User blog comment:Cuad85/No Awards This Year? Not A Surprise/@comment-24957048-20161117184712

Well, by conceptually I mean it manages to deliver a classic shooter style with the skin of WW1. Of course you would not want to play realistic WW1 simulator, the point of an action video game is to have action. It is just that I sometimes have enough of WW2 or modern setting and just want something slightly different, and I find myself playing some old and obscure WW1 strategy game or somethin and I just want actually to play a standard action packed shooter with WW1 skin, why? Variety, you know. For that matter I would even play ancient Rome or 18th century based over the top shooter, because to me the setting is more important. As for the "clamour to have different and new gameplay" I cannot understand that, really. The basic premise of the genre is outlined, you have shooting, you have game modes, gameplay mechanics and whatnot, how can you add something revolutionary to that? Insert jetpacks and call it a day? If you like to play shooters then you should be completely satisfied even with playing oldschool CS. However, yeah I also think that COD has fatigue, but my point is that COD cannot invent new genre of game, all it can do is change the setting and play around with some gimmicky pseudo-revolutionary gameplay mechanic innovations.