Call of Duty: Ghosts

 PC
User Score
2.3

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 3604 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 474 out of 3604
  2. Mixed: 384 out of 3604
  3. Negative: 2,746 out of 3604
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Grego777
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    The graphics are even worse than the transition from Cod 2 to 3. I am so glad I didn't buy any of the map packs or expansions. This will be the last CoD I ever buy. I mean honestly PayDay 2 has better graphics. I thought it would be cool that you could customize a character and become a woman. I think thats the only improvement this game has made.
  2. iCEadDer
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    Seriously bad is an understatement. But let me explain a little because of this fabulous critique.
    First; MILLIONS OF BUGS Mires where you look Impossible to play for hundreds of failures it has. Forget playing in CrossFire. Do not bother to install the latest drivers for your graphics NOT WORK do not bother spending hours adjusting the settings of the game, NOT WORK do not bother    Seriously bad is an understatement. But let me explain a little because of this fabulous critique.
    First; MILLIONS OF BUGS Mires where you look Impossible to play for hundreds of failures it has. Forget playing in CrossFire. Do not bother to install the latest drivers for your graphics NOT WORK do not bother spending hours adjusting the settings of the game, NOT WORK do not bother spending hours on forums to find some way of playing NOT WORK do not bother to disable programs like FRAPS MSI Afterburner or any other exit Overlay program ITSELF AS THE STEAM.

    In the end, after hours and hours lost I could get to play around a little Campaign and Multi-Player. The truth is that with a few minutes and you have the feeling of playing the CoD MW 3.1. If version 3.1 of Modern Warfare 3 but poorly made More of the same with the same graphics and the same The campaign, Multi-Player, ****.

    Worst of all is that people ACTIVISION has the shamelessness to sell this! An unfinished ALFA smelling a game port of XBOX 360 made ​​reluctantly All whores promises that this would be a major change in the CoD series and more on the PC version has come to nothing. A DECEPTION OF 70, A JOKE HEAVY BAD TASTE .

    WORST IN MANY YEARS! Anybody OS NO HARD ON THIS NOT A SCAM OS OCCURRING OR IS ALPHA BUY THIS GAME LIKE FIVE YEARS AGO THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN A 7/10 BUT YOU TODAY'S DATE HAS TWO A 2/10 AND PROBLEMS WITHOUT MAKING IT WORK FOR.

    Sorry for my very bad English.    … Expand
  3. hastalavistazia
    Nov 8, 2013
    4
    I do not recommend this game to noone. It is just waste of money. As single player is much more collorated then it could be that multi is much worst then other CoD tittles. Game just sucks in reality fighting. You can still be knifed out after sending few bullets to enemys chest
  4. dilligaf_uk
    Nov 8, 2013
    1
    Monumental crap, graphics are terrible but the download was 30Gb, that's like the game coming on 6 DVDs. Not sure what is included in that when the game looks so shocking.

    Best advice, avoid. Things like Metro: Last Light show what PCs are really capable of
  5. Xakep1993
    Nov 8, 2013
    10
    In vain you so ran into COD. If you were going to play on logs (computers) of 2000, wake up already outside 2013
    (Zrja vy tak na COD naehali. Esli vy sobralis' igrat' na brevnah(komp'juterah) 2000 godov, prosnites' uzhe na dvore 2013)
  6. 6un5ling3r
    Nov 8, 2013
    7
    As a franchise, Call of Duty's becoming utterly boring and the more installments Activision has released, the more it ruined it. When I first heard of Ghosts when it was announced, my first impression of it was 'just another modern warfare.' Fortunately, it wasn't. And this time, I believe, Activision has done sth different.

    On the other hand, this 'different' failed to impress a fair    As a franchise, Call of Duty's becoming utterly boring and the more installments Activision has released, the more it ruined it. When I first heard of Ghosts when it was announced, my first impression of it was 'just another modern warfare.' Fortunately, it wasn't. And this time, I believe, Activision has done sth different.

    On the other hand, this 'different' failed to impress a fair number of people. Just like Black Ops II, many people were not satisfied with Ghosts, despite the impressive graphics and the improvements in the gameplay mechanic. But seriously..... 1.6? That's WAYYY too underrated. I'm sure there are ppl out there who've been hating the franchise (and Activision is to be blamed), but Ghosts deserves at least a 6.

    When looking at these scores, its hard to imagine that Activision actually DARED to challenge Rockstar Games to break the GTA V sales record. Sure, Ghosts made a $1 billion in one day head start, but that was just retail, not even the actual consumer purchase. And when consumers come here to see THIS, I doubt their sales would reach 5 million in a week.    … Expand
  7. killerbake
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    This game runs terrible. I can load up BO2 which looks more graphically pleasing then this and it runs smooth. Load this up and I feel like I'm in 2000 watching my pc chug trying to run this.

    Animations for the dog are sometimes terrible. Like he just floats down stairs. (so next gen!) Not only that, but they raised the specs on the pc for no reason to force ignorant people to buy    This game runs terrible. I can load up BO2 which looks more graphically pleasing then this and it runs smooth. Load this up and I feel like I'm in 2000 watching my pc chug trying to run this.

    Animations for the dog are sometimes terrible. Like he just floats down stairs. (so next gen!)

    Not only that, but they raised the specs on the pc for no reason to force ignorant people to buy console versions. Infinity Ward, I'm sorry but no more. Treyarch is king of COD.    … Expand
  8. Viedmalakian435
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    Cómo juzgar al juego con mayor requerimiento de recursos cuando su tecnología está tan por debajo de la media?, es más. con la cantidad de ingresos que obtiene, no es capaz de ofrecer una optimización en PC que no de vergüenza?, Battlefield 4 (o cual quier otro) que triplica en tecnología a este titulo no requiere ni un tercio de recursos, empezando por un sistema de 64 bits...Cómo juzgar al juego con mayor requerimiento de recursos cuando su tecnología está tan por debajo de la media?, es más. con la cantidad de ingresos que obtiene, no es capaz de ofrecer una optimización en PC que no de vergüenza?, Battlefield 4 (o cual quier otro) que triplica en tecnología a este titulo no requiere ni un tercio de recursos, empezando por un sistema de 64 bits... decepcionante...… Expand
  9. smp87
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    the game is just crap! nothing new in this game! the game is by far the worst in this series! I'm not a battlefield fan! just play cod, but this game is just
  10. czirrfb
    Nov 8, 2013
    1
    Buy Battlefield 4 instead!

    Seriously. This game is a joke. It constantly crashes and has frame rate issues and yet BF4 looks about 5 times better and runs smoother. This game was clearly made for console with the sole purpose of racking in cash. At least DICE are trying new things and advancing their series forward. We have been playing the exact same CoD game since Modern Warfare 2.    Buy Battlefield 4 instead!

    Seriously. This game is a joke. It constantly crashes and has frame rate issues and yet BF4 looks about 5 times better and runs smoother.

    This game was clearly made for console with the sole purpose of racking in cash. At least DICE are trying new things and advancing their series forward. We have been playing the exact same CoD game since Modern Warfare 2. Even the graphics remain the same.

    Its safe to say I will not be buying another CoD game. I hope Titan Fall is good...    … Expand
  11. Velnon
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    Eh bae dont buy this gam. It carp for cod lelellelelellelelelelelellelelelelellelelellelelel. Seriously though don't buy this game. Kill yourself first
  12. Badrebel
    Nov 8, 2013
    1
    So disappointing!!! Poor graphics, arcade gameplay. Bad storyline and you´ll finish it within 5-6 hours.
    Multiplayer is as everytime very bad. I just can´t tell you who Cod Ghosts needs almost 35 GB Hard Disc Space, it looks like a game from 2009. I´m so disappointed.
  13. Hseeker25
    Nov 8, 2013
    3
    Its basicly a COD mod, not worth the price, to much console orientated.
    This is a step back from Black Ops 2, If I turn on modern warfare 2 I get the same deal, I guese playing a female and having a dog is the only inovating they could come up with.
  14. whitedynamite
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    Extremely awful and horrible game. After all the graphics and "new engine" hype, graphics still looks same as in the old ones, if not worse and the textures are disgusting. Multiplayer same 'ol, same 'ol, you spawn run around for 10 sec. someone spawns behind you and shoots you in the back, rinse and repeat. Cant even create your own logos anymore. SP is also nothing new and boring, copyExtremely awful and horrible game. After all the graphics and "new engine" hype, graphics still looks same as in the old ones, if not worse and the textures are disgusting. Multiplayer same 'ol, same 'ol, you spawn run around for 10 sec. someone spawns behind you and shoots you in the back, rinse and repeat. Cant even create your own logos anymore. SP is also nothing new and boring, copy pasta from old COD's. Just another terrible COD game(worst in series?) with bad optimization and lots of framerate issues.… Expand
  15. ninja_pro
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    Played for 15 minutes and go bored.

    Decided to play Betafield 4 instead.

    That crashed on my 2nd game.

