Originally Posted by Tyrannosaurus
Not at all and I understand your opinion.
I have never owned even 50% of the titles released by them. My only expectation was some form of improvement in the game.
Well had you played the last one you would have realized they achieved that in spades. Ghosts was an abomination of optimizations and game play, Treyarch makes the good games IMO. I was worried this would suck, however it is very nice in comparison to ghosts and even black ops. Graphics are even a bit better with decent textures one just needs to apply the fix for the known texture issue listed above. This games MP is CoD at one of its better times.
That's just my opinion and I'm sure anyone who's played games with quality graphics and textures knows this game is not one. Of course this is outside the broken aiming, recoil, and realistic FPS features that most CoD games do not have.
Hence why it seemed you knew it was gonna be bad but bought on day one anyways. I mean wait for reviews on it atleast. lol Also what broken aiming and recoil? Seems fine to me. If you where expecting a realistic FPS war game you made a grave error and have only yourself to blame for lack of research. Only Arma comes close to a war sim. All others are just shooters bro. CoD specifically is an arena shooter, always has been.