The lights are on
OK, the multi-player experience is very well done and enjoyable, but for me a game is only as good as its campaign. In the case of Call of Duty : Black Ops, I feel I did not receive the value for my dollar. Any time I can barrel through a game in less then four hours on Hard, I will immediately say why did I not just rent this game? Sure the graphics are amazing, sure the action sequences are brilliant but exaggerated, but again at the end of the day if I beat it too quickly I don't see the point of paying top dollar for it. If it was not for the multi-player, this would be a one play through kind of game, then immediately run back to the store while its still worth something.
For me, iin a warfare style game I want a more realistic gaming experience where the game play is challenging and the characters are more believable and involving, because of this I would rather play Medal of Honor with the obvious step down in graphics but a far superior gaming experience. However, if I want to play a game with a solid story line on the slightly cheesy side with a great multi-player experience, I think Bad Company 2 was a superior game. I know this game has a loyal following, but so does Brittney Spears, and in a way they both have a lot in common. Lots of shiny glitter to pull you in, with a mob following of fans unwilling to be critical of their idol on the stage and both feel geared toward the teen craze. When I play top dollar for a game, I don't want to feel like I am swimming in the shallow warm waters of your local baby pool, I expect a little bit more depth.
well said. i agree completely