    Went outside and enjoyed the fresh air.
  16. Killercontact
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    This is a sad day, Ghost is a MW3 clone but with much more to hate.
    So many problems with everything, sure they will probably fix some of the problems but knowing the "COD TEAM" they will start working on the "NEXT GEN COD" in about 2 week and ignore this =)

    No thanks, this is where I leave the train, back to MW2 and BO I go.
  17. spectralknight
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    I will give a 0 to this game.Why?Because this game is 0 for me.I can't play it at all...I have 20 frames on low settings.Anyway it doesn't matter if I'm on low or extra settings because I have almost the same frame rate.This is simply not a PC game.If you turn the graphics lower than EXTRA this game looks like a 2000 game.I recommend this game not to be played less than extra otherwise youI will give a 0 to this game.Why?Because this game is 0 for me.I can't play it at all...I have 20 frames on low settings.Anyway it doesn't matter if I'm on low or extra settings because I have almost the same frame rate.This is simply not a PC game.If you turn the graphics lower than EXTRA this game looks like a 2000 game.I recommend this game not to be played less than extra otherwise you will have a bad image quality so you would better play any 2006 game because it looks better than this,honestly.My specs are 8 GB RAM,1 TB HDD,AMD Phenom II X6 1090T and AMD6850 X2 Edition OC.With those specs I can't get more than 20 frames.Also I think this is my last cod game for me...Battlefield is much better than this which is just a garbage with the same engine from quake.I think I said all.This game is 0 for me.… Expand
  18. Fuby
    Nov 8, 2013
    8
    Ghost Best in Series by far.. Haters gonna Hate... Uninformed computer illiterates will always blame game design over purchase of old tech they thought would last forever.. Buy a console if you cannot update your limped biscuit of a computer. BTW, new-gen consoles have 8 gig memory and 8 core cpu.. if you can't compete with a console..why even try to play a PC game? If you like old-genGhost Best in Series by far.. Haters gonna Hate... Uninformed computer illiterates will always blame game design over purchase of old tech they thought would last forever.. Buy a console if you cannot update your limped biscuit of a computer. BTW, new-gen consoles have 8 gig memory and 8 core cpu.. if you can't compete with a console..why even try to play a PC game? If you like old-gen looks.. stick to a 360 or PS3 console so you don't whine about next-gen problems that will arise.. problem solved. These postings about limits are just plain stupid. 64 bit needs to expand further to expand games.. memory limits are going to rise to explore better features.. time marches on.. grow up already.

    For “me”.. This seems to be the “BEST” in the Call of Duty Series. There is so much new to examine while you still have the gameplay COD is known for. I like the features of “Squads” and find the multiplayer to work rather well even without dedicated servers. I would rather see dedicated servers to be honest, they should never had been moved to an after thought for PC players. Biggest mistake the franchise chose to do. Anyways.. The soldier build up is all new and works rather well. You now have a squad worth of soldiers that can also be leveled up and designed as you wish. Very interesting and look forward to more. Graphics are stunning when set to “Extra” and all seems to run pretty smooth for “me”. I didn’t buy the expansion pack “yet”.. but most likely will.

    I played Battlefield 4 for 5 days straight before this release. I have yet to load Battlefield since. People keep comparing the two titles although they do not play the same at all. Let us be honest here, they are both same old same old but refined for the better(we hope) each year. There are many ways to play these titles with known winning abilities in execution. I like ground pounding and COD offers that in spades. Battlefield is more of a Vehicle play although to me a bit arcade'ish in execution BF4 “defuse mode” is interesting and a take on Search and Destroy, my favorite type of play in these games. Ghost still has S&D buried inside, however they are toting a new twist with Search and Rescue which allows the possibility of revival from a team mate. I never warmed to Blackops or Blackops 2 nor would I suggest them to others. This title though? Single player and Multiplayer get my nod.. nicely done with no patches yet.. can only get better.

    Remember the minimum requirements folks.. you will need 6 gig of Memory to get this running on the PC.. I would also suggest a 660 or better graphics card.. don’t hate the game for this.. The bugs for “some” seem to do with graphics and the minimum ram requirement. I have neither or any bug that can relate to my system. The “only” bug I have seen is no mouse control left or right to change players you are spectating when dead in Search and Rescue games. I am sure they will fix that in a patch and does not really effect gameplay. I don’t really have an Uber system either. I5 2500k, 16 gig ram, GTX670 card and RAID HD to SSD. I call it a basic medium system and specs.

    Plenty of MP maps right at release and many ways to play. I have no choice but to like this game for what it is.. a winner. [GS] 8/10    … Expand
  19. grik
    Nov 8, 2013
    2
    First time im review a game. Iv only played MultyPlayer yet, thats why i bought it in first place. Let me tell you the first thing, avoid buying this game !
    Im a player since the first ages, playing COD feels like returning to the first Wolfenstein with better graphics. Soldiers seem to be fluctuating, they dont seem realistic not even close and the gameplay suffers with that.
    Iv seen    First time im review a game. Iv only played MultyPlayer yet, thats why i bought it in first place. Let me tell you the first thing, avoid buying this game !
    Im a player since the first ages, playing COD feels like returning to the first Wolfenstein with better graphics. Soldiers seem to be fluctuating, they dont seem realistic not even close and the gameplay suffers with that.
    Iv seen alot of games, played a few, if you want to use multiplayer in the PC version, avoid buying. I dont know if BF4 is better, i played the Beta and it felt the same.
    COD Ghost is a Beta game that will be forever beta im sure, even correcting some things i dont think they will be correcting the big picture of the problem.
    Another thing, i felt nausea's playing COD Ghosts, its because of the FOV being to low, its ridiculous never had this problem with a game.
    I would love to have my money back    … Expand
  20. olimp99999
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    worst graphic.
    bad story.
    FPS CAP.
    IT's cod mw4.
    not work without ramfix.
    activision soooosnoooley
    VOLVO GIVE DIRETIDE
    PETUSHINOE GOVNO DLYA PEDIKOV. DAESH' DIRETIDE
  21. Scootinfruity
    Nov 8, 2013
    0
    Call of Duty Ghosts takes a step back in terms of graphical fidelity and overall gameplay and story. The story is VERY bland, the Gameplay is of your typical Run-Of-The-Mill shooter, and the Graphics are WORSE than Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, a game which was released in 2009. Not to mention, the game Copy/Pastes a scene from Modern Warfare 2, frame for frame. The game was very lazilyCall of Duty Ghosts takes a step back in terms of graphical fidelity and overall gameplay and story. The story is VERY bland, the Gameplay is of your typical Run-Of-The-Mill shooter, and the Graphics are WORSE than Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, a game which was released in 2009. Not to mention, the game Copy/Pastes a scene from Modern Warfare 2, frame for frame. The game was very lazily put together and it's nice to see this already dying franchise finally be being put to rest. The Call of Duty series has turned into shovelware and I think it's finally time for Activision to let it go. Unfortunately, I can't give this game a good score. There isn't a single good thing about it. The multiplayer is buggy, the Performance is TERRIBLE, and overall, it's a very bad game. It's a shame to see a once great series die, but I think it's time to put it to rest anyway.… Expand
  22. pathorn
    Nov 7, 2013
    1
    But still CoD ghosts campaign repeat the mistake of MW3 campaign
    You kill people, blow up, rinse and repeat with different methods like missile, bombs, sniper turret or dog (Lol).
    They copied ideas from a lot of things like Disguise mission and Helicopter mission from Black Ops 1, Tank mission from Battlefield 3. If they gonna make a single player campaign like a movie, Make a movie.    But still CoD ghosts campaign repeat the mistake of MW3 campaign
    You kill people, blow up, rinse and repeat with different methods like missile, bombs, sniper turret or dog (Lol).
    They copied ideas from a lot of things like Disguise mission and Helicopter mission from Black Ops 1, Tank mission from Battlefield 3.
    If they gonna make a single player campaign like a movie, Make a movie.
    Even the story is not as dramatic as it looks and contains only few surprises and dramatic moment.
    Black Ops 2 single player and story is better even without Oscar writer.
    I finished the campaign. I'm going to return it or sell it to another people.
    Multiplayer is a same different game anyway. but with no theater mode and FOV adjust.    … Expand
  23. Adinfino
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    As the rap battle between cod and bf goes,"Every game (Cod) since '04 could have been DLC".This is the least innovative of gaming franchises.Maybe with ghosts CoD may come to an end.The same piece of year after year.And finally the rap ,"The game that claims to have such a realistic dog could be such A FAKE
  24. d4rkbr
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Well, I paid 110 R$ for a game that I can not play, because I do not have 6GB of RAM, cool Activi$ion you outdid yourself. I'll keep playing COD 4 which is much better than this crap.
  25. dadyal
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game game … Expand
  26. evan002
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I have never been this disappointed in a game ever. If I had a 3rd hand I would give this game 3 tumbs down 1) I cannot believe that they would release a game of this magnitude on the PC and have it be as buggy as it is. Weapon Texture Flickering (WTF!!!!) half of everything on my screen looked like a strobe light. The only way I could fix this was to disable Sli, which sucks because II have never been this disappointed in a game ever. If I had a 3rd hand I would give this game 3 tumbs down 1) I cannot believe that they would release a game of this magnitude on the PC and have it be as buggy as it is. Weapon Texture Flickering (WTF!!!!) half of everything on my screen looked like a strobe light. The only way I could fix this was to disable Sli, which sucks because I loose a lot of my performance. FPS drop all the damn time, this game is going from 60fps to 10fps all the time. And I haven't been able to fix that issue at all. 2) Story line is like every other CoD game out there and the overall feel seems like a 2009 release. 3) worst damn online play I have ever played in a CoD game, every problem with the single player campaign on a handful of maps you've seen in all the modern war far games with different colors.… Expand
  27. sealion
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Junk. Wanted so much to like this. I get the graphics are going to be a step behind other next gen games, but did not expect to lag so much. You would think with the visuals scaled back so far they would not have problems with multi-player, lag etc. The game handles horrible. Everything just feels loose. The controls lag, onscreen players can be a foot to the left or right of whatJunk. Wanted so much to like this. I get the graphics are going to be a step behind other next gen games, but did not expect to lag so much. You would think with the visuals scaled back so far they would not have problems with multi-player, lag etc. The game handles horrible. Everything just feels loose. The controls lag, onscreen players can be a foot to the left or right of what you see on your screen. Pass on this game, I would not even wait for a patch. They should have gotten it right the first time. I know which developer I will be passing every other year COD is released.… Expand
  28. DuneRacoon
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I basically got raped. I bought all the maps and such ($120), and the game sucks. I paid expecting to enjoy the coming months, when I've played about 4 hours at this point. There are so many "head glitches" to exploit in multiplayer, there's no point of moving. If you do, prepare to get cream pied. Weapons are about 3 shots for a kill at any about any range, so if you're spotted first,I basically got raped. I bought all the maps and such ($120), and the game sucks. I paid expecting to enjoy the coming months, when I've played about 4 hours at this point. There are so many "head glitches" to exploit in multiplayer, there's no point of moving. If you do, prepare to get cream pied. Weapons are about 3 shots for a kill at any about any range, so if you're spotted first, you're dead. There's no FOV option to play with the classic 90 FOV. In some maps, there are dark spots or places where the player camo matches so perfectly, you literally cannot see the player. Also, the spawn system lacks entirely. I don't even know how it's repairable with the maps' layout.

