Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

[Wafflesomd]

Wow could you be a bigger troll?

Well, it's essentially the same game that I've been playing for three releases already.

 

[jonnythan]

Wow could you be a bigger troll?

He's got a point. The gameplay, strategy, and mechanics of COD4 are almost identical to COD and COD2.

I love it, cause I've loved all the games. But they're essentially the same game with different textures.

Same endlessly-spawning enemies, etc.

 

[Sheep]

Wow could you be a bigger troll?

He could eat more..

Be a fatter troll...

SheepStar

 

[gus6464]

He's got a point. The gameplay, strategy, and mechanics of COD4 are almost identical to COD and COD2.

I love it, cause I've loved all the games. But they're essentially the same game with different textures.

Same endlessly-spawning enemies, etc.

Same could be said for Halo 3. After playing it I just felt like I was playing Halo 2 with new weapons and better graphics. They might as well have called it Halo 2.5.

 

[Rev]

I'd have to disagree as they do vary a great many gameplay elements in this iteration of the series. It was meant to have the same feel as the others as that's what people like about it.

 

[evilkat]

I'd have to disagree as they do vary a great many gameplay elements in this iteration of the series. It was meant to have the same feel as the others as that's what people like about it.

Absolutely. There's so much more to this iteration that the previous ones didn't. U've got melee combat (not often used, but used more often than I thought I would), guard dogs to contend with, awesome vehicle combat (I love the AC-130 level) among other things. It's definitely an evolutionary improvement, but an improvement nonetheless. The core of the game still remains the same. I mean why would you change something that's clearly working? If you wanted something completely different, go buy a different game (DUH!!!!)

 

[Wafflesomd]

Same could be said for Halo 3. After playing it I just felt like I was playing Halo 2 with new weapons and better graphics. They might as well have called it Halo 2.5.

You say that as if someone here actually likes Halo 3.

 

[GlocksRock]

You say that as if someone here actually likes Halo 3.

I love Halo 3, even thought it plays more like Halo CE.

 

[jonnythan]

Absolutely. There's so much more to this iteration that the previous ones didn't. U've got melee combat (not often used, but used more often than I thought I would), guard dogs to contend with, awesome vehicle combat (I love the AC-130 level) among other things. It's definitely an evolutionary improvement, but an improvement nonetheless. The core of the game still remains the same. I mean why would you change something that's clearly working? If you wanted something completely different, go buy a different game (DUH!!!!)

COD2 had melee combat and vehicle combat (big tank mission), but no dogs to shoot.

The big changes in COD4 for me are shooting through walls, more vehicle/gunner missions (the AC-130 level was definitely one of the high points, as were the helicopter missions - running from the battlefield into a chopper and grabbing the machine gun as it lifted off was a beautiful immersive experience), and the depth of the multiplayer experience.

The gameplay experience is certainly very similar, though, which is why we love it

 

[evilkat]

COD2 had melee combat and vehicle combat (big tank mission), but no dogs to shoot.

The big changes in COD4 for me are shooting through walls, more vehicle/gunner missions (the AC-130 level was definitely one of the high points, as were the helicopter missions - running from the battlefield into a chopper and grabbing the machine gun as it lifted off was a beautiful immersive experience), and the depth of the multiplayer experience.

The gameplay experience is certainly very similar, though, which is why we love it

Odd, I don't remember the melee combat in COD2 at all You're right about the tank though...it just felt that it was more integrated in COD4 because you do get to man the chopper guns without feeling like u're in another game mode (kind of like Unreal Tournament). I am very impressed by how they got the experience so beautifully integrated into the game. Yum.

 

[Wafflesomd]

Well.

The game is actually really good. Though I'm stuck on a later mission. Can't get to helicopter in time

 

[Crackerballer]

Got my copy for PS3 tonight (early christmas present from G/f) so I'll review it within a week or so after exams are over.

