Nothing New?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Piemaaan!
    Senior Member
    • Nov 2007
    • 1485

    #31
    Re: Nothing New?

    LOL OWNED :)

    Comment

    • Lt.Hanley
      Member
      • Oct 2007
      • 348

      #32
      Re: Nothing New?

      I hate perks there is honestly no point to have them. Also vehicles is classic cod. Uo imo was the best call of duty to do date large open maps fun sniping good gun play and vehicles. UO also had the option so you didnt have to play with tanks and jeeps too remember.

      Comment

      • Kodakk
        Member
        • Oct 2006
        • 3486

        #33
        Re: Nothing New?

        Originally posted by [11]T/9|SFC.Pieman' View Post
        Err... CoD obviously wasn't always an infantry game, seeing as the expansion to the first game had vehicles. I'll admit that CoD1,2&4 are infantry based.

        CoD2 > CoD4. CoD4 is a pubbers game, and it's a hellovalot easier than CoD2, which isn't run n gun. CoD2 had no perks, everyone was pretty much even, no silly advantages. Which is why I would like no perks. However, perks have been announced, so I'll deal with it.
        I do agree with that [the necessary skill level], although pubbing was quite similar in many ways to CoD4. There were the higher-skilled SD servers (as seen in CoD4, and I'm talking about the PAM4 servers, not the "PRO/Realistic" servers), but there were also the 30+ man TDM servers.

        **But when you say CoD4 is a pubbers game... I thought you competed? In PAM4 (at least in CAL/TGN rule sets), everyone DOES have the same "perks" - so everyone is even. It takes much more skill than perk/noobtube whoring in a pub, even though the initial skill level may be far below what CoD2 was.

        But, explain to me how by having 1 game with vehicles (I can't be bothered to call CoD3 a true game, it failed pretty hard compared to 1, 2, and 4) can make vehicles a "classic" part of the Call of Duty series.
        UO was good with them, but CoD1, 2, and 4 were just as good if not better - and didn't have vehicles.

        Well, I just hope CoD5 doesn't flop like 3 did. If CoD was so well known for it's vehicles, then Battlefield wouldn't be around (or as succesful as it is) - because Battlefield gunplay is far worse than CoD5 gunplay.

        Comment

        • Piemaaan!
          Senior Member
          • Nov 2007
          • 1485

          #34
          Re: Nothing New?

          The point is, CoD4 needed serious mods to change it, and nobody/no two league play the same mods. I just feel that it wasn't designed for competitive play as much as cod2 seemed to be. But yes, it is able to play cod4, as I do, competitivley, but ... in my opinion:

          The Designers of this game designed it with Dollar Signs instead of eyes and all the while surrouded by Bags Labelled with "Swag Goes Here". It was made to sell, therefore detracting from the competitive play a bit more. Public play was definately their focus.

          Comment

          Working...