Call of Duty

Talk about gaming culture and other aspects of PC and console games and systems.

Which is better?

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
16
70%
Call of Duty: World at War
7
30%
 
Total votes: 23

User avatar
Depressing
Posts: 1989
Joined: 2008.09.28 (01:10)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/UniverseZero
Steam: www.steamcommunity.com/id/universezero/
MBTI Type: ENTJ
Location: The City of Sails, The Land of the Long White Cloud
Contact:

Postby Universezero » 2009.04.16 (00:38)

I have played both, and I think that 4 was better, but I'll let you decide.
Image

User avatar
Not So Awesome Blossom
Posts: 2529
Joined: 2008.09.26 (21:28)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/
Steam: www.steamcommunity.com/id/
Location: USA

Postby Vyacheslav » 2009.04.16 (00:46)

Having beaten both of them, I prefer WoW.
Image

User avatar
Queen of All Spiders
Posts: 4263
Joined: 2008.09.29 (03:54)
NUMA Profile: http://www.freeWoWgold.edu
MBTI Type: ENFP
Location: Quebec, Canada!

Postby SlappyMcGee » 2009.04.16 (00:51)

87654321 wrote:Having beaten both of them, I prefer WoW.

Yeah, World of Warcraft is great. o_0

Definitely 4. Five is a step back, at least from a multiplayer only perspective.
Loathes

User avatar
Loquacious
Posts: 1747
Joined: 2008.09.27 (06:55)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/29403
Steam: What's Steam
MBTI Type: ENFP
Location: London
Contact:

Postby 29403 » 2009.04.16 (17:38)

None.

Both over rated FPSs, and it gets irritating when my friends talk about it constantly. I don't have it, and I'm glad.
Image
sig by donfuy.
Not from Charleston, South Carolina
This Forum is probably the best forum that i have ever used and i would just like to say how proud i am to be a member of this forum

User avatar
Cowboy Magician
Posts: 510
Joined: 2008.09.23 (13:07)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/wedgie123
MBTI Type: ENTJ
Location: Essex, England

Postby wedgie » 2009.04.16 (19:18)

Definitely 4. Recently I have just completely given up playing 5 altogether as it pisses me off too much. 5 has too many problems with the spawning for one. 4 is just better.

User avatar
Depressing
Posts: 1989
Joined: 2008.09.28 (01:10)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/UniverseZero
Steam: www.steamcommunity.com/id/universezero/
MBTI Type: ENTJ
Location: The City of Sails, The Land of the Long White Cloud
Contact:

Postby Universezero » 2009.04.17 (06:17)

wedgie wrote:Definitely 4. Recently I have just completely given up playing 5 altogether as it pisses me off too much. 5 has too many problems with the spawning for one. 4 is just better.
I agree, that's why I bought it. Just one thing; I can't get it to have any CPUs on the split screen mode; is this possible?
Image

User avatar
Queen of All Spiders
Posts: 4263
Joined: 2008.09.29 (03:54)
NUMA Profile: http://www.freeWoWgold.edu
MBTI Type: ENFP
Location: Quebec, Canada!

Postby SlappyMcGee » 2009.04.17 (16:31)

Universezero wrote:
wedgie wrote:Definitely 4. Recently I have just completely given up playing 5 altogether as it pisses me off too much. 5 has too many problems with the spawning for one. 4 is just better.
I agree, that's why I bought it. Just one thing; I can't get it to have any CPUs on the split screen mode; is this possible?
I assume you mean Bots, in which case, no.
Loathes

RoboBarber
Posts: 361
Joined: 2009.04.17 (09:55)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/Aphex_N
MBTI Type: ENFJ
Location: Arstar

Postby Aphex » 2009.04.18 (09:43)

well, call of duty 4 is better in my opinion.

Cod5 just feels like treyarch have taken what infinity ward have done and copied and pasted it into world war 2.

also, altogether treyarchs contribution to the series (cod3 and 5) have been of much lower quality than infinity wards contribution (cod2 and 4). Infinity ward knows what the series is about, whereas treyarch keep putting things in that look good, but don't work, for example the introduction of vehicles into cod3 ruined it, and took away from the whole premise:

its all about foot soldiers and small battles, not massive 24 player matches.

anyway, there you go, my opinion: i think treyarch should go back to spiderman.
Image

User avatar
Depressing
Posts: 1989
Joined: 2008.09.28 (01:10)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/UniverseZero
Steam: www.steamcommunity.com/id/universezero/
MBTI Type: ENTJ
Location: The City of Sails, The Land of the Long White Cloud
Contact:

Postby Universezero » 2009.04.22 (03:44)

5 does have Dualshock compatibility. I'll probably get that as well just for the Dualshock.
Image

Beyond a Perfect Math Score
Posts: 829
Joined: 2008.09.25 (21:35)
Location: England
Contact:

Postby Luminaflare » 2009.04.22 (10:01)

Universezero wrote:5 does have Dualshock compatibility. I'll probably get that as well just for the Dualshock.
Oh wow the controller vibrates, totally worth another £40 ($60 or whatever it is in your currency).

