Call of Duty 7

[Gizmo-5]

Ronin raises a good point, treyarch have been in the game for a little while longer than the CoD 3... experience, and lets not forget i believe they shat out that game in 6 MONTHS!

Although there is certainly alot of hype surrounding infinity ward most of it is well deserved, though hardgay mode didn't offer much more than grenades in my face.

Edit: also cod 5 wasn't bad, it just wasn't cod 4, though Vietnam doesn't particularly tickle my balls

 

[PsiSoldier]

Heh. I suppose I could be accused of a bit of fanboi-ism. Infinity Ward make great CoD games. 2 and 4 were great games.

That they were, that they were.

I can't comment on 1 because I've never played it. CoD3 had "mixed reviews" (According to wikipedia. I can't get the metacritic page for some ungodly reason).

Let me put it this way, CoD 1 plays alot differently to every other CoD game since CoD 2, main reason for this is that they simply used the same engine from CoD 2 in CoD 4, with modifications. Similar to what EA did with C&C3's engine. By the looks of things, this is how they're going to keep doing it. The leap from CoD 1 to 2 was immense, the amount of new features and technology the endine brought with it was mind boggling, yet with CoD 4 you didn't get a great deal of that sort of innovation because of the recycled engine.

CoD5 was a very good CoD4 mod.

You could say it's a CoD 4 mod, but it's not. For CoD 5 Treyarch had to change the engine alot to allow for vehicles - and the numerous other new features they added -, moreso than any mod could do. You could liken it to what EA did with BF2142

Effectively it seems that Treyarch are riding on the successes of IW. It seems a safe bet that MW2 will be better than CoD7.

I feel certain that although MW2 will be an improvment over MW, it won't be of the sort that the CoD1 - 2 jump was. As for CoD 7, I trust Treyarch will keep up the good work they did on 5, bringing fresh ideas into the pool of stagnant water that is the current state of the series.

 

[Tetsuo_Shima]

The leap from CoD 1 to 2 was immense, the amount of new features and technology the endine brought with it was mind boggling

Was it? I don't recall CoD2 having anything over CoD1 except for slightly prettier graphics, a weird health sytem and a shotgun. Even then, the 'cover' health system was a step sideways (and, I'd argue, slightly backwards) rather than a step forwards and nobody experienced the graphics because they all had it on DX7 to maximise their FPS anyway. All that, in addition to the fact that the community ruined the game by only playing on two maps (Carentan and Toujane, one of which was ctrl-c'ed from CoD1) and the overabundance of rifle-only servers and CoD2 was more of an immense leap down from CoD1 (where's Trax, I bet he'd back me up here). Plus, hit-indicators, recoil-less weapons (I'm looking at you, grease gun) and maps you could spit across were a major step towards the noob-friendly fluffiness of CoD4.

I do agree with you - at least part of the way - on Treyarch, though. CoD3 was a perfectly good game, but with a couple of minor hiccups like the auto-aim (which you could turn off, mercifully) and a few snafus with the multiplayer servers. That game only ever got its bad reputation because of emerald-eyed PC poptarts who ridiculed the game with some kind of smear campaign because us console commandos got a bit of attention for once, fucking savages.

 

[Nanor]

You could say it's a CoD 4 mod, but it's not. For CoD 5 Treyarch had to change the engine alot to allow for vehicles - and the numerous other new features they added -, moreso than any mod could do. You could liken it to what EA did with BF2142

I can't really think of the "numerous other new features". There was vehicular combat which was, for lack of a better word, wank. They had a flame thrower which was fun in the campaign yet useless in multiplayer. Whatever happened to the whole destroyable stuff? I recall being told that I could shoot through stuff and then climb through the hole I just made? I don't recall ever doing that. SP or MP.

As for BF2142 it is the epitome of a mod.

I do agree with you - at least part of the way - on Treyarch, though. CoD3 was a perfectly good game, but with a couple of minor hiccups like the auto-aim (which you could turn off, mercifully) and a few snafus with the multiplayer servers. That game only ever got its bad reputation because of emerald-eyed PC poptarts who ridiculed the game with some kind of smear campaign because us console commandos got a bit of attention for once, fucking savages.

