a CoD player since CoD4, I feel that this game is about what I expected it to be (gameplay wise) as a tradtional Call of Duty.

That's it! This is what we're looking: CoD must be CoD in every edition. We're expecting improves but always the CoD gamestyle itself all the way long.

[Puppyslinger]

50gig install? For what? Deffinatly not compressed Textures or anything video worthy
Dated game, BF3, Hell even Bad Company has better graphics this this.
Kill Streaks are utterly boring, if not useless, 45fps While staring at a ♥♥♥♥ty textured wall is unaceptable. The System req on this game are double what they should be. Multiplayer is a horrble hack infested mess, Reminds me of Early halo/Ghost recon with no VAC. The options for audio are a joke to say the least. No FOV slider horrible mistake Why even put an option for "extra" when it still looks like garbage! All in all i will say i give this game a 2/10 the 2 for Single player.

Patches wont fix the fact that we paid for a 3rd gen game, it wont fix the fact that the game looks aweful and we will never know what took 50gig to install. You can call this "the Best" but to be brutaly honest, Black ops 2 is 100x more enjoyable and looks so much nicer over all.

[gscualo]

引用自 Tox Laximus：

LOL, try amazon I bet it will be half price in 2 months, all bugged out game are.

Usually they keep CoD series very expensive, so you'll be very lucky if you can buy 10-15 dollars less a year later from now.

[Tox Laximus]

引用自 Puppyslinger：

50gig install? For what? Deffinatly not compressed Textures or anything video worthy
Dated game, BF3, Hell even Bad Company has better graphics this this.
Kill Streaks are utterly boring, if not useless, 45fps While staring at a ♥♥♥♥ty textured wall is unaceptable. The System req on this game are double what they should be. Multiplayer is a horrble hack infested mess, Reminds me of Early halo/Ghost recon with no VAC. The options for audio are a joke to say the least. No FOV slider horrible mistake Why even put an option for "extra" when it still looks like garbage! All in all i will say i give this game a 2/10 the 2 for Single player.

Patches wont fix the fact that we paid for a 3rd gen game, it wont fix the fact that the game looks aweful and we will never know what took 50gig to install. You can call this "the Best" but to be brutaly honest, Black ops 2 is 100x more enjoyable and looks so much nicer over all.

Single player....

.pak files (sounds, models and textures) 20.6 GB
.ff (SP maps?) 6.4GB
.bik files (video) 1.62GB
.exe (game code) 10.9MB

[Alvega]

I already have 43 hours multiplayer + 9 hours single, and i'm just starting. Of course the game is much different from other COD games. I can understand why many complain, because now they can't run like fools through the maps like before (specially in HC) because they die easily, and also because many are pissed off because their computer can't run the game. For those with good computers, the game is awesome (despite some bugs that i'm sure will get fixed). Also, there are not many cheaters (i don't call them hackers) as in the other COD games. i just saw one aimbot yet. And also, the bots AI is MUCH better than before, now they almost play like humans. And the Squad mode is amazing. and the graphics are much better that other COD games. As some say, those complaining here are the kids that can't be Rambos like before, the cheaters who can't hack like before and those who can't afford to have a good computer to play the game. The other people (the majority) are playing and don't come here.
So yes, it's worth the money.

P.S. - Forgot the BF fanboys, who come here to complain as if they bought the game, because they have nothing better to do. And for the record, i like BF also, but this is different.

[The Eternal]

引用自 Puppyslinger：

50gig install? For what? Deffinatly not compressed Textures or anything video worthy
Dated game, BF3, Hell even Bad Company has better graphics this this.
Kill Streaks are utterly boring, if not useless, 45fps While staring at a ♥♥♥♥ty textured wall is unaceptable. The System req on this game are double what they should be. Multiplayer is a horrble hack infested mess, Reminds me of Early halo/Ghost recon with no VAC. The options for audio are a joke to say the least. No FOV slider horrible mistake Why even put an option for "extra" when it still looks like garbage! All in all i will say i give this game a 2/10 the 2 for Single player.

Patches wont fix the fact that we paid for a 3rd gen game, it wont fix the fact that the game looks aweful and we will never know what took 50gig to install. You can call this "the Best" but to be brutaly honest, Black ops 2 is 100x more enjoyable and looks so much nicer over all.

Call of Duty is not known for its graphics. If you're searching for a game with amazing graphics, try the Crysis series, because you're looking in the wrong francise. I agree, system requirements are higher than what they should be and the performance I get is much, much worse than what I should, but that doesn't mean the game sucks or isn't worth the money because of it. Like I said, it needs to be fixed, but the game is still easily worth the price.

With about 30 hours in multiplayer, I have yet to see a hacker.

Audio options are a joke, I agree. Why is there only master volume? Beats me.

No FOV slider is pretty stupid as well, but I heard that they're adding thing (don't quote me, just what I heard).

You may think the graphics are terrible, and I agree, they're not super great and many games look better; however, they're definitely an improvement from previous CoD games. If you expected it to look like BF4 or Crysis 3, then that's you're own fault. Personally I don't care too much about graphics. Yeah, they're great when they're amazing, but if I play a game, I do it for the fun gameplay.

[The Eternal]

引用自 Puppyslinger：

50gig install? For what?

By the way, the install is more like 33GB (just checked; ~25GB for MP, ~8GB for SP). 50GB is a bit of an exaggeration.

[Alvega]

The Eternal is right, the game folder has 32GB. The trolls tell lies trying to make people believe them. Go figure.

[Foxtrot]

引用自 The Eternal：

引用自 Puppyslinger：

50gig install? For what? Deffinatly not compressed Textures or anything video worthy
Dated game, BF3, Hell even Bad Company has better graphics this this.
Kill Streaks are utterly boring, if not useless, 45fps While staring at a ♥♥♥♥ty textured wall is unaceptable. The System req on this game are double what they should be. Multiplayer is a horrble hack infested mess, Reminds me of Early halo/Ghost recon with no VAC. The options for audio are a joke to say the least. No FOV slider horrible mistake Why even put an option for "extra" when it still looks like garbage! All in all i will say i give this game a 2/10 the 2 for Single player.

Patches wont fix the fact that we paid for a 3rd gen game, it wont fix the fact that the game looks aweful and we will never know what took 50gig to install. You can call this "the Best" but to be brutaly honest, Black ops 2 is 100x more enjoyable and looks so much nicer over all.

Call of Duty is not known for its graphics. If you're searching for a game with amazing graphics, try the Crysis series, because you're looking in the wrong francise. I agree, system requirements are higher than what they should be and the performance I get is much, much worse than what I should, but that doesn't mean the game sucks or isn't worth the money because of it. Like I said, it needs to be fixed, but the game is still easily worth the price.

With about 30 hours in multiplayer, I have yet to see a hacker.

Audio options are a joke, I agree. Why is there only master volume? Beats me.

No FOV slider is pretty stupid as well, but I heard that they're adding thing (don't quote me, just what I heard).

You may think the graphics are terrible, and I agree, they're not super great and many games look better; however, they're definitely an improvement from previous CoD games. If you expected it to look like BF4 or Crysis 3, then that's you're own fault. Personally I don't care too much about graphics. Yeah, they're great when they're amazing, but if I play a game, I do it for the fun gameplay.

Well said, basicly what you are trying to say is: The Game ain't worth the price tag £39.99 ($60) ?? For that? you must be joking!!! The game is utter garbage, even without the graphics.