Call of Duty fans on Reddit are delving into a heated debate over whether ‘Ghosts’ is receiving an excessive amount of criticism compared to its actual quality. Various points are being discussed, from gameplay mechanics to map designs, with opinions on both sides of the spectrum.
Summary
- Opinions on ‘Ghosts’ range from praising its perk system and weapon variety to criticizing its campaign and map designs.
- Some users appreciate the fresh gameplay elements like field orders, while others find the overall experience lackluster.
- The debate highlights the diverse tastes within the Call of Duty community, with conflicting views on the game’s standing in the franchise.
Is ‘Ghosts’ Really that Bad?
Some Reddit users like ‘StoppingPowah’ believe that ‘Ghosts’ is unfairly maligned due to its release timing compared to earlier titles like ‘CoD4’ and ‘Bo2.’ They praise the game’s perk system and weapon options, citing the unique gameplay experience it offered.
Divided Opinions on ‘Ghosts’
However, not all users share the same sentiment. ‘AJ_from_Spaceland’ criticizes the game’s campaign, characters, and multiplayer experience, highlighting issues with map design and unbalanced gameplay elements. This sentiment is echoed by ‘Rabiddd,’ who bluntly states their dislike for the game.
Map Matters
Some users, like ‘jespertherapper,’ question the value of DLC maps in ‘Ghosts,’ suggesting that charging extra for better maps reflects poorly on the base game’s design. This sentiment contrasts with those who find the additional maps a positive aspect of the game.
Community Insights
‘AlohaReddit49’ provides a nuanced perspective, mentioning the game’s flaws regarding map size and class diversity that led to a camp-heavy gameplay style. They bring up the evolving opinions on ‘Ghosts’ over time and its placement within the Call of Duty hierarchy.
The diverse responses to the original question showcase the range of opinions within the community regarding ‘Ghosts’ and its place in the franchise’s history.