We weren't fans because they effectively turned their backs on us. We got them were they were and they released some console only crap.

Now, I'm sure on a console level CoD3 was a decent game. Dare I say it may have been enjoyable. Put that on a PC against all the games it has and I can see it being laughed off the hard drive.

If I may quote 360 Gamer Magazine UK who gave it 60%:

Featuring a solid frame rate, masses of detail and some amazing character clothing, Call of Duty 3 is without a doubt a fantastic looking game (albeit unfortunately out-classed by "Gears of War" right at the last minute), the problem is, the same level of effort, style and execution simply hasn’t been put into the gameplay which, unfortunately, feels like a regression from "Call of Duty 2" and wastes a lot of time with unwanted cut-scenes that only serve to interrupt the action.

So it wasn't just PC zealots who thought it was a bit meh.

 

[Tetsuo_Shima]

We weren't fans because they effectively turned their backs on us. We got them were they were and they released some console only crap.

Now, I'm sure on a console level CoD3 was a decent game. Dare I say it may have been enjoyable. Put that on a PC against all the games it has and I can see it being laughed off the hard drive.

Now hold on just a minute there, they hardly 'turned their backs', Infinity Ward were busy slaving away making CoD4 and Treyarch tried something a bit leftfield whilst they were doing it.

And what's this utter shite you're trying to feed me about PC games, that they are automatically better than console games? That console games should be judged by a lower yardarm because they're handicapped in some way? Both platforms have their good games, and both platforms have their bad games - it's that simple. Although I've been firing broadside blows at it, lets not forget about GameFAQ's Best. Game. Ever. poll, in which not even one PC game managed to make the Quarter-finals (and, indeed, Diablo II was the lone PC game to make it through round 2 of its division). As voted by the public, all using a PC.

 

[Nanor]

Now hold on just a minute there, they hardly 'turned their backs', Infinity Ward were busy slaving away making CoD4 and Treyarch tried something a bit leftfield whilst they were doing it.

Which had to be console only why?

And what's this utter shite you're trying to feed me about PC games, that they are automatically better than console games? That console games should be judged by a lower yardarm because they're handicapped in some way? Both platforms have their good games, and both platforms have their bad games - it's that simple. Although I've been firing broadside blows at it, lets not forget about GameFAQ's Best. Game. Ever. poll, in which not even one PC game managed to make the Quarter-finals (and, indeed, Diablo II was the lone PC game to make it through round 2 of its division). As voted by the public, all using a PC.

Alright, tiger!

Call of Duty 3 was a console game for X-Box, X-Box 360, PS2 and Wii. In order to function it had to be dumbed down to work on the PS2 and X-Box leaving X-Box 360 gamers with a game which has been dumbed down (in a graphical sense).

CoD3 was a piece of crap set for the lowest common denominator leaving X-Box 360 fans (May I direct you back to my previous post with the X-Box 360 magazine giving it a 60%). PC fans couldn't complain because we couldn't play the thing because Treyarch couldn't map a god damned keyboard.

 

[Ghostwolf67]

Its about time they changed to Vietnam. Its gratifying for me to see treyarch finally stop flogging the dead horse of WW2 games. I mean they did well to squeeze 4 games worth of blood out of that stone. Though i doubt we've seen the last of that particular genre from them. Infact i'd put money down on it that they'll make this Vietnam game and then go right back to Allies vs Axis or Americans vs Imperialist Japan.

In terms of my opinion on whether this game will be good or not i invoke the age old saying of 'Can't teach an old dog new tricks.' I like the fact they've moved but i dont honestly believe they (treyarch) can do anything other than WW2. This is either going to be a re-skinned version of cod 5/6 while the Doors scream 'Break on through to the otherside!' at you. Or its going to be wank... while the Doors scream 'break on through to the other side' at you.