    Last purchase from you, Activision. You're lucky you got this one.    … Expand
  29. S4rd4uk4r
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    This game is a complete piece of S...t Bad optimization Ridiculus requeriments Short Campaign Graphics equals or Worse compared whit CODBO2 and the Multiplayer is the Same recicled Bull S...t of every Year avoid this game Dont buy it.
  30. edgarpown
    Nov 7, 2013
    10
    This deserves an 8.5 in my opinion, but the reviews have been mean, to say the least. People give this game a 0, when a 0 should mean that you are playing the early alpha release of a flash game from 1990. 0 out of 10 for a triple A game is nonsensical, and let me tell you why.
    CoD Ghosts`isn't perfect. It's not mind blowingly different, but it still has the one thing that it always had:    This deserves an 8.5 in my opinion, but the reviews have been mean, to say the least. People give this game a 0, when a 0 should mean that you are playing the early alpha release of a flash game from 1990. 0 out of 10 for a triple A game is nonsensical, and let me tell you why.
    CoD Ghosts`isn't perfect. It's not mind blowingly different, but it still has the one thing that it always had: fun. Why should Call of Duty throw away its polished back bone and create something entirely new? Because then it wouldn't be a call of duty game. Lets remember the title. Call of duty. Run to your guns, run run run, shoot shoot shoot. What can you say? It'll be the same old game for gamers like me since the cod 1 era, to the cod ghosts era. It's nothing special, but its definitely not bad.    … Expand
  31. jonhny
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    If I could return the game, I would. What were they thinking when they decided to cap FPS at 91 and not add a FOV slider? On some maps it's impossible to keep a steady 91 fps due to some weird CPU usage issues when looking at certain areas.

    The lack of a FOV slider and capped FPS isn't much of an issue compared to how fast you die in this game, you die quicker than you do in Black Ops 2    If I could return the game, I would. What were they thinking when they decided to cap FPS at 91 and not add a FOV slider? On some maps it's impossible to keep a steady 91 fps due to some weird CPU usage issues when looking at certain areas.

    The lack of a FOV slider and capped FPS isn't much of an issue compared to how fast you die in this game, you die quicker than you do in Black Ops 2 hardcore mode. Maybe that's why they removed most of the hardcore mode game types? The standard mode is pretty much hardcore. I've also died so many times in a single frame when on the enemy killcam they shot 6+ bullets yet on my end all of them registered at once. Strange lag combined with this quick time to kill makes for a very frustrating game.    … Expand
  32. Choppa
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Graphics are awful. Compare the jungle maps with FarCry3 and there is absolutely NO comparison, COD are grainy and choppy. (My system runs FC3, Dishonored on HIGHEST settings, even normal on COD is nearly unplayable due to frame rate loss). The gameplay, smoothless, video quality, has nothing on CS:GO.
    Oh and the dog is a joke, here you are, a special ops ghost, decked out in armor,    Graphics are awful. Compare the jungle maps with FarCry3 and there is absolutely NO comparison, COD are grainy and choppy. (My system runs FC3, Dishonored on HIGHEST settings, even normal on COD is nearly unplayable due to frame rate loss). The gameplay, smoothless, video quality, has nothing on CS:GO.
    Oh and the dog is a joke, here you are, a special ops ghost, decked out in armor, yet one bite from cujo kills you. The dog should tackle you like the zombies in dead island, immobilize and take your health down, but not kill you upon touch.
    Very disappointed with the purchase, the amount of money and time these guys have... and they create this buggy, laggy, second-rate game? Insulting to those who purchased and pre-ordered. They simply cannot put this game out and NOT expect you to lower your expectations on gameplay and visuals compared to titles out nearly 2 years ago.    … Expand
  33. dmw
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Aside from paying for a full price game, I don't know why I expected something new. At least I won't be disappointed next time CoD release their annual expansion pack If your PC doesn't reach the system requirements, its definitely not worth upgrading for CoD Ghosts alone! Some of the multiplayer game modes do show some innovation, but for me this still could been incorporated within aAside from paying for a full price game, I don't know why I expected something new. At least I won't be disappointed next time CoD release their annual expansion pack If your PC doesn't reach the system requirements, its definitely not worth upgrading for CoD Ghosts alone! Some of the multiplayer game modes do show some innovation, but for me this still could been incorporated within a simple patch… Expand
  34. crazypeck
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The stupid game won't install, just because I don't have 6GB Ram!? Are those idiots or what!? I Run two SSD's and have a fast graphics card, I don't need more than 4GB! that sucks...
  35. MrTee
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    This is cheating at it's finest. After Black Ops 2 I thought they finally enhanced the engine to compete with other AAA titel. I was really exited as I saw the first pictures from Hesh Walker and all the 3D models looked good so far. SubD and Tesselation its all good, but you really notice that they didn't move a finger for improvements. Where is the celebrated NextGen Engine?!
    Mark    This is cheating at it's finest. After Black Ops 2 I thought they finally enhanced the engine to compete with other AAA titel. I was really exited as I saw the first pictures from Hesh Walker and all the 3D models looked good so far. SubD and Tesselation its all good, but you really notice that they didn't move a finger for improvements. Where is the celebrated NextGen Engine?!
    Mark Rubin said:
    "I feel like smaller studios are having trouble I can't speak for them but I would think are having trouble making games that fill the big AAA market because they're harder to do. It is kind of a bummer that games are getting so hard and difficult to make. People want better and better graphics, they want more realistic looking art assets and that comes at a cost and that's a hard thing to have to deal with."

    ...What?! Even independent games like outlast show that graphics are not an obstacle....Activison Blizzard is the hughest games publisher, they could put a lot of effort into game production instead of a big advertising camaign to achive as many buyers as possible... it's the definite prove that the only reason for this is money...ACTIVISON gets no money from me anymore, I promise....Imagine what else you could do with 60 Bucks!    … Expand
  36. Ghost_Leader
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The Best COD was Black Ops... It was amazing! But Ghosts is the opposite of Black Ops, it sux really.

    My Computer contains a i7 2600@4.5GHz, GTX780@1150MHz and 8GB Ram and a 512GB SSD Samsung 840 and this horrible game has strong performance problems with frames and crashes! I want my money back! Even BF4 runs like hell on Ultra without any problem, not single problem. Im really said    The Best COD was Black Ops... It was amazing! But Ghosts is the opposite of Black Ops, it sux really.

    My Computer contains a i7 2600@4.5GHz, GTX780@1150MHz and 8GB Ram and a 512GB SSD Samsung 840 and this horrible game has strong performance problems with frames and crashes!
    I want my money back!
    Even BF4 runs like hell on Ultra without any problem, not single problem.
    Im really said and feel betrayed from IW and Activision, they promised us a great game with dedicated servers. What got we? P2P Lobbies (no servers) and MP with 6 versus 6 players. GZ noobs!    … Expand
  37. TheLove
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Pc gamers who bought this should be ashamed of themselves. Pc gamers who bought any COD game since WaW should be ashamed of themselves. All the high scoring critic reviews have been paid off, this game and series should be banned and deleted from history.
  38. griggs111
    Nov 7, 2013
    1
    I wish I could give a better score, BUT Activision released the same game 5th time. I hoped that this will be the real nextgen Call of Duty, but after the trailers the game disappointed me! The campaign story is perfect, just like the cinematics, but the texture qualities... man... I have only one question left: Why is this game have such a high system requirements?
  39. GameReview22
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Total GARBAGE.
    This of 1998 graphics with the same gameplay.
    Thank god I didn't pay for it, I just like to validate what I think it will be. I'm right every year because it never changes.
    Don't buy, please don't support this type of crap.
  40. apoc
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The worst cod i have ever player, so under optimised, direct console port, plays so much worse than BO2, the style, system, hud, controls, gameplay, guns are all inferior and frankly awful in general. A mess of a game is an understatement. DO NOT BUY.
  41. spartainking
    Nov 7, 2013
    10
    Don't be discouraged by the poor reviews. After spending four hours playing both the campaign and multi-player, I'm very happy with my purchase. I had to adjust the mouse sensitivity but other then that the controls seemed very fluid.

    I'm not entirely sure why people dislike this game so strongly... However if you look closely, you'll find most of these reviews were written by people    Don't be discouraged by the poor reviews. After spending four hours playing both the campaign and multi-player, I'm very happy with my purchase. I had to adjust the mouse sensitivity but other then that the controls seemed very fluid.

