Everyone forget CoD 1, CoD:UO, and CoD: Finest Hour. Granted finest hour was complete shit, but still...
[QUOTE=Keychain;42833817]The jump to CoD4 still blows my mind to this day.[/QUOTE]
CoD 4 was the funnest of the bunch sure, but it wasn't much of a technical leap.
[QUOTE=urbanmonkey;42833942]Everyone forget CoD 1, CoD:UO, and CoD: Finest Hour. Granted finest hour was complete shit, but still...[/QUOTE]
Finest Hour, For the time it was released and the fact it was built for consoles. It wasn't bad at all. It just wasnt anywhere near as good as it's bigger brothers on the PC.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;42834152]CoD 4 was the funnest of the bunch sure, but it wasn't much of a technical leap.[/QUOTE]
Well maybe it's because of the gameplay they used, but CoD4 definitely looked a lot better than CoD3 maybe not in terms of models and textures, but the particles and effects were definitely better. The beginning boat scene in CoD4 still looks pretty nice.
CoD2 was great.
[B]MACGREGOOOOOR[/B]
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;42833159]Yeah I noticed they omitted the first CoD, which is odd since the first one was great.
[editline]11th November 2013[/editline]
I dunno to me it just showed it hasn't really changed at all since CoD4 and WaW[/QUOTE]
Wasn't CoD1 a lot like Medal Of Honor?
[editline]11th November 2013[/editline]
This video lacks Finest Hour 0/10
Where is CoD:United Offensive? That was the best in the CoD series.
[QUOTE=pedrus24;42833453]All the CoD games after Modern Warfare are basically the same to me.[/QUOTE]
I like World at War for the zombies, but Black Ops was good.
[editline]11th November 2013[/editline]
Also, why does everybody's CoD 2 looks so shitty? I was playing it recently, and mine looks like current gen CoDs.
[t]http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/630792195390240661/7BAD827C6809492BA3378B9FFBA051000D17B545/[/t]
[t]http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/635295181860709051/FE0BC92BBDB1FB38B2A4E380B763A4DD3B9BFB57/[/t]
Video just made me want to play the originals again
The reason the video didn't include CoD and UO is because they aren't from this generation. That's the point of this video.
Also makes you think just how little work was put into the CoD series seeing as how 90% of it was built in ONE generation.
[QUOTE=Mr.Cookie;42836551]The reason the video didn't include CoD and UO is because they aren't from this generation. That's the point of this video.
Also makes you think just how little work was put into the CoD series seeing as how 90% of it was built in ONE generation.[/QUOTE]
time isn't always representative of quality. not trying to defend the blatant milking-ness of cod, but some of the greatest games like, ever, were created in 1 year, like fallout 2 and majora's mask, while you have games that took nearly a decade that were total fucking garbage like DNF and too human.
Remember how in the first CoD you could select your firing mode on a gun? That was some cool shit.
[editline]11th November 2013[/editline]
Also you had actual squad mates and it felt like you just a regular guy in the middle of the shit, not some tier 10 spec ops douchebag and his one buddy.
[QUOTE=The Party Spy;42833732]MW2 was the last good CoD imo[/QUOTE]
mw2 literally felt like nothing more than 15$ DLC for mw1
[editline]12th November 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42836597]time isn't always representative of quality. not trying to defend the blatant milking-ness of cod, but some of the greatest games like, ever, were created in 1 year, like fallout 2 and majora's mask, while you have games that took nearly a decade that were total fucking garbage like DNF and too human.[/QUOTE]
and at the same time, you have some insanely good games that have taken a long time as well.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42836597]time isn't always representative of quality. not trying to defend the blatant milking-ness of cod, but some of the greatest games like, ever, were created in 1 year, like fallout 2 and majora's mask, while you have games that took nearly a decade that were total fucking garbage like DNF and too human.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but games nowadays take longer to make because there's a much higher standard in production value. Sure, we have better technology but that doesn't necessarily speed up the process of development.
I am of course talking about making a game from scratch though, not like how Infinity Ward loves to copy and paste huge chunks from a game and right into the sequel.
Way I see it, even if the sequel has few differences between the previous game as long as you are able to sink hours into it, it's worth it. It can still be fun even if it isn't that much different, and really isn't that all we buy a game for?
Didn't CoD Big Red One have voice actors that also played in Band Of Brothers?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;42833744]Black Ops 2 was really fun in single player and split screen. The online is as infuriating as ever thanks to quickscoping and other shit. But the single player was so absurd it was just fun to play. It seemed to want to take itself seriously, but never managed it, so it was fun.[/QUOTE]
WaW and Black Ops 1 took itself seriously but BLOP2 didn't feel like that, not denying it wasn't a great game tho
I like mw3 :( Only because of survival mode though
Call of duty 4 was the last good CoD game because it was the last game made by the original team before the majority of IW left, only leaving the worst elements behind.
