Call of Duty 4: Because Modern War Ain't Fair
- Thread starter Gigantor
- Start date
ehhh..The_woods_man said:
i know this is straying off topic, but this is a commonly held missconception by all specialized divisions of the armed forces. one is not necessarily better than the other, they just serve different purposes.
Black Hawk Down demonstrated this well, where the Rangers and the Delta Force each thought one was better than the other. in truth, Rangers are better suited for fire support and holding positions where as Delta Force is better at dynamic entry and reconessance.
like i said, sorry for straying off topic, just my 10 cents
At the same time, the majority of soldiers who try to get into special forces...don't. If five people don't get in, and one person does, isn't it reasonable to assume that the one who does would be the best at doing what was needed of them in that instance?BallPtPenTheif said:
Maybe it's just that the SAS are best at what the SAS do, and other soldiers are best at what they do: specialisation, like.
Great review. To be honest I thought some of the same things. COD4 struggles to maintain their enemies as faceless, and I think you only ever hear ONE of the antagonists ever speak in English. As much as I'm guessing it's trying to show America in a kick-ass world-saving light, anyone who actually looked at the circumstances (like you did) takes in the reality. Nicely done.
As well written as always, but I don't really agree with everything.
The fact that everyone was escorting me never really disturbed me or broke immersion. But rather if you kept your pace up and spent most of your time moving the battles had very suitable pace to them. I would play my game and the friendlies would be just behind me all the time, just were they should be.
I guess you just are Genetically Different, not superior. (Deapartment Of Death would have been a cooler custom title)
The fact that everyone was escorting me never really disturbed me or broke immersion. But rather if you kept your pace up and spent most of your time moving the battles had very suitable pace to them. I would play my game and the friendlies would be just behind me all the time, just were they should be.
I guess you just are Genetically Different, not superior. (Deapartment Of Death would have been a cooler custom title)
That reminds me of a thread I saw the other day, but I can't find it right now. I'm sure it's on the forum somewhere, unless I dreamed it. Someone was talking about suspension of disbelief, where you'd play along with things in a game that seem a bit unlikely for the sake of your overall enjoyment. Not in a stupid way, just so that you actually enjoy the game.sammyfreak said:
You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, though, even if it's wrong. Like mine. Isn't. Not. Not, not, not. Erm...what?
I'm adding homophonic to my vocabulary from here on out.
Good stuff, always ecstatic to read a review that actually analyzes the experience itself rather than stick with one particular aspect.
Good stuff, always ecstatic to read a review that actually analyzes the experience itself rather than stick with one particular aspect.
It really was a spectacular game, and I do agree with your points on it up to the whole morality part. I suspect here the flaw is in me: most people would feel ambiguous about slaughtering entire regiments of men, killing orphans and nuclear war having experienced it. I don't. That being said, you made an excellent point all in all, so try to keep up the good work
Incidentally: How does one get a custom title?
Incidentally: How does one get a custom title?
For the SAS its more like 75 applicants and 1 success. Considering the trauma of the testing i would be pissed to get only most of the way.
On the bonus disc with the special edition cod 4 box is a DVD of great SAS missions, if anything it goes to show that their specialty is kicking ass in every conceivable way since 1940, sneaking, bombing, running and gunning or whatever.
Ok review, i reached the line graph and thought that it was going to be crap, however your opinions on hubris/western world/weapons are interesting.
On the bonus disc with the special edition cod 4 box is a DVD of great SAS missions, if anything it goes to show that their specialty is kicking ass in every conceivable way since 1940, sneaking, bombing, running and gunning or whatever.
Ok review, i reached the line graph and thought that it was going to be crap, however your opinions on hubris/western world/weapons are interesting.
this is true. the specialized skill required for certain divisions can be more difficult to master. however, there are still tasks that "grunts" are better suited for. for example, if you have to police an Iraqi suburb, you wouldn't have a bunch of Delta Force guys checking IDs. beyond the waste of resources, the training that Delta Force receives isn't condusive to safe civil discourse. one could even argue that typical army training isn't suited for safe civil discourse, but between the choices available they would be the best option.Gigantor said:
I thought the gimmick of Gonzo was putting yourself into the review and having that be the chief topic.nilcypher said:
I was under the impression that the essence of Gonzo Journalism was discussing your feelings about an event or experience, rather than trying to analyse it objectively. But you could be right, as most of my knowledge on the subject comes from the internet.
yep specialisation like how the SAS specialize in weapons, infiltration, demolitions, sharpshooting and killing every enemy with a chargrin expression and two bullets in the head and cheast and the American Marines specialize in getting shot, friendly fire, and pushing the WRONG big red button...Gigantor said:
Pictures flatter your style superbly; especially when you do dodgy diagrams or graphs to demonstrate a point. It is a concept many other reviewers worldwide should really learn to pick up on; especially on so-called 'professional' sites. Sure, a few screenshots may be thrown in, but often they bare little relevance to the review on hand. Your work, however, is the perfect mid-point between animation and pure text.
My extensive research on the subject- yes, I looked at the Wikipedia page- has led to think that when a lot of people say Gonzo reviewing, they really mean something which admits its own subjectivity, and doesn't try to get away from it. The journalist can have a physical presence in the piece, but the point is that however hard he or she tries, they cannot remove themselves from it entirely. Or somesuch bollocks.nil said:
Thanks. Believe it or not, reluctant complements are my favourite type. They feel hard-earned.limasol said:
Shucks.the_tralfalmadorian said:
Thanks. I'm thinking of making dodgily drawn MS Paint doodles a regular staple of my reviews, so it's certainly something I'll be working on.Mel said:
Always.sammyfreak said:
Your words melt my heart... ah (cough) Bears, Boobs!
Great review as per usual. I completly agree with the spiking difficulty curve. How many times did it take me to get past the TV room? Too goddamn many.
Also, like the new title my Genetically Different friend.
Great review as per usual. I completly agree with the spiking difficulty curve. How many times did it take me to get past the TV room? Too goddamn many.
Also, like the new title my Genetically Different friend.