Why is it that every time a game that’s aspiring to appeal to COD’s player base, they don’t completely commit to the idea of taking the stuff that the players liked so much about the best Call of Duty’s?
There’s a huge crowd of people that would love to have something like, for example, Black Ops 2 again, a fast-paced arcade shooter with skill-based matchmaking only for ranked and maybe for game modes like search and destroy. So every time a so-called “COD killer” comes around, it kind of offers something similar but doesn’t really commit to the idea, so when people play them and see that it’s not the same, they end up quitting, hence the 2-3 week lifespan most of the time.
Is there a reason they don’t commit to offering the full package? Bright and colorful, visually appealing maps, strong scorestreaks, a similar class creation system (controversial, but imo they should go for something like Pick 10 instead of mw2019 system), no disbanding lobbies, similar movement (to Bo2 and the likes), plenty of good guns instead of having a meta, etc.
Why is it that they can’t do all of that at the same time? Like, is there a limit to how similar they can become to those cods before it enters lawsuit territory? Because if those aren’t the reasons, then I don’t get it. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t innovate or try their own spin on some stuff too, but if they also took all the other stuff with it, then they’d have a huge crowd waiting to play a game that I’m sure wouldn’t die after 2 weeks this time.
View Reddit by Altrot1 – View Source