Black ops since its finally broken free of the multiplayer template set down by CoD4 and tried something marginally different.
Question of the Day, November 15, 2010
- Thread starter The Escapist Staff
- Start date
I couldn't disagree more. When CoD 1 was released, there was only one level in one WW2 game (Omaha Beach in Medal of Honor: Allied Assault), which really made you feel like just a one tiny part of a giant war machine, instead of a terminator destroying third reich all by himself. CoD 1 (minus British missions) changed that. And it was awesome. Stalingrad is IMO one of the best if not the best FPS mission of all time.TestECull said:
So yeah, my vote goes for CoD 1.
I would argue that the events in the older games were just as "made up" as the ones in the more recent games. They all take part in some historic setting but they all are just made up stories within their given time periods.ProfessorLayton said:
For me personally the single player in MW1 was the most fun and immersive. MW2 and BO seemed to try to hard in the story department. Even though the story in WaW was pretty decent, it just didn't captivate me for some reason...
As for multiplayer: MW was pretty damn fun as was WaW. MW2 was pretty fun but totally ruined by not being a "real PC" game and therefore resulted in massive frustration.
I am yet to play BO online, but from what I've read and heard there seem to be a ton of bugs leading me to believe that the PC version of BO was given about as much love as MW2 (which was intentionally made worse for PC players)
I actually played MW2 the most online because of the amount of friends who owned the game and played online.
I figured I was out of touch, but nope, just as many people find CoD4 to be the best of them. I've had no interest in getting a new one since Modern Warfare, and that'll probably never change. I mean, if I wanted to play Zork I'd just download it!
For single player, COD4, hands down. For multiplayer MW2. The rest of the recent ones are a load of tripe. COD 1 - 3 were rather legit, minus Treyarch's obsession with button mashing.
Can't tell yet. I liked Modern Warfare 2 a lot, yet I'm playing Black Ops now and it's a blast. I can't tell if I like it better than MW2 or CoD 4.
World at war.
The only CoD game i've played with an interesting campaign.
And recognisable characters.
The only CoD game i've played with an interesting campaign.
And recognisable characters.
Either Call of Duty 1, which totally blew me away with immersion back then, or Modern Warfare. That game blew me away on so many levels...
So I voted CoD4, but I think those two are the best highlights of the series.
Haven't played Black Ops yet, but I don't expect too much from it.
So I voted CoD4, but I think those two are the best highlights of the series.
Haven't played Black Ops yet, but I don't expect too much from it.
I've never really played one, and whichever one I did play (round a friend's house in order to soften them up before switching to a different game) I found underwhelming. It was one of the World War versions, but I didn't really pay attention after that. Muddy vision, and not because of the graphics but because it felt like I was watching the game through a fog of cigarette smoke, annoying gameplay mechanics (I don't remember why but I distinctly remember being annoyed by something about the weapon system in that game) and overall very forgetable. I know I've played one, but I couldn't tell you one distinguishing feature about it.
Even Halo had a distinctive aesthetic, CoD could have been MoH or BiA for all I knew, there was so little difference between them.
Even Halo had a distinctive aesthetic, CoD could have been MoH or BiA for all I knew, there was so little difference between them.