A legitimate philosophical question that I didn't know where to put (?).

[Sir Sesshaku]

This is not a very serious thread, but I thought it's a funny question.

It's not a mistery that in almost every forum dedicated to a certain franchise, when a new game it's announce, as soon as new info comes to the day of light, there's almost instantly a fight between "purist hardcore fans" complaining about they beloved game turning to the "appeal cod masses" side of the force (with many paranoiac conspiracies) and a "stop whining" mob that dedicates itself to repeat "stop complaining" "you didn't get it at all", "it's just a game", "it wouldn't be fun otherwise", "entitled brat", etc.

Both sides of this story are annoying, both have some truth, and both tend to completly exaggerate the situation. However, it is something that happens, I've seen it with prerelease Skyrim, pre and post release ME3 (specially post release ), Battlefield, this forum, and many other stablished franchises.

Now my "legitimate philosophical question" (which of course, it's not that) is: How does this phenomenom works on Call of Duty forums? The hardcore fans complains about the increased complexity and campaign story to appeal Arma fanboy? They complain about the oversimplification of the game compared with the old Cod? They do not care at all?

Seriously, how that typical conflict translate to real cod players? Because the "cod masses" stereotype has expanded to almost every other game. What do they use?


Once again, forgive my english, and forgive my silly question, made entirely for the purpose of cheap fun. Hace a nice day.

[Kraut]

Seriously, how that typical conflict translate to real cod players? Because the "cod masses" stereotype has expanded to almost every other game. What do they use?

The "true COD PC platform players" will probably complain how the latest installation of COD is trying to appeal to the "console masses" or something like that *g*