    I'm not entirely sure why people dislike this game so strongly... However if you look closely, you'll find most of these reviews were written by people who never even played the game, (or at least not for very long).    … Expand
  42. jamie_rocks_on
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    fps drops and very jerky mouse lag and stuttering.stuttering in menu overall unplayable (PC) GTX 780. 16ram. cpu i7. The game just looks look bad too.
  43. Escobar
    Nov 7, 2013
    10
    This is one of the best Call of Duty games ever! Finally we can affect environment! Graphics look so good and multiplayer is as awesome as always! If you are into action games, BUY THIS!
  44. Horridus
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Where to start first of all, i've played all cod games with my all time favorite being MW3, but this game is nothing more than a money machine a uncomplete game wrapped in a nice package me and my friends bought this to play co-op but there is no real co-op you cant choose which level or what gamestyle you want, graphics are from an old engine (2007) FPS drops, very poor soundWhere to start first of all, i've played all cod games with my all time favorite being MW3, but this game is nothing more than a money machine a uncomplete game wrapped in a nice package me and my friends bought this to play co-op but there is no real co-op you cant choose which level or what gamestyle you want, graphics are from an old engine (2007) FPS drops, very poor sound effects, poor options settings, singleplayer is a joke with so bad steerring your soldier feels like a tetris brick, looks and feels more like very early tech demo. i am left with a empty feeling and a 2 hour used game in the trash. BIGGEST MONEY GRABBING DISAPOINTMENT THIS YEAR … Expand
  45. PaleDolphin
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    You know the game's pure when one of the in-game cutscenes is ripped from the MW2. No, it's not called an hommage; it's laziness of the programmers and the cutscene director (or whatnot), that are hoping that no players would remember that cutscene. Well, guess what? I've played all CoD games, since the very first one, and to the MW3. Won't happent to repeat that mistake anymore.
  46. LamarrCZ
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    How you can release this piece of sh*t!? Crap graphics, really bad optimization and how this game need 6GB RAM TO RUN?! CAN YOU ANSWER ME?! Please fix this fu*ked restriction... And think about yourself Activision
  47. Konstantinxy
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    This game is just a lazy rushed cashgrab. It's bad optimization, low quality textures and frequent FPS drops in the most random of situations are just the tip of the iceberg. The game frequently manages to crash both ATI and Nvidia display drivers (the newest ones) no matter if the settings are set to high or low. The single player campaign is short and uninspired and is as generic asThis game is just a lazy rushed cashgrab. It's bad optimization, low quality textures and frequent FPS drops in the most random of situations are just the tip of the iceberg. The game frequently manages to crash both ATI and Nvidia display drivers (the newest ones) no matter if the settings are set to high or low. The single player campaign is short and uninspired and is as generic as they get. The multiplayer took a huge step backwards from Black Ops 2 and is just as boring and uninspired as the single player but hey at least you can complain over voice chat. Do not spend any money on this game you will regret it. If you want to play a decent multiplayer modern military shooter wait a month or so until Battlefield 4 has ironed out all of it's problems and give that a try, it's far superior to this mess of a game both visually and technically.… Expand
  48. ozorxoron
    Nov 7, 2013
    1
    I can actually say without a doubt that this is the worst game I've played this generation of gaming. This is not next-gen, this isn't even up to par with current gen titles, this is an embarrassment.

    This is a poorly optimized, poorly designed, poorly written game with no redeeming qualities. This game is literally selling on its title alone, I can not imagine anyone will actually    I can actually say without a doubt that this is the worst game I've played this generation of gaming. This is not next-gen, this isn't even up to par with current gen titles, this is an embarrassment.

    This is a poorly optimized, poorly designed, poorly written game with no redeeming qualities. This game is literally selling on its title alone, I can not imagine anyone will actually recommend this game because they've enjoyed their time with it.

    Admittedly I haven't played the console versions, but the PC port is practically broken in its current state. Crashes, frame drops, lag, stuttering and clunky controls. This is what you can expect from this game. Not to mention this isn't even a high demanding game, for shame Activision, for shame.    … Expand
  49. CrashNT
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Let me start by saying I wanted this game, I haven't played CoD since MW2. I was excited for some arcade style shooting. Then came the release... WHAT A NIGHTMARE. I pre-loaded the game 3 days before but for some reason had to spend another 6 hours downloading the game!! It was on release night, a night I reserved for gaming by leaving early from work Well, the next day I got toLet me start by saying I wanted this game, I haven't played CoD since MW2. I was excited for some arcade style shooting. Then came the release... WHAT A NIGHTMARE. I pre-loaded the game 3 days before but for some reason had to spend another 6 hours downloading the game!! It was on release night, a night I reserved for gaming by leaving early from work Well, the next day I got to finally play the game. "You do not meet specified RAM requirements" WHAT A LOAD OF BS!!! I have 6GB of physical ram that I installed myself. I know it is there!

    They created a artificial wall to the game, because the game doesn't actually use or require a full 6gb of ram. They bloated their specs so they could look like they were competing on a graphical scale of BF4. (which by the way, BF4 doesn't block you if you have 4gb of ram, plus it looks better and has bigger maps)

    BTW I used RAMFIX and was able to play single player on ultra settings with no problems... 6gb or higher of ram my a$$!

    ABSOLUTE FAIL IN EVERY CATAGORY FROM ACTIVISION AND INFINITYWARD!!!    … Expand
  50. SSDROiD
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I have played every Call of Duty game since Modern Warfare 2 and I have loved the franchise very much for a long time. I was therefore very excited for Ghosts, but that excitement quickly went away after I got to play it. Let me walk you through some of it:

    First of all, the graphics. The textures, the maps and the basic graphic fidelity is so bad it literally looks like the game was    I have played every Call of Duty game since Modern Warfare 2 and I have loved the franchise very much for a long time. I was therefore very excited for Ghosts, but that excitement quickly went away after I got to play it. Let me walk you through some of it:

    First of all, the graphics. The textures, the maps and the basic graphic fidelity is so bad it literally looks like the game was made for release in 2003. That's no joke, the graphics actually hurt my eyes. The colors used are basically black and grey, everywhere, plus lots of smoke and a bland, boring landscape. I was actually looking for excuses to turn my face away from the screen, repeatedly checking my phone just to be able to look at something better than this game's graphics.

    Secondly, we were promised a next-gen game, with dynamically-evolving maps. The game has absolutely no feeling of being any next-gen anything. In fact, this can be described as moving backwards. Some of the maps are recognizable; they have been used before in previous Call of Duty titles, with tweaks made here and there. The only dynamically-changing events are that at some rare times in a match, something will fall down. That's about it. I feel especially lied to considering how Infinity Ward specifically stated the game would use a new engine, but then months later, a comment was made by them that the engine was the same as always, just upgraded. Frankly, I don't see any upgrades. This is the same engine, and we were lied to.

    Third, I believe in giving credit where credit is due. The game has improved upon previous titles in two areas: A brand new weapon and perk system, in which you can unlock items for Squad Points (which seem to be given to you randomly during a match, for no good reason) before actually hitting a required level the way previous titles did. This means it's easier to get the weapons and other firepower that you like. In addition, Ghosts gives you a certain number of available perk spots. On the perk menu, you are free to choose exactly the ones you want, without having to select one from each perk category. However, keep in mind some of the perks require 2, 3, 4 or 5 spots while others only need 1. This new weapon and perk system is an improvement, but not enough to make up for the cons this game suffers from.

    Fourth, no matter how good your gaming rig is, you will suffer from performance errors. The game crashes, it has performance problems such as skipping frames, lagging, tearing and repeated major drops in frames-per-second. I have a brand new high-end gaming laptop, and upon starting the game, without having entered an actual lobby, it even had significant problems adjusting the settings in the Options menu (which, by the way, shouldn't be called "Options" because you get no options). All of these problems cause an actual match to be more useless than useful, and you will find yourself hating the game more and more after each round. You will end up getting so frustrated, you look for something better, anything at all, to do, rather than playing this game.

    Fifth, I don't commonly like to say someone just "threw something together and called it a day", but this is exactly the impression I have for Ghosts. The game is not done. Far from it. It wouldn't ever be done the way it is constructed. Modern Warfare 2, which is several years old now, looks like a futuristic monster game of awesomeness compared to this.

    This game is terrible. It is not worth your money. Don't trust me because I say bad things about it, trust me because I have happily bought every Call of Duty title annually and this will be my last Call of Duty title the way it has completely disappointed me. I feel ripped off, genuinely ripped off big-time. The game is a joke, and a big middle-finger from the developers and publishers to the PC players. You'd have a better time staring at a wall, as you wouldn't be as frustrated about the game as I am, and your wallet would also feel better. Do yourself a favor, and do not get this game. Thank you for your time.    … Expand
  51. werttingo
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Not even gonna bother writing why this game sucks, it wouldnt fit anyway i only have 5000 max characters. Read the other reviews. Waste of money, cant even launch the damn thing.
  52. iJonicoo
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The game doesn't have anything of new, except of the worst performance.

    70gb of of "next gen" textures, that are flat textures, 65 FOV and the biggest inestability.

    Even with 2 Nvidia Titans (36 gb) it goes the worst it can
  53. Tagger
    Nov 7, 2013
    3
    Its a "Call of Duty"-game didnt expect the graphics to get a massive boosts over the previous ones; but they actually made the graphics look worse. But hey thats how it goes its okay.. The Multiplayer part of the game is what I by COD for, and they pretty much messed that up 100%.. There is no sense of progression no reason to keep playing more than 2 hours (if that). There's noIts a "Call of Duty"-game didnt expect the graphics to get a massive boosts over the previous ones; but they actually made the graphics look worse. But hey thats how it goes its okay.. The Multiplayer part of the game is what I by COD for, and they pretty much messed that up 100%.. There is no sense of progression no reason to keep playing more than 2 hours (if that). There's no levelling weapons to get better attachments/camo/better weapons nothing they removed that entirely. THAT pretty much killed the multiplayer for me and many others..… Expand
  54. gtx18
    Nov 7, 2013
    8
    This game is the best call of duty I've ever played however some bugs need to be fixed...

