Poll: Call of Duty 4 or Call of Duty 5?
- Thread starter Incompl te
- Start date
Recommended Videos
How about United Offensive? Technically, World at War is the seventh Call of Duty game that's been made.Raunky said:
Y'know, if you want to get picky.
Edit: Here's a good litmus test: did you play Call of Duty 2? If yes, then World at War is the same game with basically the same story, only the graphics are better and the multiplayer is different. If no, then World at War will seem like a WWII conversion of Modern Warfare.
Simple!
Pros:
4 is smoother and more tactical, also headshots give you camouflages.
5 has better large-scale battles, the Toss Back perk, and some good maps.
Cons:
4 makes throwing back grenades almost useless, noob tubes (grenade launchers) are available at rank 1, pretty small maps.
5 is choppier, MP40s are way too powerful and accurate, most new perks are useless (flak jacket, shades, gas mask), MOTHERFUCKING TANKS, no weapon camouflage, lots of glitches/sploits.
Note: I'm only talking about multiplayer here.
4 is smoother and more tactical, also headshots give you camouflages.
5 has better large-scale battles, the Toss Back perk, and some good maps.
Cons:
4 makes throwing back grenades almost useless, noob tubes (grenade launchers) are available at rank 1, pretty small maps.
5 is choppier, MP40s are way too powerful and accurate, most new perks are useless (flak jacket, shades, gas mask), MOTHERFUCKING TANKS, no weapon camouflage, lots of glitches/sploits.
Note: I'm only talking about multiplayer here.
I would say CoD4 simply because it's different than ALL OF THE OTHER CoD games because it does not take place during WWII.
You get decent guns and... please, be serious, who doesn't like calling in airstrikes on a crowd of fanatical madmen trying to kill you?
Also, I thought the story was more immersing than any of the others because it was something original. whereas the WWII games have been going on for over ten years.(longer than WWII actually lasted for people who didn't already know that.)
You get decent guns and... please, be serious, who doesn't like calling in airstrikes on a crowd of fanatical madmen trying to kill you?
Also, I thought the story was more immersing than any of the others because it was something original. whereas the WWII games have been going on for over ten years.(longer than WWII actually lasted for people who didn't already know that.)
ok its kinda hard 2 choose one because they deal with 2 different places in history,
Call of duty 4 deals with modern warefare, nukes, automatic assualt rifles, and night vision.
Call of duty 5 deals with world war 2, banzi charges, flamethrowers, bolt action rifles, and beach landings. so it depends in what ur into modern warefare, or world war 2, i liek both of the games i thought they were great.
Call of duty 4 deals with modern warefare, nukes, automatic assualt rifles, and night vision.
Call of duty 5 deals with world war 2, banzi charges, flamethrowers, bolt action rifles, and beach landings. so it depends in what ur into modern warefare, or world war 2, i liek both of the games i thought they were great.
because its different to other COD games, it was refreshing to see that they had moved on from the world wars
Guess I'll go with Call of Duty 4, since I prefer the modern warefare thing, I find the multiplayer maps to be more diverse, and the campaign story isn't broken up into sections that are sometimes separated by month wide gaps.
And I agree with the people who are mentioning that COD: World at War is not COD5. It's not that we're trying to be nitpicky when we bring that up. I think a lot of people wouldn't even care if it wasn't for the fact that, as someone mentioned already, "Call of Duty 5" is supposed to be released by Infinity Ward in the near future.
I'm pretty sure I heard somewhere that they're handling the CoD games that are actually gonna be numbered, while Treyarch is going to handle the other biennial releases which are going to go under other names like "World at War."
That's just what I heard. But with Activision wanting to do that whole "one game every year" thing, I think it makes sense.
And I agree with the people who are mentioning that COD: World at War is not COD5. It's not that we're trying to be nitpicky when we bring that up. I think a lot of people wouldn't even care if it wasn't for the fact that, as someone mentioned already, "Call of Duty 5" is supposed to be released by Infinity Ward in the near future.
I'm pretty sure I heard somewhere that they're handling the CoD games that are actually gonna be numbered, while Treyarch is going to handle the other biennial releases which are going to go under other names like "World at War."
That's just what I heard. But with Activision wanting to do that whole "one game every year" thing, I think it makes sense.
I would have to say CoD 1.5 simply because when that came out WWII was not quite as overdone. Out of CoD 4 or Cod5 I would have to say Cod4 due to the toyish sounds of the weapons in Cod5 and the superior story and character development in Cod4 (the SAS portion at least) However the Coop (and zombies) in Cod5 are excellent additions and it makes me happy that developers are not forgetting that PC players like Coop too.
COD WaW had an alright campaign, the Russian missions were great. It got irritating that the Japanese and Germans fought really differently so you were always changing gears mid-game, but that's not really a gripe.
COD 4's multiplayer is better purely because modern guns are funner to use than older ones.
COD 4's multiplayer is better purely because modern guns are funner to use than older ones.
COD4. Because it was a reinvention of a franchise which looked like it was going to be laid to rest (Face it, COD3 wasn't the best.)and so infinity Ward reminded everyone how its meant to be done.
Cod 4 is the only way to go!
Cod 5's single player campaign is a thing of beauty, however the game will never recover for its fucking joke of a multiplayer!!!!!
All they fucking did was import cod4's challenges and guns into cod 5's scenery and weapons!
Which has just created 15 maps of pure camping...and if thats not the shittest thing you've ever heard then fuck off you camping barstards!
xx
Cod 5's single player campaign is a thing of beauty, however the game will never recover for its fucking joke of a multiplayer!!!!!
All they fucking did was import cod4's challenges and guns into cod 5's scenery and weapons!
Which has just created 15 maps of pure camping...and if thats not the shittest thing you've ever heard then fuck off you camping barstards!
xx