The treyarch CoD games just make me sad because it just shows Treyarch has a ton of ideas for the franchise and could make an amazing new licence out of them but they keep getting forced to beat up the dead horse.
Can't tell the difference from any of them from CoD4 and on, except World at War, but that's because it's obviously World War 2
CoD4 was great. It was new and different. Exactly what we needed when we needed it. The rest has been riding on its wave ever since. Quite literally, given some of the assets being used in several of the games are the same
One thing I've recently noticed with CoD is the maps are very very static. Extremely static. Reminds me of maps like DoD_Hill or Doom. Even DoD_Hill was less static because of the silly artillery the germans could call in. And that was in 2001. Even though Battlefield maps are just as static up to Bad Company, they had vehicles and planes and ships and all that shit which brought them to life. CoD's seems lifeless
[QUOTE=TheTalon;42837963]Can't tell the difference from any of them from CoD4 and on, except World at War, but that's because it's obviously World War 2
CoD4 was great. It was new and different. Exactly what we needed when we needed it. The rest has been riding on its wave ever since. Quite literally, given some of the assets being used in several of the games are the same[/QUOTE]
I think MW2 was the peak of the franchise. They took what they had done with cod4 and expanded on it. It was the last cod game that actually added anything new.
[QUOTE=WhiskeyTangoF;42837978]I think MW2 was the peak of the franchise. They took what they had done with cod4 and expanded on it. It was the last cod game that actually added anything new.[/QUOTE]
I don't think I liked MW2... It seemed like they took CoD4 then sped it up. There was a point where you could take the right perks. Get kills until you can get the care package, then just run around with the care package ready to be thrown (But never throw it) at like 45 miles per hour, just knifing everyone because you were too fast for anyone to do shit about
Marathon Runner, Faster Sprint and the Longer melee range. Holy dicks was it stupid
Further compounds that CoD is stagnating. Personally, Big Red One and CoD4 were the best and my favorites. All the Treyarch ones are also solid and i enjoyed them but Infinity Wards are pathetic.
[QUOTE=draugur;42832894]Blatant advert which finds and displays the worst moments of older games and cuts out video of bugs and glitches as the games become new to the point where it begins to just show the best parts of a game? Yeah, great, it's just a really shit way of advertising the new COD.[/QUOTE]
hope someone makes one in reverse
Ugh it hurts to see the awkward aim when it's played on a gamepad.
It honestly feels like he purposely was bad at it, there's a running enemy and instead of aiming at him quickly and shooting he goes and sloooooowly follows his movement and by the time he's on his aim he already got to cover or he flips his shit and aims to far to the left or right.
I've never played past cod 4 because it gives me what I want in many aspects. anything after that is just watered down, same ol same ol
[QUOTE=proch;42839252]Ugh it hurts to see the awkward aim when it's played on a gamepad.
It honestly feels like he purposely was bad at it, there's a running enemy and instead of aiming at him quickly and shooting he goes and sloooooowly follows his movement and by the time he's on his aim he already got to cover or he flips his shit and aims to far to the left or right.[/QUOTE]
In Call Of Duty on consoles, you can just tap the ADS button to snap on to a target.
So either that persons legit sucks, or faking it like you said
The only Call of Duty game I haven't had a lot of fun in was MW3, which shouldn't be surprising considering the people behind it were a new studio combined with the leftovers of the Infinity Ward-Activision split.
Everyone likes to consider all the games after CoD4 DLC's or expansions but I'd argue that those would have to be fairly large expansions. New maps, weapons equipment, killstreaks, mechanics and in the case of Treyarch games, a new setting make the multiplayer aspects of each one quite different, to the point where by MW3 and Black Ops 2 the create a class and killstreak systems have been completely changed.
Black Ops for instance, probably my favorite CoD title (three way tie between that, CoD4, and United Offensive) plays similarly to any other CoD game but the multiplayer feels slightly slower and more deliberate. There is an element of strategy even in pub games where holding down sections of the map is rewarded. Front lines form more often than in other CoD titles. This is the opposite of the high speed found in games like MW2 and Black Ops 2. Again, it's still CoD so movement and shooting feel similar but both games are much faster due to the different perks, weapons, and maps featured. The only exception to this is MW3, which feels just like MW2.
With Ghosts poor reception I think the odds of me getting another Infinity Ward game at this point are pretty low. Still eagerly looking forward to the next Treyarch title and Respawn's Titanfall though.
[editline]12th November 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Durrsly;42839336]In Call Of Duty on consoles, you can just tap the ADS button to snap on to a target.
So either that persons legit sucks, or faking it like you said[/QUOTE]
Only in singleplayer.
Hey fuck this CODUO was the best COD.
Fucking Base Assault.
I wish they would just ditch the whole grr grr gritty military shooter USA fuck yes and go fully arcade, Treyarch is getting there but we'll see what happens next November when they release the CoD people actually care about
The gameplay is already completely stupid arcade silliness, why does the rest of the game have to be so dull and serious
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