    I think the graphics and gameplay are good on my 1440p monitor maxed out on my gtx 780!
    Looking forward to the future patches and driver updates, this is clearly a step forward for the franchise.
  55. Usser
    Nov 7, 2013
    1
    Step back from Black ops 2
    Why ?
    "Next Gen" graphics Dog Animations from MW2 and MW3 Sounds from MW3 And my pc Running Metro last light and BF4 FPS 60 on Very High And this game IS 30 MAX on Mid That bad side And now Good Sides +..... +..... +..... + Multi (That same was in bo2 ) And That is all good sides My Verdict is 1/10 If You want good Campaning and Multi Go buy    Step back from Black ops 2
    Why ?
    "Next Gen" graphics
    Dog
    Animations from MW2 and MW3
    Sounds from MW3
    And my pc
    Running Metro last light and BF4 FPS 60 on Very High
    And this game IS 30 MAX on Mid
    That bad side

    And now Good Sides
    +.....
    +.....
    +.....
    + Multi (That same was in bo2 )
    And That is all good sides
    My Verdict is
    1/10
    If You want good Campaning and Multi
    Go buy Black Ops 2
    You will save money and get a better game    … Expand
  56. MainTain
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I played Black Ops 2 with all Settings on ultra with about 160fps. Battlefield 4 Beta with around 100fps.
    Now here comes Ghosts. It doesnt look too sexy at high details but even at ulta low settings it has a framerate from under 60.
    Best features of this game: - you often spawn under the map in mid-air. - performance on some 2.000$ PCs is so poor, that you actually can't play the game.    I played Black Ops 2 with all Settings on ultra with about 160fps. Battlefield 4 Beta with around 100fps.
    Now here comes Ghosts. It doesnt look too sexy at high details but even at ulta low settings it has a framerate from under 60.
    Best features of this game:
    - you often spawn under the map in mid-air.
    - performance on some 2.000$ PCs is so poor, that you actually can't play the game.
    - There is NO OPTION to display fps
    - There is NO OPTION to display ping
    - There is NO OPTION to adjust FOV
    - There is NO OPTION to even start the game with under 6gb of RAM (the game actually uses only 2gb)

    So i just payed 119$ for the Hardened Edition of an ALPHA VERSION GAME. Plus additional 80$ for upgrading my RAMs to a level that isn't necessary.
    There was no open Beta because this f**** game is ALPHA. It would be a Beta if we could discuss things like balancing the multiplayer but you cant even play this game anyway.
    Nice work for the biggest shooter franchise in gaming history.    … Expand
  57. Kamian
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Ghosts is the most terrible COD franchise ever
    Optimisation sucks and too many bugs are to play well
    It's way worse than BO2
    I am not going to buy COD made by IW again
  58. AdamSKrist
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    To be honest, i have been a Call of Duty "FanBoy" since Call of Duty 2. I have to say this is arguably the worst in the franchise.
    I don't want to go into to much detail, because basically everyone else is doing it for me.
    But this, i think is the beginning of the End for Call of Duty.
    Oh well, let's see how BOIII goes*.
    (If Activision doesn't pull the plug)
  59. wisefool
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I don't understand dog enthusiasm about the release of the next unfinished crap from IW and Activision. Such a horrible single player campaign, I have not seen yet never, the plot does not exist it is incomprehensible what started it all and end all. This game is just a fish & dog simulator!
  60. Jackycz
    Nov 7, 2013
    3
    I bought this serie because I have all of Call Of Duty series. Also I missing "FOV" changer, dedicated server (but it is too much for infinityward). Very laggy game, when is bad host you can play like a best skiller on the world, but you dont have any chance to kill somebody.
  61. Gigabytenator
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    das ist scheiße und kein spiel genauso wie die vorgänger auser mw1 und die cods die davor kammen immer noch eine scheiß grafik eine dume k i in dem singleplayer flache story abschusserien die zu over powert sind
  62. Karppaky
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Unacceptable PC port. Bad performance, terrible optimization, no PC game features that should be a standard for the platform.

    Extremely dumbed down FPS gameplay that makes you fall asleep. You're not the player, you're a cameraman, enjoy the ride, if you can. I prefer to play video games to watching a movie when I pay 60 euros for it though. The multiplayer is the same old it's been    Unacceptable PC port. Bad performance, terrible optimization, no PC game features that should be a standard for the platform.

    Extremely dumbed down FPS gameplay that makes you fall asleep. You're not the player, you're a cameraman, enjoy the ride, if you can. I prefer to play video games to watching a movie when I pay 60 euros for it though.

    The multiplayer is the same old it's been for years. Not worth your time if you own a previous CoD game already.    … Expand
  63. Kaden
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I started playing Call of Duty in 2006...

    I bitterly regret that i have bought this game and i swear i will never buy anything which will be released by Activision or TreyArch. Ghosts does look like and the performance if you really want to call it that way is far away from beeing acceptable. I want my money back! The graphical representation isn't worth to talk about. Just one    I started playing Call of Duty in 2006...

    I bitterly regret that i have bought this game and i swear i will never buy anything which will be released by Activision or TreyArch. Ghosts does look like and the performance if you really want to call it that way is far away from beeing acceptable. I want my money back!

    The graphical representation isn't worth to talk about. Just one short sentence: What a     … Expand
  64. Rcoop
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The only slightly positive thing about this game is the single player, despite being very short (as usual with CoD). Well written and entertaining.

    Everything else is unfortunately negative. It requires humongous specs. So I expected HD quality graphics and the IW guys promised quote: 'over 60 fps on all platforms'. Maybe they need to clarify what they mean by 'all platforms'.    The only slightly positive thing about this game is the single player, despite being very short (as usual with CoD). Well written and entertaining.

    Everything else is unfortunately negative.

    It requires humongous specs. So I expected HD quality graphics and the IW guys promised quote: 'over 60 fps on all platforms'. Maybe they need to clarify what they mean by 'all platforms'. Because on the PC it jumps between 60-60 to under 20. Often it turns into a slideshow. And now we know PS3 paleyers suffer from framerate stutters too.

    In general the graphics appear very dated think CoD UO. BLOPS and BLOPS2 look much modern in every way.

    Only 65 degree field of view? Which cannot be adjusted!!?? WTF Activi$ion?! Do you know is 2013 and most of us use 16:9 widescreen monitors?!! This is a major fail!

    MP is crazy as always I find the standard MP unplayable the only one that I can cope with is hardcore. But that is a let down too due to very limited number of maps and game types you can use.

    Customization is minimal I don't really care for it but is worse even than BLOPS 1.

    The maps I played so far are minuscule the only big map is on standard game type only which I find unplayable to get a kill you need to hit 4-5 times.

    I will persevere with some of the other new game types, however this is turning to be not just the worst CoD, but just a bad game in general.

    If you have the game and also have CoD 4 fire that up and check out the MP gameplay. It still beats this hands down.    … Expand
  65. ShadowXENUS
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The size of the game. The system requirements... What is in the game? Is there something better that Battlefield 4 can offer? System crashes, bugs, poor graphics... Looks like the game was created like a Free-to-Play title but creators suddenly decided to create a short campaign mode and start selling the game. No optimization at all! MW1, MW2, BO, BO2, WAW this games are good. GhostsThe size of the game. The system requirements... What is in the game? Is there something better that Battlefield 4 can offer? System crashes, bugs, poor graphics... Looks like the game was created like a Free-to-Play title but creators suddenly decided to create a short campaign mode and start selling the game. No optimization at all! MW1, MW2, BO, BO2, WAW this games are good. Ghosts only a terrible ghost of "Call of Duty".… Expand
  66. BSim500
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    This is why I love Metacritic. The "professional critic" vs community reviews shows up 'manufactured hype' 10/10 shill reviews for bad games like a flare at night. At time of writing, the "official" CoDG critics scores are 85/79/67. The community score is 1.6 (16%). When you have a gap that large, something is seriously wrong somewhere that no amount of hype or criticism downplaying willThis is why I love Metacritic. The "professional critic" vs community reviews shows up 'manufactured hype' 10/10 shill reviews for bad games like a flare at night. At time of writing, the "official" CoDG critics scores are 85/79/67. The community score is 1.6 (16%). When you have a gap that large, something is seriously wrong somewhere that no amount of hype or criticism downplaying will cover up. I believe the phrase "jumped the shark" is entirely appropriate here. Ghosts is sadly one "cash in on the CoD franchise" release too many.

    Actual review Almost everything is a step backwards. No FOV slider on PC's. Theatre mode removed. Old previously fixed bugs are now reintroduced (like mouse sensitivity jumping about all over the place if you're running FRAPS to record gameplay footage). I thought my Logitech G300 was dying. So did many others given many similar comments online elsewhere. Nope it's the game.

    The PC porting optimisation is appalling. The game runs even slower than BF4 with little noticeable increase in quality over previous CoD games. In some places, GFX look like 2007/2008-era games. It's like Dragon Age 2 vs DA:Origins all over again half the fps for *inferior* quality textures. The issue is not "people's hardware is too slow because its next-gen launch time" some games engines are just plain badly written. 6GB min RAM for this? You must be joking. I've seen amateur modders do far better with Oblivion.

    Voice acting is a step back, constant crashes, sound issues, server issues, poor AI, etc, are just icing on the cake. No point repeating them all as everyone else here is saying the same thing. Even without technical issues, the main issue for me is that it's lost its general "fun-ness". It's just plain boring. If you've played older CoD games, then you've pretty much seen it all before. Many times before.

    If these half-finished bug-ridden dumbed down rehash sequels are representative of next-gen games, then all I can conclude is that next-gen "so smart it's turned full circle and become retarded again"... At this rate, I'll be getting a lot more fun replaying modding older games in future, something a lot of people seem to be increasingly doing with bug-ridden glorified Beta releases booted out with little to no quality control, and an over-reliance on using "day one" gamers as unpaid patch testers due to marketing dept. release date p*ssing contests.