 

[Traxata]

Was it? I don't recall CoD2 having anything over CoD1 except for slightly prettier graphics, a weird health sytem and a shotgun. Even then, the 'cover' health system was a step sideways (and, I'd argue, slightly backwards) rather than a step forwards and nobody experienced the graphics because they all had it on DX7 to maximise their FPS anyway. All that, in addition to the fact that the community ruined the game by only playing on two maps (Carentan and Toujane, one of which was ctrl-c'ed from CoD1) and the overabundance of rifle-only servers and CoD2 was more of an immense leap down from CoD1 (where's Trax, I bet he'd back me up here). Plus, hit-indicators, recoil-less weapons (I'm looking at you, grease gun) and maps you could spit across were a major step towards the noob-friendly fluffiness of CoD4.

I do agree with you - at least part of the way - on Treyarch, though. CoD3 was a perfectly good game, but with a couple of minor hiccups like the auto-aim (which you could turn off, mercifully) and a few snafus with the multiplayer servers. That game only ever got its bad reputation because of emerald-eyed PC poptarts who ridiculed the game with some kind of smear campaign because us console commandos got a bit of attention for once, fucking savages.

CoD was awesome :')

However, Psi, 'modifying the engine' to allow for vehicles?!

CoD1 + United Offensive, Oh look they had vehicles way back then, I think you'll find that's ALSO recycled code...

This is why CoD5 is meh

CoD4 was amazing because it shook up the FPS world, not quite so many retards playing CSS, though they've damn well managed to make it play like CSS with those shitty tourni-mods -.-

 

[Traxata]

Its about time they changed to Vietnam. Its gratifying for me to see treyarch finally stop flogging the dead horse of WW2 games. I mean they did well to squeeze 4 games worth of blood out of that stone. Though i doubt we've seen the last of that particular genre from them. Infact i'd put money down on it that they'll make this Vietnam game and then go right back to Allies vs Axis or Americans vs Imperialist Japan.

In terms of my opinion on whether this game will be good or not i invoke the age old saying of 'Can't teach an old dog new tricks.' I like the fact they've moved but i dont honestly believe they (treyarch) can do anything other than WW2. This is either going to be a re-skinned version of cod 5/6 while the Doors scream 'Break on through to the otherside!' at you. Or its going to be wank... while the Doors scream 'break on through to the other side' at you.

Can't beat Battlefield Vietnam. Get in my Huey Bell, winch up a Jeep, and blast out Ride of the Valkyries to everyone on the server

 

[HotStuff]

Can't beat Battlefield Vietnam.

Was waiting for someone to mention this game. I thought BF:V was pretty damned good too. The licensed music was particularly good when the maps were loading, and hearing the music ingame while driving jeeps was cool too AND the programmers even added the doppler effect to the music as a jeep drove past you.

The handling of the vehicles wasn't that good though, in particular the helicopters (which vietnam is all about) were difficult to fly intuitively.

Anyhow back to COD, I don't think the vehicles were done well in COD 5 by Treyarch, that's not to say they can't improve things in COD 7. Treyarch have taken a lot of criticism for COD 5, most of it unfairly in my view, COD 4 was always going to be a close to impossible act to follow. Remember they are TWO distinctly different wars' after all.

I often wonder how the programmers at infintiy ward and treyarch think of one another - do they support/congratulate each other or .....

At least Treyarch try different genres of war, infinity ward seem to have stagnated with modern warfare.

I think both developers compliment each other quite well, COD 4 and COD 5 offer a good alternative should you get bored of one. I imagine COD 6 and COD 7 will have a similar standing.

 

[PsiSoldier]

However, Psi, 'modifying the engine' to allow for vehicles?!

CoD1 + United Offensive, Oh look they had vehicles way back then, I think you'll find that's ALSO recycled code...

This is why CoD5 is meh

CoD4 was amazing because it shook up the FPS world, not quite so many retards playing CSS, though they've damn well managed to make it play like CSS with those shitty tourni-mods -.-

UO is an expansion with a modified engine, not a full game, though. Wouldn't be an expansion if they didn't expand off the base, silly buns.

