Poll: Why is Treyarch considered the worse of the duo?
- Thread starter Dogstile
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I like Treyarch, I think COD WAW was awesome. But I like Infinity ward better.
But, if they were to combine to make a COD game, I would say I am already going to buy it.
Over all in story tell, COD WAW told it the best, but MW1/2 is better at game play. But combine those two together and you already have a good COD game.
But, if they were to combine to make a COD game, I would say I am already going to buy it.
Over all in story tell, COD WAW told it the best, but MW1/2 is better at game play. But combine those two together and you already have a good COD game.
Well I think that's a little uncalled for, you at least should explain why they suck.jkklol94 said:
Call of Duty/United Offensive was horrid purely because I had to stop and restart the missions over and over because I did something wrong. Not something like killing my teammates. Once, I picked up a rocket launcher too early. Another time I went to a side instead of running through a bunch of people shooting at me so I wouldn't die. I don't know who made that one, but it was bad.
Call of Duty 2, 4, and 5 (World at War) were all good in my opinion. As for campaigns though, 4 was a let down, 2 was ok, but I have to say half of 5 was the best. The American side was boring, but the Russian side was amazing. I never played 3, heard it was bad from someone, but was never interested in it. MW2 I refuse to buy for certain reasons as least on PC. Might rent it for PS3 just to play the campaign.
I think they are about equal (comparing 4 and 5), but I like 5 a lot more.
Call of Duty 2, 4, and 5 (World at War) were all good in my opinion. As for campaigns though, 4 was a let down, 2 was ok, but I have to say half of 5 was the best. The American side was boring, but the Russian side was amazing. I never played 3, heard it was bad from someone, but was never interested in it. MW2 I refuse to buy for certain reasons as least on PC. Might rent it for PS3 just to play the campaign.
I think they are about equal (comparing 4 and 5), but I like 5 a lot more.
I like both, but the reason i think that Treyarch is the less liked is because they were brought in to pump out games on the off years of IW games. Also they really don't push any envelopes particularly with WaW because they just used the COD4 engine. That being said I really like WaW
call of duty 3 was the first call of duty I played and I really really liked it. Though I hated world at war, so whatever.
lol
lol
I agree, W@W was worse than MW because it was not better. If you are pretty well basing the game right on top of its predecessor, it should be better World at War is essentially the same game as Modern Warfare, gameplay, perks, graphically. MW2 improved upon and added stuff to its predecessor thus making it a solid sequel, World at War made the same game but WW2AC10 said:
I personally thought CoD 5 was a very fun game, but the games by IW are great as well. Call of Duty, the original, is one of my favorite games of all time.
Well, both of their most recent installments in the Call of Duty franchise are about equally unbalanced, so....
*and I really don't care to type up my rant on why MW2 is unbalanced, again*
*and I really don't care to type up my rant on why MW2 is unbalanced, again*
Satchel charges were where it was at. 2 of them placed not ON the tank but NEXT to it would take it down. Because knowledge is power.Ham Blitz said:
OT: COD4< W@W< MW2 IMO
Never underestimate the appeal of co-op campaign modes, Infinity Ward, I probably played through W@Ws 5 or so times with different mates. Also bolt action rifles are awesome, as are zombies.
