I do enjoy your arguments for why CoD is a good series, as they are much more intelligently thought out than most. That being said, I have a completely different opinion on the series.
A few points in no real order...
1. I started playing CoD during World at War, but didn't buy a CoD game until MW2.
2. I thoroughly enjoyed the single player storyline to MW2.
3. I played the multiplayer for quite a long while, but very soon got bored of it.
4. I feel CoD 4: Modern Warfare was an extremely important title which helped online FPS games attain their level of fun online through the console matchmaking services.
Now, I have started having problems with CoD, not just for its player base online, but for its lack of creativity. They have pretty much put out the same game 4 years in a row, making HUGE amounts of money with each consecutive release, and with each release falling shorter than the last. Blizzard makes even larger amounts of money, but they continue to innovate and ensure that releases such as Starcraft II (and eventually) Diablo 3 will be quality releases. Now, the producers of each CoD game did have some kind of creativity for creating different game modes, including the very entertaining Nazi Zombies minigame, but if you look at the competition, CoD really isn't that great (especially after BlOps).
Look at Battlefield BC2. In multiplayer, the maps were larger, almost all the buildings were fully destructible, vehicles were present, yet balanced, more players could join each game, and yet lag was kept much lower than my experiences with CoD. Yet, Black Ops somehow sold more and is much more popular than Battlefield BC2. This makes very little sense, especially due to the backlash the community gave about MW2. Now, the entire Bad Company spinoff was just a side project, used to test the destruction engine and Battlefield's ability to play on console and with matchmaking services, while the real Battlefield 3 was being made.
Boy, if BF3 fails out due to MW3, I will be quite annoyed. Just remember, I don't think CoD sucks or is even bad, but it's just not great. Especially recently.
That is all.
A few points in no real order...
1. I started playing CoD during World at War, but didn't buy a CoD game until MW2.
2. I thoroughly enjoyed the single player storyline to MW2.
3. I played the multiplayer for quite a long while, but very soon got bored of it.
4. I feel CoD 4: Modern Warfare was an extremely important title which helped online FPS games attain their level of fun online through the console matchmaking services.
Now, I have started having problems with CoD, not just for its player base online, but for its lack of creativity. They have pretty much put out the same game 4 years in a row, making HUGE amounts of money with each consecutive release, and with each release falling shorter than the last. Blizzard makes even larger amounts of money, but they continue to innovate and ensure that releases such as Starcraft II (and eventually) Diablo 3 will be quality releases. Now, the producers of each CoD game did have some kind of creativity for creating different game modes, including the very entertaining Nazi Zombies minigame, but if you look at the competition, CoD really isn't that great (especially after BlOps).
Look at Battlefield BC2. In multiplayer, the maps were larger, almost all the buildings were fully destructible, vehicles were present, yet balanced, more players could join each game, and yet lag was kept much lower than my experiences with CoD. Yet, Black Ops somehow sold more and is much more popular than Battlefield BC2. This makes very little sense, especially due to the backlash the community gave about MW2. Now, the entire Bad Company spinoff was just a side project, used to test the destruction engine and Battlefield's ability to play on console and with matchmaking services, while the real Battlefield 3 was being made.
Boy, if BF3 fails out due to MW3, I will be quite annoyed. Just remember, I don't think CoD sucks or is even bad, but it's just not great. Especially recently.
That is all.