    Battlefield 4 was rushed out to compete with CoDG, and CoDG was rushed to compete with BF4. Both have masses of low-rated reviews for the same reason More bugs in each than the inside of an ant's nest. What in God's name is going on with gaming studio's these days? Not impressed at all either with the individual game, or "next-gen" releases in general so far.    … Expand
  67. kartana
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Everyone that worked on Ghosts, especially on the PC Version, should be fired! There is no excuse for such a mess! It looks terrible, it runs terrible (even on high end systems) and most of all it plays terrible.
    No FoV slider, capped at 90fps, and no way of disabling mouse acceleration.
    They removed the most interesting game modes (SnD is gone, Headquarters is gone). They increased    Everyone that worked on Ghosts, especially on the PC Version, should be fired! There is no excuse for such a mess! It looks terrible, it runs terrible (even on high end systems) and most of all it plays terrible.
    No FoV slider, capped at 90fps, and no way of disabling mouse acceleration.

    They removed the most interesting game modes (SnD is gone, Headquarters is gone).
    They increased the weapon damage so that it becomes just a game of who sees whom first.
    They designed maps that are way to big for a game like CoD and have way too many hiding and camping spots.

    Ghosts is three steps down from Black Ops 2. People should stop buying those games! Stay far away!    … Expand
  68. azarth
    Nov 7, 2013
    2
    Hi there, atm the state of the game is just awkward.
    1) Impossibile to play Single Player campaign due to a bug with some AMD and Nvdia video cards
    2) Graphic is simply AWKWARD and to damn heavy. Srsly i run Bf3 at full settings but this s*** snap in a 10 square meters map??!! I had to set to medium all graphic options and still i have some snap in certain moment, fps drop and so on. 3)    Hi there, atm the state of the game is just awkward.
    1) Impossibile to play Single Player campaign due to a bug with some AMD and Nvdia video cards
    2) Graphic is simply AWKWARD and to damn heavy. Srsly i run Bf3 at full settings but this s*** snap in a 10 square meters map??!! I had to set to medium all graphic options and still i have some snap in certain moment, fps drop and so on.
    3) 30 and more gb for a game like this?! Nice optimization
    4) Paying 60 for "playing" (if you can call it play) a beta. SHAME    … Expand
  69. Timeraider
    Nov 7, 2013
    10
    God.. the amount of clenching butt is todamn high here. People have got their owns ettings wrong and then complain about graphics, they have PCs and complain about lag.Well.. let me say it like this then.. this game works great and me and im having a massive blast.. the end :D
  70. Alexthepanda
    Nov 7, 2013
    10
    Awesome! it has a very strong campaign story (watch out hollywood) its just like that movie black hawk down with tom cruise but set in the future where the Europeans have taken over America (land of the free) and you and your dog friend riley have to take back the land our noble white Christian forefathers originated from (not the Indians lmao who believes that myth?)

    Revolutionary fish    Awesome! it has a very strong campaign story (watch out hollywood) its just like that movie black hawk down with tom cruise but set in the future where the Europeans have taken over America (land of the free) and you and your dog friend riley have to take back the land our noble white Christian forefathers originated from (not the Indians lmao who believes that myth?)

    Revolutionary fish A.I is also a new feature I was swimming in the game and the fish floated around me! it was was like a scene from disney and brought a tear to my eye. absolutely overwhelming and beautiful, maybe in the sequel to ghosts they can help take back america from the arabs since it would be a waste of the AI code otherwise.

    The multiplayer is also amazing such a breath of fresh air its just like the last game! the killstreaks feel rewarding and the atmosphere oh my lord its so cinematic in game. I was playing a match online and a light post fell infront me I jumped out my seat and was all like WTFLMAO HOLY and my kid teammate screamed and we had good times. My only gripe is the fish ai was not used in multiplayer which was a dumb choice as they could have had a sword fish killstreak or something you know?

    and the game runs like on my $2000 mac pro, I should have got it for xbox, what's all the talk about pc gaming being better and cheaper than console hmmm?

    Overall a solid 10

    pls don't pick on my grammer btw    … Expand
  71. miknutty
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Ready for this?

    WASTE... OF... MONEY... Now unfortunately this review has to be over one hundred and fifty characters long but there isn't one thing in Ghosts that is worth talking about. Not one thing.
  72. Krellus
    Nov 7, 2013
    3
    First time COD player here. I was expecting big things. I only tried the multiplayer. I am disappoint. Bad graphics for starters. Set FOV at 65 or so, you cant change it. But most importantly. You cannot check your ping, or tell what server you are on. I couldnt tell if i was on a local server or an international one. That is very very very retarded and is a huge deal breaker for me, as IFirst time COD player here. I was expecting big things. I only tried the multiplayer. I am disappoint. Bad graphics for starters. Set FOV at 65 or so, you cant change it. But most importantly. You cannot check your ping, or tell what server you are on. I couldnt tell if i was on a local server or an international one. That is very very very retarded and is a huge deal breaker for me, as I am in Sydney. If I cant see my ping, i cant tell if it's me stuffing up or lag. Its incomprehensible to me that you cant see your ping, or select a server with a server browser. Is it 1988? Lame.… Expand
  73. tanadyb
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Bought this game in preorder...campaign see's pretty good...but multiplayer sucks... I can't believe that this game go so bad...will don't preorder anymore...none support...and still going bad with a ultimate gen pc and gpu...
  74. handicapper911
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    There has been no difference (graphically or gameplay wise) or innovation whatsoever since the first Modern Warfare, released back in '07. Movement, weapon handling, gameplay, even the bloody sounds are the same. Wait there has been some difference graphically, a downgrade in textures. Oh, and some dogs.
    Kotick and his lackies are taking the piss out of us, they reinvest NOTHING into    There has been no difference (graphically or gameplay wise) or innovation whatsoever since the first Modern Warfare, released back in '07. Movement, weapon handling, gameplay, even the bloody sounds are the same. Wait there has been some difference graphically, a downgrade in textures. Oh, and some dogs.
    Kotick and his lackies are taking the piss out of us, they reinvest NOTHING into their projects themselves, only the external marketing with stupid live action trailers gets any funding. Apparently thats more important than the actual game. But hey, whatever boosts your shareprice.
    Though the graphics if anything look worse than previous cods, whats the deal with the system requirements? 6 gb ram? For an engine from 2007? The hell?
    If they are so worried about their bottom line why not hire some modders to graphically improve the game? Anyone whos used texture packs or whatever to modify any fallout game or skyrim can tell you that there are some beautiful grapihcal mods (which are free of charge) for FNV, F3, or Skyrim.
    So, here I whine again about another innovative call of duty, and normally I would be calling myself a hypocrite since I normally buy the game. But thank I didnt, (played it at a friends house). Blops II (another game) was the last game cod game for me.    … Expand
  75. TheD
    Nov 7, 2013
    1
    That`s an imposition! Can`t believe I spent 60€ for this!
    After reading some negative user reviews I first thought: "this can`t be that bad". I have a high end rig, so this has to run smooth. What a mistake! This came runs like crap. In mp there`s a constant stuttering (with or without Vsync on, even with low settings). And in sp it`s even worse. I hardly reach 60 frames with my FX8350,    That`s an imposition! Can`t believe I spent 60€ for this!
    After reading some negative user reviews I first thought: "this can`t be that bad". I have a high end rig, so this has to run smooth. What a mistake! This came runs like crap. In mp there`s a constant stuttering (with or without Vsync on, even with low settings). And in sp it`s even worse. I hardly reach 60 frames with my FX8350, 8GB RAM, 680 GTX, most of the time the sp runs with 20-40 frames and really annoying stuttering. Though this game looks really pretty with highest settings and better than previous CODs and it can be typical COD fun I don`t recommend the PC port as it is a trash port. Trust me: dont buy it for the PC! This is definitely my last COD!    … Expand
  76. RainbowPieFiM
    Nov 7, 2013
    2
    The graphics are from 2011, that's okey, but... the requeriments... i have a GTX 480 and in maximum settings i have "60" frames, with drops to 20fps and 1fps.
    70GB, yep.. 70GB for graphics from 2011 (Have textures that looks the same in Black Ops II and Black Ops II are only 20GB)
    The history pfff.... i don't want to talk about that. The Extinction mode is fine, is funny. Ah, and we    The graphics are from 2011, that's okey, but... the requeriments... i have a GTX 480 and in maximum settings i have "60" frames, with drops to 20fps and 1fps.
    70GB, yep.. 70GB for graphics from 2011 (Have textures that looks the same in Black Ops II and Black Ops II are only 20GB)
    The history pfff.... i don't want to talk about that.
    The Extinction mode is fine, is funny.
    Ah, and we don't have quickscope anymore (And we can't do ALT+TAB)    … Expand
  77. lochdoggg
    Nov 7, 2013
    1
    This game is terrible, Bad host connections, terrible FPS even with mid to high end computer, the ram required is 6gb while the game only uses 2gb. Maps suck, lowering graphics makes it look terrible, bad spawns. This game needs an update.
  78. Grandman
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Good day.
    I think we should require money back. We need to create a petition!
    Money, money, money and more time, all they need from us, not giving us the proper quality of the game.
    We all be betatesters.
    No quality no money!
  79. Argeon
    Nov 6, 2013
    3
    Before you say this review isn't helpful, do gaze into it because I do have some valid points. Here's a more realistic review than 0/10, which is supposed to mean jumble of code which is barely recognizable as a game.

    What's GOOD about this game? Maps are surprisingly big and varying. I was very scared that big maps in COD would be absolute trash, running around and find no one. This    Before you say this review isn't helpful, do gaze into it because I do have some valid points. Here's a more realistic review than 0/10, which is supposed to mean jumble of code which is barely recognizable as a game.

    What's GOOD about this game? Maps are surprisingly big and varying. I was very scared that big maps in COD would be absolute trash, running around and find no one. This isn't an issue with these maps. They are also easy on the eyes and aren't dull gray like MW3. Next, the Squad Point System. You don't have to wait a million years to get a specific weapon, which is absolutely fantastic. Third, no gun is 'broken'. Nothing clearly OP like the Type-95 or the FMGs. Infinity Ward hit the nail on the head when it comes to weapon balance. Knifing also has a neat animation which prevents you from meleeing multiple people at a time.

