Poll: Which Call of Duty developer is superior?

Tf2 H3aVy

New member
Jun 17, 2011
23
0
0
In my opinion, Infinity Ward is a vastly superior developer to their counterpart Treyarch. I have a few arguments to support my side;

>Superior graphics and aesthetics
>(opinion) Better campaigns
>(opinion) Superior mulitplayer
>more realistic firearm design and kickback
>Wider selection of kill-streaks, not just dogs, SAM turrets, and air support

All in all i think that IW is a much better developer than Treyarch, but if you folks disagree, feel free to comment below and let me know what you think.
 

Blazing Steel

New member
Sep 22, 2008
646
0
0
Infinity Ward's good and everything, but they didn't make zombies.

So Treyarch all the way!

EDIT Details:

Infinity Ward Pros:

-Fast past mulitplayer.
-Guns handle better, in a smooth manner while Treyarch guns feel kinda clunky.

Cons:

-Some design features were a kick in the balls.
-Controversy, controversy and more controversy.

Treyarch Pros:

-Zombies.
-Zombies.
-Zombi...
-Awesome WaW campaign.
-And Reznov.

Cons:
-Worse multiplayer.

Also I think graphics just come down to the newest release has the best graphics etc.
 

Onyx Oblivion

Borderlands Addict. Again.
Sep 9, 2008
17,032
0
0
Gotta give it to Treyarch. I really loved WaW, and Black Ops stepped their MP game up to IW level. Mostly giving it to Treyarch for their campaigns.
 

TheEvilCheese

Cheesey.
Dec 16, 2008
1,151
0
0
Infinity ward made COD4. COD4 is probably my favourite FPS of all time due to the multiplayer being varied enough to give me a sense of my personal taste and style being taken into account while not being horribly unbalanced in such a way that my personal tactics were useless.

Also that Pripyat stealth level. Bloody brilliant.
 
Jun 11, 2008
5,331
0
0
To be honest they have both gone to shits in my opinion and dragged CoD through the mud with half assed unbalanced multiplayers, cut standard features and imba irritating killstreaks coming out of the games binary code. If I have to pick one it would have to be IW as all of Treyarch games have never really added much but minor features. WaW was good but it didn't do much on CoD 4. Although I was one of those people who boycotted MW2 so I can't comment on first hand info to BO but from what I have seen they just balanced it slightly.
 

teh_Canape

New member
May 18, 2010
2,665
0
0
Infinity Ward

they brought us Call of Duty and Call of Duty 2, that's more than enough to redeem MW2
 

Rex Fallout

New member
Oct 5, 2010
359
0
0
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Infinity Ward. Yeah, they dont support there games. Yeah, Infinity Ward is a shadow of the great studio it once was. Yeah, Treyarch should win it but...

When I play COD4 or MW2 I actually have fun. Even with noobtubes, even with scavenger claymores (I am guilty of using this to my advantage), even with harrier - AC 130 - nuke or predator - harrier - pavelow, even with painkiller (my worst enemy). Its just SO MUCH MORE FUN than Black Ops. Plus, second chance in Black Ops annoys the living fuck out of me so hard. And those stupid little cars which would be fine if it were not for the fact that it is impossible to shoot them if you arent host.
You have fun playing MW2? Huh I wonder if we are playing the same game...

I'd have to say Treyarch, they've been better on most occasions. IW has MW1 which yes was a good game, but Treyarch has [email protected] and Black ops, not to mention zombies. So treyarch all the way.
 

Jonesy911

New member
Jul 6, 2009
789
0
0
I've only played COD 4,5 and 6 (mx, waw, mw2). Judging by those definitely IW. I don't play multiplayer but the single player of MW is simply unparalleled
 

Reaper195

New member
Jul 5, 2009
2,055
0
0
Neither, as both have yet to release a Call of Duty game that took more than five and a half hours to finish.
 

ruben6f

New member
Mar 8, 2011
336
0
0
Treyarch IMO, they both did horrible games but tryarch wins my votes with the zombies
 

Rex Fallout

New member
Oct 5, 2010
359
0
0
Tf2 H3aVy said:
In my opinion, Infinity Ward is a vastly superior developer to their counterpart Treyarch. I have a few arguments to support my side;

>Superior graphics and aesthetics
>(opinion) Better campaigns
>(opinion) Superior mulitplayer
>more realistic firearm design and kickback
>Wider selection of kill-streaks, not just dogs, SAM turrets, and air support

All in all i think that IW is a much better developer than Treyarch, but if you folks disagree, feel free to comment below and let me know what you think.
1- What? Better graphics? Their graphics are equal, they arent different at all.
2- No. Just no. Mw1 had a great campaign I will give you that, but no not Mw2. Treyarch did a wonderful job with [email protected] in my honest opinion, (especially considering the whole World War 2 thing has been done to death) And they have their Zombies storyline in the same game to boot. Black Ops also had a wonderful story, and I dont understand how some people couldn't follow it.
3- debatable. Mw1 had great multi, I will give you that, but I enjoyed [email protected]'s just as much. I have NO fun playing MW2, (a reason why I sold it like a week after I got it) and Black Ops seemed to combine great elements that I loved from both Mw1 and [email protected]
4- guns are the same in those aspects.
5- Do you remember what the killsteaks were in Mw1? and for that matter Mw2? Same thing! Mw2 just added the Nuke which people complained so much about that it was taken out in Black Ops.
 

JourneyMan88

New member
Jun 30, 2009
106
0
0
I voted equal, they both have their ups and downs. IW does varying shades of brown and gray well, but Treyarch does richer texture and color work. IW does smoother multiplayer, but it's easily hacked, put MW2 in either PS3 or XBX and you'll find someone using mods almost immediately, yet I can still put in WaW and find no online problems. Treyarch does have some framerate issues to deal with, especially in Black ops. Campaigns are a matter of opinion i.e quality v. quantity argument, along with personal taste, but Treyarch does give us zombies.
Simply put, they both have their fair share of pros and cons, this is really just the tip of the iceberg.
 

Jakub324

New member
Jan 23, 2011
1,339
0
0
[email protected] campaign was for the most part shit, but Treyarch do have zombies. Infinity Ward tend to do a better job of showing other countries involvement in shit, plus MW1 and MW2 campaigns got an A*
 

Drops a Sweet Katana

Folded 1000x for her pleasure
May 27, 2009
897
0
0
Neither are anywhere near brilliant, although I'm going with Infinity Ward for:
1) CoD 4, easily one of one the best shooters out there at the moment if you want a solid multiplayer experience and a very good singleplayer campaign.

2) They're games tend to actually work online. Not terribly well, but at least it's something.

3) Being the ones who actually made the series.

And plus, having a zombie mode isn't really a redeeming quality in my eyes.
 

Kapol

Watch the spinning tails...
May 2, 2010
1,431
0
0
Treyarch, only due to the fact they have the zombie mode. I seriously considered Black Ops mostly for that mode, which is very impressive. I dislike the multiplayer of both companie's versions of CoD, and, while CoD 4 had the best campaign, I felt WaW had a pretty good one as well.

But yea, zombies win every time for me. I'd honestly buy a standalone version of the zombie minigame if it had all the maps and a few more, as well as maybe something to tie them together.
 

Broken Boy

New member
Apr 10, 2010
399
0
0
Infinity Ward simple as that.

Treyarch needs to burn for what they did to CoD in Black Ops.