Alot of FPSes shook the FPS world, CSS probably did on release, way back then.

 

[waterproofbob]

I'm going to be contreversual and say that CoD5 is not a bad game.

Providing you never want to play it on the PC. It is a console game through and through and for that reason I got it for the 360. The PC gamer in me hated this. FPS' with some exceptions (I love dual spikers and a grav hammer) are general more intuative on the PC. Unforetunately I don't think we are going to see many more games that most of us here want to see. The money is in the consoles for FPS. We are more than likely to get stuck with crappy console ports.

CoD5 is not crap. It is a console game. The vehicles were a stupid idea. You do not need a tank on maps where you can almost throw nades the width of the map it is just dumb. I try to play CoD5 and pretend it isn't CoD.
I still love CoD4 and as my first experience of the CoD universe that is my comparison point. Also no nay saying about 2142 it's awesome and you all know it .

I'm not going to judge either way and am just going to wait and see and hope for the best. If CoD6 is another great PC game and Treyarch come back with a good console game then tbh I'm happy.

 

[Taffy]

I love me some Call of Duty

Although it's main drawbacks for me are the MP maps. They're always so small and full of grenades (and, in COD5, booby traps). This, for me, is why vehicles don't work in them. COD:UO had bigger maps, which made the vehicles a lot more fun. I hope for Vietnam they have big fat-ass maps with lots of room for tanks to blow the shit out of each other and Phantom's to swoop out the sky and napalm those Cong SOB's! Hopefully, they'll be able to make it like a modern, better version of BF:V without the epic lag and with a kickass SP (which, IMO, has always been great on COD).

 

[PsiSoldier]

I'm going to be contreversual and say that CoD5 is not a bad game.

Providing you never want to play it on the PC. It is a console game through and through and for that reason I got it for the 360. The PC gamer in me hated this. FPS' with some exceptions (I love dual spikers and a grav hammer) are general more intuative on the PC. Unforetunately I don't think we are going to see many more games that most of us here want to see. The money is in the consoles for FPS. We are more than likely to get stuck with crappy console ports.

CoD5 is not crap. It is a console game. The vehicles were a stupid idea. You do not need a tank on maps where you can almost throw nades the width of the map it is just dumb. I try to play CoD5 and pretend it isn't CoD.
I still love CoD4 and as my first experience of the CoD universe that is my comparison point. Also no nay saying about 2142 it's awesome and you all know it .

I'm not going to judge either way and am just going to wait and see and hope for the best. If CoD6 is another great PC game and Treyarch come back with a good console game then tbh I'm happy.

I have only this to say: CoD5 is no more a console game than CoD4. Both games are dumbed down to suit the joystick using wankers, and if anything, CoD5 is less console friendly, simply because it doesn't have the vast array of pray and spray guns CoD4 has, and is more suited to the higher accuracy and efficiency of mouse/keyboard gamers.

 

[Nanor]

I have only this to say: CoD5 is no more a console game than CoD4. Both games are dumbed down to suit the joystick using wankers, and if anything, CoD5 is less console friendly, simply because it doesn't have the vast array of pray and spray guns CoD4 has, and is more suited to the higher accuracy and efficiency of mouse/keyboard gamers.

I can imagine Tets foaming at the mouth.

 

[PsiSoldier]

Forgot to mention how they raped the weapon picking system in CoD4 to allow the 13 year olds with XBOXes get their precious AK47 no matter what team they're on (Sadly, Treyarch kept this in CoD5).

CoD has drifted away from what made it an awesome and unique game since CoD2, looks like it's gonna continue that way.

 

[BiG D]

You're all wrong. Boycott Activision!

 

[PsiSoldier]

You're all wrong. Boycott Activision!

Another awesome idea you have there.

 

[Tingham]

I dont do alot of First Person Shooters. But ive only ever done them on my Xbox.

Im not 13.

HATE ME

 

[thatbloke]

I dont do alot of First Person Shooters. But ive only ever done them on my Xbox.

Im not 13.

HATE ME

DIE MOFO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!