    What's 'MEH' about this game? The character customization is really, well, underwhelming. Not a lot of choices or individuality. However, it is a step in the right direction merely not a big one. Guns are also very boring to look at. Not really that big of an issue, but gun models went down after MW2. Next, singleplayer. As usual, COD doesn't focus on campaign, mainly because it's a multiplayer game. However, campaign is decent and enjoyable the first couple runthroughs. Nothing spectacular ther. Lastly, the graphics and innovation. It's nothing new or groundbreaking. It's the same time-tested formula which works year after year. Is it bad? No, but is it good? Not in particular, it's just repetitive. You can't expect such a fast-paced shooter to have BF4 graphics; that would be unrealistic and frankly stupid for such an arcadey shooter.

    What's BAD about this game? Foremostly, graphical glitches. Too many times I have switched weapons to find myself with a huge polygon in my face, completely blocking my vision. This happens relatively often, but it isn't that gamebreaking. Switching weapons or restarting game fixes it. Scopes may sometimes also appear invisible, but again, not a huge problem. Second, and fairly important, lag. Oh good god the lag in and outside of the game. The menus lag, the game lags, everything lags expect for the infinity ward logo on the screen. Hopefully they'll fix it up in a patch, but it will constantly annoy you.

    tl;dr It's not a terribly bad game, although it's nothing new. Some pretty big issues with multiplayer which can easily be patched, but a lot of good things brought to the table. A few more years and maybe COD will finally learn from it's mistakes and evolve into what we have always wanted.    … Expand
  80. derpmunster
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This game is an utter turd of a scam. I am disappointed and angry at myself for being careless enough to purchase this steaming heap of cow manure. Fair warning, if you are considering to pick this game up, don't, treat yourself to a nice dinner or movie instead.

    I finished the single player campaign in under four hours and was underwhelmed, with hopes that the multiplayer components    This game is an utter turd of a scam. I am disappointed and angry at myself for being careless enough to purchase this steaming heap of cow manure. Fair warning, if you are considering to pick this game up, don't, treat yourself to a nice dinner or movie instead.

    I finished the single player campaign in under four hours and was underwhelmed, with hopes that the multiplayer components would at least be something that I would enjoy. I was dead wrong.

    Let's list my major qualms:
    -Graphics are dismal, especially in light of the poor performance. Poor texture quality, modeling, animation, artistic design and use of effects. The game has a plastic-like look to it and frankly looks like a 360 or PS3 launch title with everything turned up to maximum quality.
    -Performance is unbelievably bad on my high end(780, i7 2600k at 3,4 Ghz, 16gb RAM)machine, framerate varies from 240 to under 30 FPS.
    -Gameplay just feels wrong, especially in multiplayer it just seems 'off', meaning that the gunplay is inaccurate and not enjoyable.
    -The multiplayer side of things is just horrible, right now, bit for bit, I find Black Ops 2 to be a more enjoyable game.

    The only positive thing I have to say about the game is the cinematic music for the single player missions. It made the loose drivel of a plot playable and added some much needed dramatic qualities and emotions to the wooden animation.

    To sum it up, this game is a joke. Right now there are so many better alternatives for a first person shooter, both single- and multiplayer, that I highly recommend not buying this piece of garbage. Having bought the game at full retail value, I feel like someone who bought a ticket to a Metallica concert and ended up watching an out of tune high school cover band.    … Expand
  81. aurathekitty
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This game was unsurprisingly rubbish. The optimization of the graphics was bad, frame rate was bad, Riley the dog was the most uninteresting dog of all time and the multiplayer has gone backwards! The rank system with the guns has been better thought out but come on, they put 100 million dollars onto the table, for a 4 hour average campaign? You still have to wait for everyone to runThis game was unsurprisingly rubbish. The optimization of the graphics was bad, frame rate was bad, Riley the dog was the most uninteresting dog of all time and the multiplayer has gone backwards! The rank system with the guns has been better thought out but come on, they put 100 million dollars onto the table, for a 4 hour average campaign? You still have to wait for everyone to run through their scripts until they breach the door? Like come on, ain't nobody got time for that!… Expand
  82. Koltin
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    50GB game install for graphics worse then Black Ops 2. A 6GB ram minimum requirement when the game uses maybe 1GB(there are mods that let you play the game with less then 6GB of ram). FOV is stuck at 65(you can get a mod that fixes this)

    - Same damn game as always. Nothing is different here. Campaign is linear and pointless, might as well play MW2 campaign. Thats the reason for the 0.    50GB game install for graphics worse then Black Ops 2. A 6GB ram minimum requirement when the game uses maybe 1GB(there are mods that let you play the game with less then 6GB of ram). FOV is stuck at 65(you can get a mod that fixes this)

    - Same damn game as always. Nothing is different here. Campaign is linear and pointless, might as well play MW2 campaign. Thats the reason for the 0. There are games already out there that are infinitely better. Go buy those games(trust me activision dont need your money.)    … Expand
  83. Timon48364
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    The graphics are even worse than the transition from Cod 2 to 3. I am so glad I didn't buy any of the map packs or expansions. This will be the last CoD I ever buy. I mean honestly PayDay 2 has better graphics. I thought it would be cool that you could customize a character and become a woman. I think thats the only improvement this game has made. VERY BAD GAME!!!!
  84. contract
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    Not worth your time. 3+ year old graphics, yet it runs sluggish on a beast system. The game play is terrible, the team play is terrible, the story line is contrived, and obviously most of the props were reused from past games.
  85. Lestat87
    Nov 6, 2013
    1
    Activision clearly thinks their customers are fools who will buy the game regardless of what they do. A next gen game using an 11 year old modified quake engine. So much for all the "we are building a new engine". Adding some poor lighting effects (google ghosts two suns lighting) and upping polygon count doesn't equal a new engine. Then there is the issue of one of the final scene fromActivision clearly thinks their customers are fools who will buy the game regardless of what they do. A next gen game using an 11 year old modified quake engine. So much for all the "we are building a new engine". Adding some poor lighting effects (google ghosts two suns lighting) and upping polygon count doesn't equal a new engine. Then there is the issue of one of the final scene from MW2 being recycled into the start of ghosts. Been playing since cod2 and cod4 is still the best. Not because of nostalgia (as Vonderhaar has claimed) but because the server lag was way less notable to the point that skill actually played a part.… Expand
  86. MrHemiroids
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This is just a short review. Call of Duty Ghosts is by far one of the most disappointing NexGen era games. With a multibillion dollar company I was expecting more. Their new engine is already dated. The game looks absolutely horrible. Massive frame rate drops on a very powerful PC quad core i7 16 GB of RAM GTX 660ti. Unacceptable for dated graphics. Hardly nothing new no innovation. ItThis is just a short review. Call of Duty Ghosts is by far one of the most disappointing NexGen era games. With a multibillion dollar company I was expecting more. Their new engine is already dated. The game looks absolutely horrible. Massive frame rate drops on a very powerful PC quad core i7 16 GB of RAM GTX 660ti. Unacceptable for dated graphics. Hardly nothing new no innovation. It feels like an expansion pack for MW3 or any other COD game out. Battlefield 4 wins hands down. It feels NexGen and looks the part.… Expand
  87. Rhyzak
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    Poor Quality game. The requirements for this game make no sense and its horribly optimized. mostly everyone who brought this game cant even play it either because of the 6GB ram requirement. This is the worst game to come out this year.
  88. n8dawg
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    bsolutely disappointing game. The campaign was a total joke that lasted half as long as the previous campaigns in the other call of duty games (I beat the game in 3 hours, really????) To make matters worse, the ending was horrible and was a "cliffhanger" that I expected the moment I started playing the game. Multiplayer is ridiculous, the maps are enormous and leaves the player runningbsolutely disappointing game. The campaign was a total joke that lasted half as long as the previous campaigns in the other call of duty games (I beat the game in 3 hours, really????) To make matters worse, the ending was horrible and was a "cliffhanger" that I expected the moment I started playing the game. Multiplayer is ridiculous, the maps are enormous and leaves the player running around searching for enemies instead of playing the game. And I thought Call of Duty could sink no lower...… Expand
  89. Brotato
    Nov 6, 2013
    1
    In all honesty, this game is bad. Especially for PC. Infinity Ward done goofed it up. The guns all pretty much look and feel the same, with a few exceptions. The leveling up feels uninteresting, and so does creating a class. For pc, the game looks, handles, and generally feels like sh*t. For Infinity Ward to boast that they would work extra hard on the PC version for a great experienced,In all honesty, this game is bad. Especially for PC. Infinity Ward done goofed it up. The guns all pretty much look and feel the same, with a few exceptions. The leveling up feels uninteresting, and so does creating a class. For pc, the game looks, handles, and generally feels like sh*t. For Infinity Ward to boast that they would work extra hard on the PC version for a great experienced, they might as well have been a politician, because that was a promise unkept. The settings can't be changed in game, which is ridiculous. You have to back out to the very first menu if you want to change simple stuff like texture settings. The options are scarce too. Features are disincluded, for others. I.E. Vision distance can't be changed, for the whole "dual rendering" on snipers. The dual rendering is more pointless than having camos for the damn dog, which acts brain damaged. When you aim down the scope, the "amazing" world around you is rendered twice, then blurred out, so you get to see green blotches in all their glory. The engine is not, in any way, "next-gen." Battlefield 4 runs better than this. I'm not some Battlefield fanboy either, I have appreciation for both of the series. I'd rather have bought Black ops 2 than this garbage. The audio settings (read: SETTING, AS IN ONE) is comprised of a master volume bar. So no, I can't turn down the crap music, so I can listen for footsteps. At this point, BF4 is better at being CoD than CoD. The weapon selection is crap. I've seen more guns in a point-and-shoot. The perks feel non-existent. Everyone else says the story mode is poop, so why bother. I give it a 1, as I gave one f*ck to write this review. Don't buy this Activision is half-assing it now. None of this is innovative as it sounds.… Expand
  90. Shykz
    Nov 6, 2013
    9
    I am disappointed with many of the comments, seeing as the reviewers have clearly not played the game. First the Single Player: The Single Player is alright, its by far not the worst the series has seen, or the best for that matter. It has a rocky launch, but picks up about half an hour through, to deliver a semi-fresh plot with lots of the usual violence and explosions. Honestly its notI am disappointed with many of the comments, seeing as the reviewers have clearly not played the game. First the Single Player: The Single Player is alright, its by far not the worst the series has seen, or the best for that matter. It has a rocky launch, but picks up about half an hour through, to deliver a semi-fresh plot with lots of the usual violence and explosions. Honestly its not really new, but plays decently enough that its worth completing it.
    Second the Multiplayer: The multiplayer is absolutely amazing, one of the best in the entire COD series. The new graphics engine is clearly visible, and it doesn't even look like a call of duty, engine wise. The new modes are awesome, there are no latency issues, kill streaks are more easily obtainable, but are less over powered, It feels more fluid, and the map designs are phenomenal. While it's not COD 4 or COD 2 level awesome, its far better than the 2 previous games, and it gives MW2 a run for its money. Its Polished, fresh, not laggy, and all around more enjoyable.
    Third, Extinction: First off Extinction, in my eyes, is not as fun as Zombies, but its still pretty freaking awesome. It feels kind of like Black Ops: Zombies, Left 4 Dead, and Payday 2 all had a three-way and came up with this. Extinction is an objective based alien-shooter, you drill out these giant blob-pod things and hold off against aliens in the process. You can upgrade your soldier w/ skill points, and by defense systems like turrets, and explosives. All in all, while it doesn't live up to Black Ops: Zombies, its still a fantastic first attempt from infinity ward.
    Ultimately this game is what the Call of Duty series needed, its polished, mostly fresh, latency issue free, and hugely enjoyable, unless that is you hate the Call of Duty series, and wont give it a chance (like most of the other reviews on here).