User avatar
Hawaii Five-Oh
Posts: 923
Joined: 2008.09.27 (16:29)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/RadiumFalcon
MBTI Type: ENTJ
Location: California
Contact:

Postby Radium » 2009.04.22 (14:50)

Campaign wise, CoD 4..

But I play online so CoD 5 all the way. The online play is much better to me.
spoiler


User avatar
Oops Pow Surprise
Posts: 635
Joined: 2008.09.26 (22:09)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/
MBTI Type: INTJ

Postby noops » 2009.04.23 (10:32)

29403 wrote:None.

Both over rated FPSs, and it gets irritating when my friends talk about it constantly. I don't have it, and I'm glad.

QFE'd. I was about to say 4, but then I started thinking about the last time I playeed it, a year or so ago. I'd rushed through the single player levels and stuff, but got slaughtered in the multiplayer matches. So I took a step back, and realized that, it's really rather stupid, to put it simply.

But, somehow, it's good in it's stupidity.
Image

User avatar
Queen of All Spiders
Posts: 4263
Joined: 2008.09.29 (03:54)
NUMA Profile: http://www.freeWoWgold.edu
MBTI Type: ENFP
Location: Quebec, Canada!

Postby SlappyMcGee » 2009.04.23 (23:31)

spoon wrote:
29403 wrote:None.

Both over rated FPSs, and it gets irritating when my friends talk about it constantly. I don't have it, and I'm glad.

QFE'd. I was about to say 4, but then I started thinking about the last time I playeed it, a year or so ago. I'd rushed through the single player levels and stuff, but got slaughtered in the multiplayer matches. So I took a step back, and realized that, it's really rather stupid, to put it simply.

But, somehow, it's good in it's stupidity.
The thing I like about the multiplayer is the level and unlock system, as well as the learning curve. It takes about four hours of online to become a solid player, and if you have a talent for FPS's, you'll rise to the top of the ranks. Ultimately, it doesn't take lots of time to learn, everyone can fill a variety of roles without having the roles dictated by their classes, and there are many modes to play.
Loathes

User avatar
Oops Pow Surprise
Posts: 635
Joined: 2008.09.26 (22:09)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/
MBTI Type: INTJ

Postby noops » 2009.04.26 (00:44)

SlappyMcGee wrote:
spoon wrote:
29403 wrote:None.

Both over rated FPSs, and it gets irritating when my friends talk about it constantly. I don't have it, and I'm glad.

QFE'd. I was about to say 4, but then I started thinking about the last time I playeed it, a year or so ago. I'd rushed through the single player levels and stuff, but got slaughtered in the multiplayer matches. So I took a step back, and realized that, it's really rather stupid, to put it simply.

But, somehow, it's good in it's stupidity.
The thing I like about the multiplayer is the level and unlock system, as well as the learning curve. It takes about four hours of online to become a solid player, and if you have a talent for FPS's, you'll rise to the top of the ranks. Ultimately, it doesn't take lots of time to learn, everyone can fill a variety of roles without having the roles dictated by their classes, and there are many modes to play.
I agree. It's for this reason that I enjoy Battlefield: Bad Company, though a lot more for the realism. Of course, I know if you take a step back, they're pretty much the same. Bad company just focuses on teamwork more than CoD4. To top things off, it's pretty obscure, so I look somewhat cultured :D.
Image

User avatar
Depressing
Posts: 1989
Joined: 2008.09.28 (01:10)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/UniverseZero
Steam: www.steamcommunity.com/id/universezero/
MBTI Type: ENTJ
Location: The City of Sails, The Land of the Long White Cloud
Contact:

Postby Universezero » 2009.04.26 (01:41)

The bad thing about Multiplayer is, for me anyway, that it's out of sync with my country, so I'm slightly slower than other American players, which makes it harder.
Image

User avatar
Cowboy Magician
Posts: 510
Joined: 2008.09.23 (13:07)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/wedgie123
MBTI Type: ENTJ
Location: Essex, England

Postby wedgie » 2009.04.27 (18:35)

I've been playing 5 a bit more over the last few days and I just never seem to do as well on that. Like, consistently never getting any more than 10 kills and almost always getting more deaths than kills. On 4 I can play so much better and get positive ratios and around 20-30 kills pretty consistently. 5 is just harder for some reason. Oh and the servers and spawning on it is totally shite.

