You forgot COD 4. Which is arguably the best in the COD series.Furburt said:I think 3 is better, there is no chance a game with 4 or higher after it can work (Resi 4 excepted)
Well played, I had totally forgotten about that one.Aby_Z said:Prince of Persia: Warrior Within (second game). A resounding failure by most people (I'm not most people.) Your thread has thusly been disproved.
Well WaW was released on PC too *stokes the Furburt vs Furburt argument*.Furburt said:I don't count 3. It wasn't released for PC. Although I do like WAW, so there goes my argument.sheic99 said:You forgot COD 4. Which is arguably the best in the COD series.Furburt said:I think 3 is better, there is no chance a game with 4 or higher after it can work (Resi 4 excepted)
But I could also say they were developed by different people.
Goddamn, am I arguing with myself now?
You can stop now guys, Commi wins.IdealistCommi said:But ~One is the loneliest number you'll ever doooooooo
Two, can be as bad as one, the loneliest number 'since the number one~
Now that you've said that I agree. used to play that with my dad on the ps1.tdp316 said:Have you ever noticed that 2 is just right, I can think of a few examples.. Sonic 2, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2, Cool Boarders 2. Is it just me or do games just go downhill after that? (No pun intended) Your thoughts?
Okay, but what one earth makes MGS4 the best? And where is exactly MGS2 faulty where MGS1 isn't?-Stranger- said:Metal Gear Solid 2 was pretty much terrible (and not just because of Raiden.) But 4 was the best/second best in the series (Thought # 1 was the best, myself.)