    I give it a 9/10.    … Expand
  91. EvilSushi
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    I was going to give this game a 7 because all in all it is a fairly decent game...but I'm so sick of the COD developers not giving a about the community, here are the reasons I give it a 0
    1) You can't see your ping in game?? wtf is the reasoning behind this??
    2) The menu lags horribly..this has something to do with the amount of friends you have on steam 3) There's no FOV changer, and    I was going to give this game a 7 because all in all it is a fairly decent game...but I'm so sick of the COD developers not giving a about the community, here are the reasons I give it a 0
    1) You can't see your ping in game?? wtf is the reasoning behind this??
    2) The menu lags horribly..this has something to do with the amount of friends you have on steam
    3) There's no FOV changer, and if you do use an external one you get banned for hacking
    4) There are no dedicated servers...which is the only reason i bought this game to begin with
    5) Poorly optimized engine, I'm have a 3Ghz I7, 10Gigs 1866 Ram and a 660ti and I'm forced to run the game on the lowest settings 720p just to get a stable framerate...and yes i have updated my drivers
    6) I keep losing connection to host, this literally happens every 10mins
    7) Clipping issues, I have multiple screenshots of multiplayer games where I have fallen through the ground and gotten stuck at the bottom of the map
    8) Lag Lag Lag, this is probably the biggest problem I have with this game. Everything is so damn laggy. The lag compensation in this game is just ridiculous.

    It's a shame I was really looking forward to this game, I'm hoping they fix these problems but until then this game is just a waste of money for me    … Expand
  92. Gravewolf
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This game is the definition of how Activision laugh at consumers, they joke on you like if you were a brainless lamb buying whatever they do in dispite of so many senseless logics in this one as the amount of retarded requirements aren't even what the game runs with. The game just needs like 1.8-2 gb of RAM from those 6 GB that have been specified on the exigencies, 40 GB are too forThis game is the definition of how Activision laugh at consumers, they joke on you like if you were a brainless lamb buying whatever they do in dispite of so many senseless logics in this one as the amount of retarded requirements aren't even what the game runs with. The game just needs like 1.8-2 gb of RAM from those 6 GB that have been specified on the exigencies, 40 GB are too for cdls/mods and other stuff they will pull on you later. It's just a pity how this company does what it wants and doesn't pay for its acts.

    I'm guessing the next specs for the incoming CoDs:

    CPU: Intel Pentium 4 1,7ghz
    RAM: 12 GB RAM
    HDD: 100 GB space
    Video: NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN or Better    … Expand
  93. Xaponz
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. All games get bugs in the first week of launch so that has nothing to do with the score. Instead the story is literally awful, boring (shoot a wave and go, wave and go, repeat over and over), and incredibly predictable. I will admit i did not expect the ending, but it was the worst cliff hanger in history. Now the multiplayer, they tried so hard to innovate that they literally made the worst CoD i have ever played (i played every single one except CoD 3). Its just not the same fun feeling i had, instead its just a series of frustrating events (awful spawns lead to camping, camping leads to hide and seek instead of run and gun that it should be). Lastly, graphics mean little to me as long as the game is good, but you think if they made the campaign this short and bad, with this kind of multiplayer, they could have tried to make a beautiful game with the amount of money they had? I used to be a "CoD is better than Battlefield" guy. Now on this game im about to hop the fence.… Expand
  94. joebob01
    Nov 6, 2013
    9
    The textures are still a bit buggy and you need to have a great computer to run the game that is not crazy beautiful, but the story is great, the extinction mod is really fun and the multiplayer is also great. I recommend it to the people who loved MW2 and to people that like fps in general.
  95. vderomana
    Nov 6, 2013
    1
    From the stuttering happening in the menu to the poor texture quality this game was not worth 60$. You cannot change your FOV and you will find yourself killed by shots out of your field of view. The game was poorly optimized for Pc I expected much more for the requirements. I rate this 1/10 because I'd feel like an idiot if I gave it 0 after spending 60$.
  96. Slipper
    Nov 6, 2013
    2
    I am CoD fan from the first game. After this, not anymore. They lied to us. They say this is going to be The Best game ever. Not for me.
    Minimum pc requirement to play this game
    OS: Windows 7 64-Bit Windows 8 64-Bit CPU: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8200 2.66 GHZ AMD Phenom™ X3 8750 2.4 GHZ or better RAM: 6 GB RAM HDD : 40 GB HD space Video: NVIDIA® GeForce™ GTS 450 ATI® Radeon™ HD 5870 or    I am CoD fan from the first game. After this, not anymore. They lied to us. They say this is going to be The Best game ever. Not for me.
    Minimum pc requirement to play this game
    OS: Windows 7 64-Bit Windows 8 64-Bit
    CPU: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8200 2.66 GHZ AMD Phenom™ X3 8750 2.4 GHZ or better
    RAM: 6 GB RAM
    HDD : 40 GB HD space
    Video: NVIDIA® GeForce™ GTS 450 ATI® Radeon™ HD 5870 or better
    Sound: DirectX® compatible sound card
    DirectX®: DirectX® 11
    Internet: Broadband connection and service required for Multiplayer Connectivity. Internet connection required for activation.
    are just lame.
    Price of 60 Us dollars or 60 Euros is to much for the game that is purely MP. Four hour of SP huge disappointment, Not to say that Hardened Edition is 120 Us Dollars or Euros. In one word this is just BAD! I am sorry but you lost me as a future buyer of your new games.
    In ten years Activision and Infinity Ward are crossed from game making company to money greeding company. I gave you score 2 just for effort. It is not everything lost, just million or two player who can't start the game because or minimum system requirements.    … Expand
  97. sergioccc
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    It's the same game of 2007 and also uses the same engine, it looks horrible on my high end PC, as ugly as an Xbox 360, I have been unable to play the entire campaign because of their horrible graphics, deserves to be free to play
  98. Ahmedtoni
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    are you freaking kidding me?!!
    the game is not even playable!

    lame graphics lame story line lame multiplayer. can't believe i wasted my money on that crap

    stupid dog woof woof fukin idiots you fuked up the game

    R.I.P COD 2003-2013
  99. DelMann2
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    Utter disaster. IW can't be arsed about their games anymore, nor is Faildivision. It is getting ridiculous and I blame all these CoD fanatics for its continuity.
  100. OrangeLion
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    So today I received this game for free, as a gift from a magazine I'm subscribed to. To my surprise, I needed 6GB of RAM. Bit steep, but okay, the graphics quality will suffer a bit, no biggie, as long as the game runs I'm fine with it. Turns out, the game does not even launch if you do not meet the 6GB of RAM. The 50GB needed to install the game is as ridiculous as the 6GB of RAM. I'mSo today I received this game for free, as a gift from a magazine I'm subscribed to. To my surprise, I needed 6GB of RAM. Bit steep, but okay, the graphics quality will suffer a bit, no biggie, as long as the game runs I'm fine with it. Turns out, the game does not even launch if you do not meet the 6GB of RAM. The 50GB needed to install the game is as ridiculous as the 6GB of RAM. I'm completely done with the COD franchise now, and I recommend you to do the same (or start playing previous, much better, COD games).… Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

9
#9 Most Discussed PC Game of 2013
53
#53 Most Shared PC Game of 2013

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
68

Mixed or average reviews - based on 14 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 14
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 14
  3. Negative: 2 out of 14
  1. PC PowerPlay
    Dec 30, 2013
    80
    It's exactly what fans of the franchise have grown to expect. No surprises here, folks. [Jan 2014, p.90]
  2. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Nov 25, 2013
    60
    Nothing to see here in terms of innovation: the campaign is dull, the multiplayer fun. But this time, the air of sameness is a little bit too much. [Issue#236]
  3. IncGamers
    Nov 24, 2013
    40
    An utterly horrible PC port mars an otherwise very, very average Call of Duty game. Nothing to see here.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »