Has call of duty ruined you on FPS
- Thread starter dangerousdave_42
- Start date
It didn't ruin other FPS's, but it dampened the experience. I honestly can't find anything glaringly wrong with the game except for a mild balance issue with a few of the multiplayer perks.
Really? because for me, I could play incredibly well with some guns, and terrible with other ones that were 'more or less the same'. That's just my experience, though.searanox said:
Really? I don't think that at all. Maybe you're referring to older Rainbow Six games, but the guns in Vegas 1 & 2 were quite satsifying with three or four bullets leading to a bloodstain and limp ragdoll.Darthracoon said:
Also, if you were really firing an automatic full out (which you would never do when actually trying to kill something, the recoil would go up and to the right or left depending on which shoulder you're using not, 'all directions'. Upwards is more realistic than 'all directions'. And it makes sense, if you consider how FPS portray people holding a gun. While you may hold a pistol in front of you, you don't hold the butt of a gun against your chest, and you don't fire bullets out of your face as cod would have you believe, where all you need is a bit of your head above a wall to shoot bullets over it.
Pretty much the same for me, if you play multiplayer for a while, you get a feel for each weapon, similar or not. For example, the RPD and M60 (both lmg's) might seem the same at first glance, but the RPD's higher rate of fire and better iron sights make it distinct from the M60's low rate of fire, horrible iron sights, and high power to an experienced player.Dr_Baron_von_Evilsatan said:
Other FPSs aren't ruined for me, but there's just something about the feel that I can't pinpoint that only Cod has (maybe the feeling that its actually a war and its actually chaos).
to me CoD is meagre tier above most the bland fps games that EA produce, considering its the same team that did medeal of honour, they all feel the same.
i feel HL and Halo set the standard.
i feel HL and Halo set the standard.
No, I approach each game as a unique experience unless it's a sequel that's very similar to its predessesors, and even then I might develope a unique sense for that particular title too. Every game I've ever played has developed a "mode" in my subconscious, it's a very useful phenomenon.
I wouldn't say just CoD. The trio of Half Life 2, Halo and CoD4 sort of leaves other games feeling either samey, unbalanced or immature. CoD4's biggest strength, to me, would have to be the assortment of weapons (and thus, playstyles). My performance can decrease massively just from changing to a weapon that doesn't suit me.
No, the gun physics are of high quality but they can't compare with shooting wasps from my veins.
CoD4 was not very fun. CoD 1 was fun, CoD 2 was fun, but didn't ruin me. The best FPS right now is Counter Strike Source. I will definitely get flamed for that one..
I got my dad to play CoD:UO with me a couple years ago. He would always slaughter me on Sicily, and it was the only map he could beat me on. But now, he's back to hating all gaming that's actually fun and won't even consider playing games with me again.PsyberGoth said:
You probably don't have a ps3 so this is useless advice, but the resistance games have a really good feel to the weapons. They're all unique and its just generally fun to shoot aliens in that game. It's no Half Life 2 but it certainly compares favorably to halo and CoD4.Healey said:
Only own a PS3 and PC, actually. I agree with the summation of Resistance's weapons. The only problem with them is that they're just not that distinct for me. Maybe it has something to do with the popularity of the game, but despite only ever owning the original Halo on PC many years ago, the Needler remains stuck in my memory more than the Bullseye or Hedgehog Grenades.dcheppy said:
Edit: In retrospect, I think I'm going to have to play through Resistance again now.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I did not like call of duty 4. The first one I loved, the second one I played a lot, especially multiplayer, but I just couldn't get into the fourth. It just felt..shallow. I'm yet to touch the new one but it looks very much like cod4, just in ww2.
I wouldn't rate call of duty 4 on the same scale as call of duty (original), half life, half life 2, deus ex, farcry, farcry 2 or even medal of honour airbourne (flawed as that game was I loved it). It honestly surprises me that it was received so warmly. I'm not try to say it isn't a good game, it's just nowhere near as good as people seem to make it out to be.
I wouldn't rate call of duty 4 on the same scale as call of duty (original), half life, half life 2, deus ex, farcry, farcry 2 or even medal of honour airbourne (flawed as that game was I loved it). It honestly surprises me that it was received so warmly. I'm not try to say it isn't a good game, it's just nowhere near as good as people seem to make it out to be.
Crysis ruined gaming for me for a while because nothing else looked anywhere as good a bit like how the first Metal gear solid made everything else on the playstation look rubbish.