Call of Duty, Now with Blood!
- Thread starter Ezzay
- Start date
Recommended Videos
i have to say that COD WAW is a waste of money. the mechanics are not as solid. you get stuck on stupid corners like the small destructable bricks and debris. sure its more vibrant and violent but there are so many things wrong with it. the guns are retardedly unbalanced and the pace is too fast for the guns. for example, mowing people down with the tommy and you get 1 guy. his buddy is behind him and has a full clip. now, here is where youre fucked.
you hit reload
you hear his steps
you hit reload again in hopes of it going faster.
5 seconds later you have a new clip because you died.
fuck the long as reloads.
you hit reload
you hear his steps
you hit reload again in hopes of it going faster.
5 seconds later you have a new clip because you died.
fuck the long as reloads.
get a cup man what you just said is going to start a chainreaction of about 18 people kicking you in the balls im not a persons opinion is their opinion and hell i thought it was in fact i HATED cod4Ezzay said:
*runs into his fortress with machine gun gaurds rocket launchers trenchs bomb shelters tanks and spartans (both master chief spartans and greek spartans) in the inevitable flamming he is about to recieve
welcome to the escapist
Thing is WaW was pretty unbalanced when it came to tanks and guns. Albeit it was still a good game. The gore added very little to the game. Gore should never have anything to do with making a game better by the way. The first time I got my legs blown off with a double barrel shotgun it shocked me and made me want to get revenge. In the story mode there were some characters that I actually cared about. None of them were American. Honestly the marines just felt to bland for my tastes. (don't hurt me I only meant that the stuff they did was expected) I feel that this game was just filler 'til the next "proper" COD installment. Not to mention a place to try some new things. (thank God grenade launchers had to be earned)And yes I love the bayonet.
The worst part of any forum is that when you hate a popular game for valid reasons and the people there accuse you of trolling.lizards said:
Thank the heavens that The Escapist is full of reasonable people who understand why I didn't enjoy Fallout 3 enough to even finish it.
ok i'll agree with him on the blood and gore but i have to say COD 4 is a lot more fun to me and with Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 coming out this fall/holiday season...forget it i'll sell COD:WaW at my local game x-change.
Although, if there is one thing, just one tiny thing i like about COD:WaW more than COD 4 is the Flamethrower. If anyone disagrees with me on that, then you obviously don't know the meaning of the word "fun"
Although, if there is one thing, just one tiny thing i like about COD:WaW more than COD 4 is the Flamethrower. If anyone disagrees with me on that, then you obviously don't know the meaning of the word "fun"
I have to admit, I was really excited when I first noticed limbs missing and torsos flying across the screen. I still am, in fact. It really helped me get immersed in the experience.Ezzay said:
And then I got a Flamethrower.
Although not the best, in terms of story and pacing, it definitely ranks high up in terms of replayability for Campaign.
Dude there was blood in COD4 but you had to get a headshot and have a wall behind the enemy to see it
I didn't get a suit when I joined...and I had to buy a new helmet...ColdStorage said:
On topic, the gore in CoD:WaW got to me for about the first three levels, and then I actually stopped noticing. Except when I shred an enemy with an MG42. It never gets old. It's like a ranged woodchipper.
Oddly enough, though, I got more grossed out in CoD4 (which is also pretty bloody and gory) when I shoot a guy in the head with my M16 and there's a clearly visible spurt of blood, and a large bloodstain on the wall near him (if he's near a wall).
I liked the saw series...Mercanary57 said:
Anyway, yes i am well aware they ripped off CoD4, however i am personally a big fan of bolt action rifles, and CoD4 did not have any. Now this dose not mean its a bad game oh no, i liked CoD4 as much as the next guy, and i still play multiplayer.
All i am saying is with the blood, with the more realistic if you will, gameplay that CoD:WAW has to offer, i got immersed in it, and when i first played it, you couldn't drag me away from the PC even if you offered me money.
I did enjoy co-op, although its a pretty easy game to begin with, it isn't really needed to progress, it was fun though.Onyx Oblivion said:
Gore might not matter but it does add atmosphere to the game. You cant deny that.
Oh...but I can deny that...Some of the most atmospheric games I've ever played had minimal gore. Fable 2, Oblivion, Morrowind, Vegas 2 (I talked to the squadmates who you ordered around!)Ezzay said:
Any game that gets me to talk to the characters has a great sense of atmosphere that translates to feelings of being immersed. CoD:WaW did that, but it wasn't the gore that did it.
I've never seen that gore really added to a game in any meaningful way. I can see that for the battlefield missions in CoD 5, it does make a lot of sense and adds a little to the immersion - after all, these missions are to portray and capture the feeling of being in the middle of a battle, with must be gruesome and gory experience. So yeah, this might add up.
But I don't see it as a substantial improvement. For me, the most that gore ever does is provide hit feedback, for which the little blood clouds of WaW's predecessors were completely sufficient.
But I don't see it as a substantial improvement. For me, the most that gore ever does is provide hit feedback, for which the little blood clouds of WaW's predecessors were completely sufficient.