But as I said in the OP, in my experience a high frame rate is far more immersive and involving than high res textures.IamQ said:
Call Of Duty and why we keep going back to it...
- Thread starter MiracleOfSound
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Zombies for the win. Even when BioOps (still getting used to that name) comes in with zombies, Im still gonna play on WaW.Iffat Nur said:Wait, are we talking about the entire series, or just MW2?
If the entire series, then its da zombies. and Mile High Club.
If just MW2, I must've forgot there was crack, because I only rented this game, and I never did again (November 2009-now)
OT: The only reason i ever play any MW2 is because i only use pistols and its fun to see people in awe at my awesome pistol skills. Man i really am to full of myself.
I must give that a go so! Although we'll just watch eachother's screens hehe.TheRightToArmBears said:
Splitscreen is sorely lacking from games these days. Gears 2 was amazing with a friend, and I've been lovng the XBOX Live version of Doom in Splitscreen too.
Why we keep coming back to it? With Episode 3, Portal 2, Dead Space 2, Resistance 3, Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, Metal Gear Solid: Rising, Crysis 2 and Batman: Arkham City coming out in the next 12 months, I can safely say that Call Of Duty can go and die quietly. Not that I ever liked it much in the first place, but there are games that I just appreciate so much more. Probably because they are more fun, (for me of course.)
COD is an awful game, I only play it so that I can speak to my friends due to XBL parties being banned from the majority of game modes. The gameplay is repetitive and dull, the graphics are shit and it's plagued by morons. There's a 100 other FPS's I'd rather play than COD, it's just a shame that I can't play them and speak to my friends at the same time..
Most of those points are subjective opinion instead of the actual merits of the game.
1: The best controls on the market? They're just as competent as any other big-name FPS on the market. It's no more fluid than, say, Unreal, Half-Life, Halo, etc, etc. It's slightly less arcadey than, say, Unreal but it's no better or worse.
2: The engine may be able to do 60 frames second, but it doesn't run at a constant 60 frames a second. It only maintains that when it's running a scripted cut-scene or when there's virtually nothing happening. And that's for either version, PC or console.
3: Visually, I wasn't "wowed" all that much, but then I'm biased. I've seen Crysis running on maxed settings. So pretty much all other engines look like crap visually. Damn you Crytech!
4: Frankly, leveling in a multiplayer FPS is one of the single dumbest ideas that's ever been implemented. Think about it. It's an epic dick move on the developers part. They're basically giving better weapons, better stats, and better abilities to those that waste WAY too much of their lives playing the game. It's like saying, "Fuck you!" to any new player.
Besides, it's kinda sad to go through so much effort playing that many hours...just to get a custom paint skin on one gun.
Don't take this as a personal attack. I just grow weary of hearing so many sing this game's praises as if there is no other game that can compare. Same goes for many other games.
Personally, I prefer a little more depth to my online gaming experience. Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead, Battlefield 2, even Bad Company 2 (to a VERY small degree) appeal more to me. We've come a long way since Doom and Quake. There's no excuse to have a multiplayer game that only involves just run-and-gun deathmatch shooting where the only thing that differentiates it from shooters a decade ago is...you have to press two buttons to fire instead of one. I'm looking at you too Halo...
1: The best controls on the market? They're just as competent as any other big-name FPS on the market. It's no more fluid than, say, Unreal, Half-Life, Halo, etc, etc. It's slightly less arcadey than, say, Unreal but it's no better or worse.
2: The engine may be able to do 60 frames second, but it doesn't run at a constant 60 frames a second. It only maintains that when it's running a scripted cut-scene or when there's virtually nothing happening. And that's for either version, PC or console.
3: Visually, I wasn't "wowed" all that much, but then I'm biased. I've seen Crysis running on maxed settings. So pretty much all other engines look like crap visually. Damn you Crytech!
4: Frankly, leveling in a multiplayer FPS is one of the single dumbest ideas that's ever been implemented. Think about it. It's an epic dick move on the developers part. They're basically giving better weapons, better stats, and better abilities to those that waste WAY too much of their lives playing the game. It's like saying, "Fuck you!" to any new player.
Besides, it's kinda sad to go through so much effort playing that many hours...just to get a custom paint skin on one gun.
Don't take this as a personal attack. I just grow weary of hearing so many sing this game's praises as if there is no other game that can compare. Same goes for many other games.
Personally, I prefer a little more depth to my online gaming experience. Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead, Battlefield 2, even Bad Company 2 (to a VERY small degree) appeal more to me. We've come a long way since Doom and Quake. There's no excuse to have a multiplayer game that only involves just run-and-gun deathmatch shooting where the only thing that differentiates it from shooters a decade ago is...you have to press two buttons to fire instead of one. I'm looking at you too Halo...
Mine is curbed naturally (and involuntarily) by how much I suck at the gamesilver wolf009 said:
Don't worry I don't... as always these are just my opinions and I'm trying to weigh up the good with the bad. Not sure if you know it but I did quite a differently toned MW2 thread recently that was quite popular...Vigormortis said:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.187182-Modern-Warfare-2-why-it-makes-people-angry-Read-if-youve-ever-played-the-game?page=1
You may prefer my opinions in that one
I moved on to World At War quite recently, and I'm actually good at it. More often than not I'll get very good scores, but there's one thing that annoys me more than wasps that refuse to bugger off. The Second Chance perk. The amount of times I've downed a guy, only to get pistol'd in the face and lose the one kill that would have given me Dogs...MiracleOfSound said:
I know what you mean about hit registry though, it is a right arsehole sometimes.
Second Chance/Final Stand/Last Chance... by far my most hated perk in COD. I hate it more than Commando and Noob Tubes combined and it frustrates the shit out of me when I get assists instead of kills because of it and have to unload an entire clip into someone to kill them, by which time I've been shot from behind.StarStruckStrumpets said:
I agree. MW1 was rather balanced, and is still a much better game than its predecessor.MetallicaRulez0 said:
Damn straight. The only things that were annoying were Martyrdom, frag spam and Last Stand... basically the things that reward people for playing badly.The Hairminator said:
Hehe thats why I love BFBC 2 so much! Pretty much the whole map is destructible.Worgen said:
As far as CoD I liked CoD 4, but MW2... not so much. I played it about a month then stopped, but you are right, the controls are great, it looks great but thats about it, other than that I never found MW2 to be much fun.
This, and it's the only game my friends will play.TheYellowCellPhone said:
I don't care how it looks, I play on an SD TV.
The controls have been the same since the series started.
The levels are all the same format. Left path, right path, center path.
I don't care about my stats, until some asshole thinks hes better than me and tells me to get on his level. Then I simply say "Hey, can you tell me what name is at the 5xxx rank on the leaderboards? Yep, that's me.".
I've never prestiged. And I never will.
So, I keep going back because I like to play games with my friends, and they'll play nothing else.