So the newest CoD will be released this Fall, and the usual talk starts up. I'm sitting here, wondering what is and isn't true about the hate and adversity towards the game? Let's find out.

Note: My Opinion, say what you want in the comments.

What is true:

The game is basically the same every year: Yes, the games are all very similar, but that's why it's called a Franchis. Pokemon is the same thing, just with newer Pokemon and new locations/ battles. Battlefield is the same thing, just with newer guns, vehicles, and locations. Zelda is the same thing (essentially), you get new stuff sequentially, and get around the temples in different ways. In that sense, it isn't an insult. This game sold because it was a fast paced loadout shooter, with focus on Infantry CQB. Changing it would make it a different game, therefore it wouldn't be Call of Duty. And with so many other shooters with their own twists, changing the game in a big way would be somewhat pointless, for there would be another game with the new changes out already. And even though they do come out every year, they are made by 3 different devs, with 3 years per game. That is a legitimate time span to make a AAA game.

It uses the same engine: Yes, the engine hasn't really been changed all that much, but that isn't a bad thing. It's engine has been tinkered and toyed to the point in which it takes tons of effort to find errors, and it is guranteed to play smoothly on all systems. Battlefield 4 is buggy because Crytek made a new, untested engine, which made he game unplayable for it's initial release. CoD is guranteed to work.

What isn't true:

Only kids play it: No, they are actually a small minority, but a loud one. It's like (as I'm guilty of doing) saying all PC players are full on Master Race. Just because this minority is loud, doesn't mean that they are fully representative of the entire community. Yes, you see them every now and then, but hey, there is a mute option for a reason.

It requires no skill: This game does require as much skill as any other game. You run around, attack, take and defend areas, and choose what you use for these tasks. Same for other games.

The story is bland: That is an opinion, but it depends on which dev made the game. Infinity Ward (MW, Ghosts) make realistic, mission-driven stories with characters switching in and out. Treyarch (WoW, BO) make over-the-top, 80's esque action games using history and fiction to make an entertaining story with set peices. The newest dev, Slegdehammer (MW3-ish, AW) has yet to make their own game, with Advanced Warfare being their big debut. From what it seems, they want to make a more non-patriotic story with an actual actor playing a big role. Maybe they aren't as serious, or believable stories and settings, but they are entertaining, popcorn movie stories.

Is the hate fueled by opinions rather than the games?

The hate is fueled by experiences gained from either MW2 or Black Ops, with that they were apperently the things said about all the games released afterwards. But it may just have been people who arent used to the game, or are not really good at it, expressing their opinions on the internet. It spread as the game became popular, with the same points being made each release. It seemed cool to hate it. What it honestly seems like, is a small minority in the gaming community, trying to justify their purchases and what they supported. It went like this: If you don't own CoD, just make fun of people who do. It's a fad that is somewhat dying. As CoD's keep getting released, people either stop or realize that they are only making the gaming community a hostile place. The only people who do this (as far as I know) are those who think it's cool to insult the franchise, or people who think that it is a tradition that should continue. If you are still complaining about the same stuff since 2009, you really don't understand that this critiscism is only hurting people who like these games.