 

[ParadigmDawg]

I found the game quite fun with good graphics and dynamic sound but it seemed short. I am not much of a gamer but I have played all the CODs and finished this one pretty fast.

 

[redman_43]

Just like Halo3, the story was rather short. I beat both with less than a weeks worth of game-time. What makes COD4 a good game in my book is the replayability online. What makes COD4 better than Halo3 is the customizability and the selection of the weapons in the game.

All in all, I give it 2 thumbs up.

 

[mouettus]

- VEEEEEERY short omg! I was actually angry at the end of the game. Finished it the same day I got it. 5 hours something. No more.
- Very interesting new features. Like others explained, the AC-130 was great.
- Cinema-like (story)
- I REALLY hate infinite unit spawning until you rush ahead.
- Great graphics. The big ?nuclear? explosion was insane!!

Best map: Sniper level in russia. It was great to have a normal number of enemies for a bit and being more laid-back. I'd really like a game that would be life-like. You get 5 bullets in your body, ur dead buddy! And hundred russians on a small base?! Come on.

Finally, I disagree with those who think it's the same as COD2. Yeah, same shoot-em-all and graphics engine but not it the same years, not the same storyline either. Haven't played online yet. Apparently it's pretty tough...

 

[ParadigmDawg]

Yes...like I said, I am not a gamer and I finished it in two afternoons. I also loved the Sniper level in russia and keep playing that over and over.

The spawning was killing me until I realized that if you duck your head and run, they quit reproducing...

 

[jbrillo]

Loved playing the game. It was definitely intense. Still playiing online...on my 3rd tour of duty.

 

[Shock]

FPS on consoles are just plain bad, and it comes down to one simple thing, controls.

You cannot beat a PC for FPS style games. Don't get me wrong CoD4 is a great game on the PC. But playing the 360 version it feels like your not only fighting hordes of enemies, you're also fighting the controls.

The only advantage of console FPS is how you can destroy your buddy sitting next to you instead of destroying someone you've never met online.

In the end there were two console FPS' that had great controls, and they were Goldeneye and Perfect Dark for the N64. The addition of the second analog stick really made the controls too clunky and difficult to manage in FPS'.

Auto Aim FTW.

 

[SopRage]

FPS on consoles are just plain bad, and it comes down to one simple thing, controls.

You cannot beat a PC for FPS style games. Don't get me wrong CoD4 is a great game on the PC. But playing the 360 version it feels like your not only fighting hordes of enemies, you're also fighting the controls.

The only advantage of console FPS is how you can destroy your buddy sitting next to you instead of destroying someone you've never met online.

In the end there were two console FPS' that had great controls, and they were Goldeneye and Perfect Dark for the N64. The addition of the second analog stick really made the controls too clunky and difficult to manage in FPS'.

Auto Aim FTW.

I have to disagree, and I think that an awful lot of console gamers would argue as well. While there is perhaps a higher level of precision available with a mouse, categorizing FPS controls on consoles as "clunky" is a bit much. Any video of MLG Halo players would argue the point. These people are hardly "fighting the controls."

Also, the reason that Goldeneye and Perfect Dark had "great controls" was because they essentially only operated on two axes instead of three. If any thing, the second analog stick was a vast improvement.

It's possible that FPS gaming on PCs has a slight edge, but I think it has an awful lot more to do with preference and what you're used to.

 

[Shock]

I have to disagree, and I think that an awful lot of console gamers would argue as well. While there is perhaps a higher level of precision available with a mouse, categorizing FPS controls on consoles as "clunky" is a bit much. Any video of MLG Halo players would argue the point. These people are hardly "fighting the controls."

Also, the reason that Goldeneye and Perfect Dark had "great controls" was because they essentially only operated on two axes instead of three. If any thing, the second analog stick was a vast improvement.

It's possible that FPS gaming on PCs has a slight edge, but I think it has an awful lot more to do with preference and what you're used to.

Yeah but when you play halo 8 hours a day you'll eventually get the hang of it