On PS4 and Xbox One it may be, but Ghosts is a current-generation game. In fact, it's the current-gen game, the one that defined systems and mechanics that changed the industry. They remain enjoyable; the question is whether that's still enough.

On the battlefield, play is more focused on gun-on-gun than aerial bombardment, and the game is better for it. Few of the maps seem conducive to sitting off and calling in strikes: players are funneled into buildings and tight corners with a regularity that makes one-on-one the focus. Sniping is possible: there's a new marksman rifle class, and Warhawk and Stonehaven in particular pay dividends to diligent distance players. But the frustration of being constantly blitzed from above is gone.

It puts the focus on your loadout and guns, and the new perk system is nicely organised. They're now broken down into specific categories (such as speed, equipment etc), with each assigned a 'cost' to equip, like with Pick 10. Perks - and their classes - seem flexible enough to accommodate most builds.

Flexibility is also encouraged elsewhere, with one example being a sight that can be changed from thermal vision to iron sights with the click of a stick. It's a small part of a system that seems to encourage players to be more rounded: it's possible to play with all speed perks if that suits, but with thermal, tracker and variable equipment - as well as perks designed to counter 'pure' players - variety is key.

With regards to maps, few are duffers, but then again few really stand out. It's a shame, as the gameplay itself seems more refined and enjoyable than Black Ops 2, especially new modes Blitz and Search and Rescue.

Outside of multiplayer, the campaign is a po-faced, nonsensical rehash of greatest hits long past. Extinction (Left 4 Dead meets Zombies) is a lot of fun, and Squads feels like a well-marketed shell for Black Ops' Combat Training mode.

Multiplayer is still the star then, but it's diminishing with every return, its addictiveness tempered by over-familiarity.

Version Tested: PS4. Played for 12 hours. Accommodation and food provided by Activision.

7 / 10

  • Less emphasis on aerial bombardment.
  • Extinction mode is good, if limited.
  • Returns are diminishing.
  • Single-player is terrible.

New stuff to check out

To add your comment, please login or register

User Comments

tmeierle's Avatar

tmeierle

I have played the game 30+ plus hours have already beat it twice and I give it a 8.5 but that's just my opinion.
Posted 06:02 on 01 January 2014
Honeyman's Avatar

Honeyman

A good and concise review. I noticed towards the end you wrote that accommodation and food were provided by Activision. Was this therefore a controlled environment under which you were allowed to review the game, or were Activision just being kind to you by giving you a free meal?

Never the less, it seems to echo the consensus among the media. COD Ghosts is a very average entry in the renowned franchise. Give me Farcry 3 anytime thanks.
Posted 16:03 on 27 November 2013
dantechandler's Avatar

dantechandler

I really want to play ghosts.
Posted 03:03 on 11 November 2013
naf27's Avatar

naf27

The advert on tv showing the game as a young boy playing it . Im sorry but its listed as an 18 . Now my lad as seen this he wants it . Not happy at all
Posted 23:49 on 06 November 2013
essex1212's Avatar

essex1212

This is brilliant, can you guys do reviews like these more :P

YouTube Video
Posted 20:20 on 05 November 2013
wee_gregor_2003's Avatar

wee_gregor_2003

Cant wait till ghosts
Posted 15:52 on 05 November 2013
pblive's Avatar

pblive

...
Posted 15:18 on 05 November 2013
Bloodstorm's Avatar

Bloodstorm

No talk about dog or fish A.I?? 1/10 will not attempt to read again.
Posted 15:16 on 05 November 2013
Karlius's Avatar

Karlius@ FantasyMeister

I see your point here I guess the fundamentals aren't covered in enough depth in either article if you are coming from a zero/low COD experience background.

But I think that should be covered in a separate article again.
Posted 14:45 on 05 November 2013
FantasyMeister's Avatar

FantasyMeister@ Bratterz

It's being written off as too brief. To me it's pretty obvious that the 300 word limit didn't give the author scope to talk about the game, it could be talking about a MOBA or an isometric tactical strategy game unless you now what COD is. And the feature just doesn't go into enough detail about the game itself and the things I wanted to know about it.

What is Squads, what is Extinction? How many players in Vs mode? What happened to Fido? How many maps? Is there a Prestige system? Are these new characters or existing ones? Is it over-familiar if I haven't played the last few CODs/MWs? and so on.
Posted 14:34 on 05 November 2013
yellowsapphire's Avatar

yellowsapphire

I actually rather like the feature. It poses some interesting questions, I mean, where *does* COD go from here? Personally, I think it needs a bit of a rest. It's a well-known enough brand that it isn't going to leave the public's consciousness. Give it a rest for a year or so; regroup, reassess and then release something that's amazing, rather than just more of the same. Might earn them some more money in the long run.
Posted 14:12 on 05 November 2013
Bratterz's Avatar

Bratterz@ Karlius

That's the way I see it too. I really do hope the review isn't being written off as too brief, without taking the feature into account as well. That would be a blow to the new format, but it's more of a shame to see a great piece on CoD's future not being read by those who might be interested.
Posted 14:00 on 05 November 2013
Karlius's Avatar

Karlius@ Bratterz

I had no problem thought the review was good but I wanted more so I read the feature.

That went into great depth, maybe a little too much depth for my liking.

Sometimes the above would be enough as it sums everything up perfectly well and other times I feel like I want more as I have more of an interest in the game. The features fulfill that want.

Really don't see the problem anymore. It's just a to the point review with additional in depth reading for those who want it.
Posted 13:34 on 05 November 2013
Bratterz's Avatar

Bratterz@ Neon-Soldier32

Fair enough! Have you given Steve's feature a read though?

It goes into more detail with both the singleplayer/multiplayer and I think he's done a very good job of explaining his feelings towards the series and the lack of BIG changes each year.

Don't forget that the review is meant as a quick roundup and it's the accompanying feature that goes into that further detail that you're after :]
Posted 13:24 on 05 November 2013
MrHEWBO's Avatar

MrHEWBO@ Neon-Soldier32

i agree, im going to have to read elsewhere ti make my decision *gasp*
Posted 13:07 on 05 November 2013

Game Stats

Call of Duty: Ghosts
7
Out of 10
Call of Duty: Ghosts
  • Less emphasis on aerial bombardment.
  • Extinction mode is good, if limited.
  • Returns are diminishing.
  • Single-player is terrible.
Agree? Disagree? Get Involved!
Release Date: 05/11/2013
Platforms: PS4 , Xbox One , Xbox 360 , PS3 , PC , Wii U
Developer: Infinity Ward
Publisher: Activision
Genre: First Person Shooter
Rating: PEGI 18+
Site Rank: 238
View Full Site