Question of the Day, November 15, 2010

[Davey Woo]

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

To me it's the most balanced and fun to play. Most of the changes in MW2 pissed me off, except the ACOG scope. That is the only thing I like about MW2.

 

[TerribleAssassin]

Nothing beats Call of Duty: Classic.

 

[instantbenz]

People are going to say that anyone choosing Black Ops is just a fickle fink, but I can honestly say, with it's focus on cooperative play, it's easily my favorite.

What cooperative play? They took co-op out of the main game and the friendly AI is so helpless that you're basically fighting the enemy alone.

The multiplayer coop (online against the world or zombies split screen or zombies split screen with friends online or zombies strictly with friends online or the DOA zombie top-down shooter which can be played online or split screen in the same manner as the regular zombie maps) far outweighs coop that has been offered in any of the other titles.


BUT I agree that there is no campaign coop ... they only wanted to almost knock it out of the park. Bit of a bummer when you can't play through a game with friends, although the zombie extravaganza makes up for it ... for me anyways.

 

[Dark Prophet]

The first Modern Warfare because it had a solid although short single player campaign, and I don't care much for the multiplayer.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

In this order:

WaW
CoD4
BlOps
MW2

I actually prefer the newer ones to the first 3. WaW is excellent, truly. I enjoyed the campaign loads, the online multiplayer has few annoying practices and it nails everything a good fps should be. And zombies! If only you could get custom classes offline, then it would be perfect.

 

[Berserker119]

CoD 4 was a great game, and not just for the campaign. It was basically what got me into online multiplayer.

 

[Chechosaurus]

World at War - Storming the Reichstag... FUCK YEAH!

 

[Woodsey]

Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, obviously. And I'm not talking about the mutliplayer.

Same. In none of the CoD games did I find the multi-player very intersting, so when the series gave good story-lines a kick in the butt, that was it for me CoD-wise...

MW's story was hardly anything inspiring.

OT: I liked the first and second, Modern Warfare put the series way above where it should be in people's standings. It was good, but I'm not buying all the interest.

 

[teh_Canape]

Call of Duty 2 and United Offensive

FUCK

YEAH

also, World at War ^-^

 

[The Escapist Staff]

Between all the choices, the natural choice it's Call of Duty 4; but know this, IMO Black Ops is closely following it, I tell ya.

 

[ACM_Shadow]

I love the old ones, could bare with 4 for the SP campaign, but i find CoD is meant to be WW2, if you want modern day shooters you go for battlefield/CS/FEAR/most generic shooters
PS: nothing more fun then melee+tri-rocket-launcher in FEAR when you activate Slow-mo in MP.
Then again, i found the MP on CoD 4 and CoD 6 (modern warfare 2, not Mechwarrior 2) absolutely horrible, because of the people running with the knives on pistols/throwing knives. NO WAY IN HELL KNIFE BEATS CLAYMORE!!!

 

[Assassin Xaero]

I'd say World at War. I played the first two Call of Duties (tried to play United Offensive, but that was a nightmare), and was never really that into them. The campaign for Call of Duty 4 was meh. Nothing too memorable, and some of the missions were stupid as hell, like the one where you had to get to the bottom of the hill in a certain amount of time. Only way I ever managed that was to just run and not shoot anything.

World at War's campaign was... err... the Russia half was amazing. The American half was about as good as Call of Duty 4's. Plus both their multiplayers were pretty fun, minus the campers. MW2 I only rented on PS3 and it was pretty bad. At some parts (Burgertown or whatever) it looked too cartoony, and the first half bounced around so much that it seemed like the random missions in Black Hawk Down connected together better than these did. Haven't played Black Ops yet and waiting on whether to buy it or not...

 

[Johnnyallstar]

Campaign wise, CoD4. I have to admit, it was pretty damn good.

Multiplayer wise? CoD2. I *LOVED* the idea that you could find the direction of your opponents from their shots. I thought it was a fantastic setup, and should have been used in later games with the "no radar" setting enabled.

 

[Halceon]

World at war. Mainly because of the bolt-actions and semi-auto rifles.

 

[GLo Jones]

I have to say, CoDBlOps has definitely perfected the 'modern' series, and while it's probably much better a game, it still can't beat my memories of CoD2 rapage.

 

[Catalyst6]

Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, obviously. And I'm not talking about the mutliplayer.

"" "". It had a great plot, something that you rarely see in shooters. MW2's plot was... eh, and WaW's was your standard WWII shtick, "walk through trenches, kill baddies".

The multiplayer? I'm not a huge fan of MW1/2's multiplayer because it basically forces you to treat it as an unrealistic shooter, a la Quake. However, I did enjoy WaW's a bit...

 

[Darth Sea Bass]

I'd like to say i don't like any of them but i'm gonna have to go with any of them prior to CoD 4 which was full of meh.

 

[silasbufu]

Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, obviously. And I'm not talking about the mutliplayer.

Thank You!!! The campaign for 4 was just breathtaking for me and made me cherish the fact it had a great single player experience that much more!

The sniper mission was one of the most intense moments for me in an FPS. I didn't even touch the multiplayer though.