Cod 5 Or Cod 4.5 - Page 3

kid8 · #21 12-28-2008, 11:06 PM

cool mate

Corpsecrank · #22 02-09-2009, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amurphy

I think COD5 was a step backward. WW2 as a scenario is quite played out even if you do change to the less traversed pacific front. COD4 was the only one I have purchased since the first and it looks to be the last that I will purchase. WW2 is just so overused!

I disagree. With world at war the entire game felt like I was watching the history channel. They used the modern warfare engine and made improvments to create a WWII game that is as realistic as possible at this time. The entire game really breathes new life into the older WWII theme.

MissBunny · #23 03-22-2009, 08:02 AM

And COD WAW has tanks. You've gotta love tanks. We havent seen them in the COD series since the United Offensive expansion.

Crimmastermind · #24 04-22-2009, 10:47 AM

Meh, Cod 5 is basically CoD 4 in a different setting. Apart from maps, guns (eg, setting), CoD 5 basically has nothing new or really anything that Cod 4 was lacking. In fact, by going back to WW2 it was a big step backward, because Cod4 was awesome in that it was original. Modern Warfare 2 probably won't be as good, because its still just Russians like Cod 4. Maybe they'll start a series of Modern Warfares all of which you fight the Russians. WW2 is well played out, and going back there doesn't really help the franchise.

Venom1983PRO · #25 05-02-2009, 08:42 PM

If treyarch/MS could sort out the multi player and the amount of problems joining games then it would be great as that is the best bit - the multi player!
In MW I found myself actually likeing the main character and hoping he would survive and have a hollywood ending but WaW I was so unmoved by the game play I almost couldn't be bothered with it!

RoGVenomRV · #26 05-05-2009, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Venom1983PRO

If treyarch/MS could sort out the multi player and the amount of problems joining games then it would be great as that is the best bit - the multi player!
In MW I found myself actually likeing the main character and hoping he would survive and have a hollywood ending but WaW I was so unmoved by the game play I almost couldn't be bothered with it!

I believe one of the last title updates fixed the joining game, while in a party issue. Just because it uses the same engine as cod4 doesn't mean it's call of duty 4 or anything alike.

You have to look at the actual game, not compare it to another.

D1LDOBAGG1NS · #27 05-05-2009, 07:54 PM

Nope, and as I've noticed nearly all of the Newer COD games have server issues when it comes to the consoles. .

Clone1138 · #28 05-09-2009, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dem

My thoughts exactly. I think the game is boring as hell as well. I thought I already made a post about it, maybe it was on a different board... But anyway... I keep reading how TENSE and EXCITING this game is... IGN gave it a 9,2... I think that pretty much gets rid of any doubt anybody could still have about how shit IGN is...

The game is EXACTLY the same as 4... But in the setting of 3... It's more like 3.5 than 4.5 Or maybe an mod for 4... It's booooooooooring, and just plain uninteresting.

It's 5 steps backwards, into a ravine, into a shallow river of shit.

Here here. Absolute shit. Treyarch was given gold an pissed out vinegar. A truly uninspiring game. Horrible spawning in multiplayer plus the use of optics that hardly existed in WWII. I've been playing FPS WWII games since Medal of Honor on Playstation and I have to say I'd rather play through that singleplayer over again than drudge through WAW.