[h2]Verdict[/h2]
✅ Recommended
Not the best Call of Duty, but definitely one of the better ones for me.
[h2]My history with the game[/h2]
I finished Call of Duty: Ghosts in 5.7 hours (on Veteran difficulty).
This was my second full playthrough. I first played it sometime around 2018, but I actually wanted to play it much earlier, around its original release in 2013.
Back then, I still had an older PC build from 2007, and Ghosts was one of the first Call of Duty games where the system requirements felt noticeably higher. I remember installing it, trying to launch it, and the game simply refused to start because of an error.
I think this was probably one of the reasons why Ghosts had a rougher reception and why Activision never made Ghosts 2.
[h2]Quick signals[/h2]
💸 Value: ✅ Worth playing at least once
🖥️ Requirements: ✅ Easy to run today, but demanding back in 2013
🎨 Graphics: ✅ Still decent
⏱️ Length: ✅ 5.7 hours for my playthrough
📖 Story: ✅ Good enough and entertaining
🎮 Gameplay: ✅ Classic cinematic Call of Duty
🐛 Bugs: ✅ No major issues for me now
[h2]What I liked[/h2]
* I enjoyed the campaign again, even on my second playthrough.
* The game still delivers that classic cinematic Call of Duty feeling.
* The skyscraper mission with rappelling was one of the most memorable parts for me.
* The jungle mission also stood out.
* Honestly, all missions had something enjoyable in them.
* The main villain was pretty good and carried a lot of the story for me.
* The campaign is short, but well-paced.
* It is not the best Call of Duty, but I still think it belongs among the better ones.
[h2]About the story[/h2]
I know some players did not like the missions or the story, but we also have to be honest here.
After the original Modern Warfare trilogy and Black Ops 1 and 2, it was extremely difficult to bring another Call of Duty campaign with the same level of cinematic impact.
Ghosts does not reach those heights, but I still think it offers a solid military action campaign.
[h2]Nostalgic details[/h2]
One thing that made me smile was the sound design.
This game came out in 2013, exactly 10 years after the original Call of Duty from 2003. Because of that, it felt strangely nostalgic to hear some familiar sounds again.
The footsteps in snow, picking up ammo from weapons on the ground, and walking on metal stairs sounded almost exactly like in the 2003 game.
Maybe some people will not care about that, but for me it was a nice nostalgic detail.
[h2]What didn’t work for me[/h2]
* It does not reach the level of the original Modern Warfare trilogy or Black Ops 1 and 2.
* The story is good, but not legendary.
* Some players may find the campaign too short.
* I can understand why not everyone connected with this entry.
* It probably did not do enough to become the start of a successful Ghosts sub-series.
[h2]Is it an endless game? How long to beat?[/h2]
No, this is not an endless game.
I finished the campaign in 5.7 hours. It is a typical shorter Call of Duty campaign, focused on cinematic missions and fast pacing.
[h2]Who will love it[/h2]
You will probably enjoy Call of Duty: Ghosts if you like cinematic military shooters, classic Call of Duty campaigns, short action-packed stories, and older CoD games from the Xbox 360 / PS3 / early Xbox One era.
[h2]Replay value[/h2]
Replay value is decent if you like replaying Call of Duty campaigns.
For me, this was my second full playthrough, and I still enjoyed it. I do not think I will replay it often, but I am glad I returned to it.
[h2]Final note[/h2]
Call of Duty: Ghosts is not the best Call of Duty, but I think it is better than its reputation suggests.
The campaign is short, cinematic, enjoyable, and has some memorable missions. The villain worked well for me, and the game gave me a bit of nostalgia because of some classic Call of Duty sound effects.
After Modern Warfare and Black Ops, expectations were extremely high, and Ghosts probably could not fully live up to them.
But as a single-player campaign, I still had a good time.
Recommended to play at least once.
