@Rackjaw Is that your IQ? Sounds about right

@Rackjaw @CaesarIIII @Villimax Way to dodge the question.

@CaesarIIII @Rackjaw Except that it's one game, and it's an action game. Nothing changes between the campaigns besides the enemies and settings and the back of the head you stare at the whole time.

@JoonKimDMD People pay $60 for Call of Duty because they are simple monkeys that don't know any better. Call of Duty is the "obvious" choice and that's why they would pay $60 every year. But, if Activision didn't include a shitty 6-hours-or-less campaign with their game, then they couldn't charge $60 for it and pretend it is a well-rounded game. It would probably be something more like $15.

@patrick112 This guy couldn't have been more biased in his review, exaggerating negative points and not mentioning the combat system at all, unfortunately he fits right in at Gamespot!

@Rackjaw @Villimax @CaesarIIII Pray tell, what kinds of shitty games do you support?

@Rackjaw @Villimax Except that it's just legitimately good and I shudder to think what games you think are good.

@Rackjaw @CaesarIIII Last time GS called a turd a turd, the reviewer got fired because that game's publisher was paying Gamespot off. But some idiot who doesn't even like action games poops some crap out of his mouth with arbitrary complaints, and that will earn your respect, huh?

@Rackjaw You must be like an amazing super-critic to realize the cutscenes are bad. How about the gameplay?

@Rackjaw Haha what? Have you played RE6?