User avatar
On the Psychic Highway
Posts: 292
Joined: 2008.10.12 (17:19)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/mahi_mahi
Location: VOJVODINJA<3

Postby Mustardude » 2009.05.04 (02:35)

Not only online play, but the campaign in Call of Duty 4 completely destroys that of Call of Duty WaW. In WaW, knifing seems to have receded; there seems to be less lunge and less 'lock-on'. Also, the sounds and perks in WaW are subpar. Because of the setting, the guns in the game aren't too good. The maps in WaW, too, suck majorly. They are either destroyed building(s) or some kind of tropical island. The campaign is predictable on the Russian side, but impossible to follow on the American front. Personally, I think even Ace Combat can stand up to Call of Duty WaW.

CoD 4, hands down.
Image
Check out the pack thread, click the picture above
wordblamcreator wrote:mahi_mahi has the french flag up! He must be surrendering...
mahi_mahi wrote:It's the Russian flag.

User avatar
Cowboy Magician
Posts: 510
Joined: 2008.09.23 (13:07)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/wedgie123
MBTI Type: ENTJ
Location: Essex, England

Postby wedgie » 2009.05.05 (18:23)

I've been trying 5 out a bit more today and one gun alone has really pulled me back. The M1A1 Carbine. I've never really given it a chance, but today I've just been kicking serious ass with it. Scores like 19-1 and average of 20's with 10 or less deaths. Amazing gun. Though after digressing I think I would still pick 4 overall. Can't wait for Modern Warfare 2.

The Dreamster Teamster
Posts: 77
Joined: 2008.12.03 (16:35)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/

Postby shiprelation_ » 2009.05.28 (19:35)

I really like (Call of duty 4). My dad got so hooked on call of duty 2 (I bought it for him for Christmas) that he played everyday and would get mad when we asked Questions! IT WAS SO SO SO SO FUNNY!!
Image

User avatar
Slice of Wisdom
Posts: 407
Joined: 2008.09.27 (05:29)

Postby kai » 2009.05.30 (04:33)

29403 wrote:None.

Both over rated FPSs, and it gets irritating when my friends talk about it constantly. I don't have it, and I'm glad.
Thanks, your input was so insightful.

have you even played it? there's hype for a reason man, so i damn hope you at least played it first.
SlappyMcGee wrote:The thing I like about the multiplayer is the level and unlock system, as well as the learning curve. It takes about four hours of online to become a solid player, and if you have a talent for FPS's, you'll rise to the top of the ranks. Ultimately, it doesn't take lots of time to learn, everyone can fill a variety of roles without having the roles dictated by their classes, and there are many modes to play.
Meaning everyone gets their ass handed to them on there first run. and second, and third.... pretty much till your out of the noob weapons. Its defiantly a game you have to play for a bit to get good.

User avatar
Loquacious
Posts: 1747
Joined: 2008.09.27 (06:55)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/29403
Steam: What's Steam
MBTI Type: ENFP
Location: London
Contact:

Postby 29403 » 2009.05.30 (18:30)

kai wrote:
29403 wrote:None.

Both over rated FPSs, and it gets irritating when my friends talk about it constantly. I don't have it, and I'm glad.
Thanks, your input was so insightful.

have you even played it? there's hype for a reason man, so i damn hope you at least played it first.
I admit that I didn't play it extensively, maybe for one hour, but I don't like games like those in general. Maybe COD has a lot more to offer, but it gets irritating when my friends talk about it constantly and say nothing else.

I must say that you are right in saying that there's hype for a reason. I'm not a fan of shooting games, so maybe my opinion might be disagreeable, since it's biased, but oh well!! :P
Image
sig by donfuy.
Not from Charleston, South Carolina
This Forum is probably the best forum that i have ever used and i would just like to say how proud i am to be a member of this forum

User avatar
Donator
Donator
Posts: 155
Joined: 2008.10.20 (07:53)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/DW40
Location: Scotland

Postby DW40 » 2009.06.14 (10:13)

Woops! I think I voted for WaW instead of 4. :(

I prefer CoD4 because I'm better at it. haha. I've never been able to get into World at War.

User avatar
The Konami Number
Posts: 573
Joined: 2008.09.29 (22:27)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/_destiny%5E%2D
MBTI Type: ISTJ
Location: UK

Postby Destiny » 2009.06.16 (01:01)

Infinity ward > tryarch

Nazi Zombies is the shizz, however.
Image
Image

User avatar
The Konami Number
Posts: 584
Joined: 2008.09.26 (22:00)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/eternal_moonlight
MBTI Type: ENFP
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Postby moonlight » 2009.06.16 (17:44)

Call of Duty 5 is my personal favorite.

New Nazi Zombies! <3
Image

RoboBarber
Posts: 361
Joined: 2009.04.17 (09:55)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/Aphex_N
MBTI Type: ENFJ
Location: Arstar

Postby Aphex » 2009.06.16 (18:05)

if i wanted to fight zombies i'd be playing left 4 dead, not call of duty.

Whichever way you look at it, call of duty:modern warfare 2 is going to blow practically every other shooter out of the water.
Image


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests