Poll: Call of Duty 4 or Call of Duty 5?

[MintyFreshBreathGuy]

COD4 because it came first. What I mean is that COD:WaW is basically a WWII setting of COD4... with a flamethrower. Most I can say is; I just wish I could shoot zombies. Even wishing that I could just murder zombies like Hell, I still don't think it's worth my money. Now I hear there's a second Modern Warfare coming out, that I will buy...most likely.

 

[Sackwak]

The only real thing I liked about CoD5 was the Red Army campaign. The music, the story, the whole vibe to it really felt epic. Online for me was a drag because all I ever experienced were spawn campers

So really CoD4 is the way to go. The story and online are both magnificent peices of work that I still play to this day

 

[Fightbulb]

Man, those poll results are insane. I do agree though, I prefer CoD4 as well. Amazing game.

 

[Dr Pussymagnet]

I never

Also, COD: WAW has tanks.

Not a selling point. The controls for the vehicle missions in the Call of Duty games have never been stellar, but they was downright dismal in World at War.

This question is definitely all about personal preference. In any case, my recommendation was for Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Yes, they are both essentially the same game in different settings, but Modern Warfare is a much more coherent gaming experience. To me, anyways: the multiplayer seems more fun, the levels seem built better, and the characters don't seem as ridiculous as in World at War.

Plus Price could kick Roebuck's ass any day of the week.

I never said the tanks were a selling point, I was talking about the differences between COD4 and COD: WAW. The reason I brought up the tanks was because, unlike COD: WAW, COD4 doesn't have any vehicle segments, and it was one part of the game that I thought stood out.

 

[TundraWolf]

I never said the tanks were a selling point, I was talking about the differences between COD4 and COD: WAW. The reason I brought up the tanks was because, unlike COD: WAW, COD4 doesn't have any vehicle segments, and it was one part of the game that I thought stood out.

Fair enough. Though, to be fair, you do have the segment in CoD4 where you're in the plane, bombing the small town to clear the way for Soap's squad below.

 

[neoman10]

both, because they are interchangeable really

Edit: also I found the story in COD 5 to be much more engaging(partly because I'm a history nut)

 

[Enigmers]

Not to nitpick here, but there is no "5" in "Call of Duty: World at War."

That aside, I have played very little of CoDWaW, however, you can't go wrong with CoD4, it's a hell of a game.

 

[a7r0p05]

COD4 + WW2 + Spawn Campers = COD5

 

[neoman10]

Not to nitpick here, but there is no "5" in "Call of Duty: World at War."

That aside, I have played very little of CoDWaW, however, you can't go wrong with CoD4, it's a hell of a game.

oh god not this again

Call of Duty: World at War is a first-person shooter video game. It is developed by Treyarch and published by Activision for Microsoft Windows, Nintendo DS, PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3, Wii and Xbox 360. It is the fifth installment in the Call of Duty series

 

[Captain Urahara]

I prefer CoD4, mainly since I'm sick of WW2 games. But that's just my personal preference.

I haven't actually played the full game of CoD: WaW but I played the multiplayer beta and it was very.....how to put this....."bleh". It was sort of like CoD4's multiplayer but ALOT more spawn camping, unfair advantage with the tanks, and I swear those are the worst sniper rifles I've ever seen in a game. I could be zoomed in shooting a guy point blank in the face and it wouldn't register. I wasn't very fond of the snipers in CoD4 either but at least CoD4 had the M40A3.

Just my two cents though......

 

[Berndawg69]

this thread would have better to answer if both of the games existed, CoD4 is out and get it, Cod:WaW is NOT CoD5. when it comes out hopefully it wont be in the hands of Treyarch...can only dream.

 

[ygetoff]

I prefer COD4 for the better story, the better gameplay, and what I found to be an annoying lack of exposition in COD5. In 4, I grew to appreciate the characters, while the sequel bombards the player with generic-looking soldiers who bark orders at you. I didn't care when a character died, in contrast to COD4.

The same thing I would've said. Call of Duty 4 also has better multiplayer in my opinion. CoD5 doesn't give out enough incentives to level up, whereas CoD4 spaces out weapons and perks better. Also the things CoD5 added to the multiplayer don't really add to it.

 

[neoman10]

this thread would have better to answer if both of the games existed, CoD4 is out and get it, Cod:WaW is NOT CoD5. when it comes out hopefully it wont be in the hands of Treyarch...can only dream.

*twitch twitch*

 

[Berndawg69]

seems I am Saying what everyone else is so, just think of GTA and you'll get it

 

[neoman10]

seems I am Saying what everyone else is so, just think of GTA and you'll get it

see my above post please, the one with the wikipedia post

Edit: Also sorry if i seem a bit...mean or something, its just one of those things, a petpeeve

 

[Berndawg69]

lol, honestly, they did mediocre with 3 and all right with WaW... only the second time they had 4's tech

 

[Berndawg69]

t

Not to nitpick here, but there is no "5" in "Call of Duty: World at War."

That aside, I have played very little of CoDWaW, however, you can't go wrong with CoD4, it's a hell of a game.

oh god not this again

Call of Duty: World at War is a first-person shooter video game. It is developed by Treyarch and published by Activision for Microsoft Windows, Nintendo DS, PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3, Wii and Xbox 360. It is the fifth installment in the Call of Duty series

that may be, but that does not mean that it is CoD5, look at GTA series for exa,ple or even F.E.A.R., which will show you that it is the topsy turvy-ness of the corporate world that is the cause of these cases, there are over 7 installments of GTA, yet GTA4 just came out, the reason for the numbers is to let the consumer know that the game has something thats actually new, and not just new areas or weapons.... but new engines, or tech, etc. therefore CoDWaW does not get the # because its really CoD4 with different weapons, levels, and enemies..... but it's not CoD5

 

[Celd]

I enjoy CoD4 because I have bad eyes and red dots helped me out better than iron sights.

 

[neoman10]

t

Not to nitpick here, but there is no "5" in "Call of Duty: World at War."

That aside, I have played very little of CoDWaW, however, you can't go wrong with CoD4, it's a hell of a game.

oh god not this again

Call of Duty: World at War is a first-person shooter video game. It is developed by Treyarch and published by Activision for Microsoft Windows, Nintendo DS, PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3, Wii and Xbox 360. It is the fifth installment in the Call of Duty series

that may be, but that does not mean that it is CoD5, look at GTA series for exa,ple or even F.E.A.R., which will show you that it is the topsy turvy-ness of the corporate world that is the cause of these cases, there are over 7 installments of GTA, yet GTA4 just came out, the reason for the numbers is to let the consumer know that the game has something thats actually new, and not just new areas or weapons.... but new engines, or tech, etc. therefore CoDWaW does not get the # because its really CoD4 with different weapons, levels, and enemies..... but it's not CoD5

Calm down Neo, Calm down

breath

*begins heavy breathing*

 

[kits456]

WaW is not the 5th installment, it's the 6th. Did you guys forget about Big Red One? >_>