A game worth the money

[iQue]

Re: A game worth the money

I played the beta rather a lot and liked it somewhat at first but I got tired of it very very fast. I bought vCoD + UO a while ago and have had much more fun playing that game.

But tbh I don't like "realistic" games anymore. Crysis, Quake, TeamFortress, AIX for BF2 I like

[Piemaaan!]

Re: A game worth the money

Once Treyarch patch the redirect, the mods and maps will be ready in greater numbers.

I'd guess Mid to Late January before some of the smaller mods and maps get released. After that, it's anybodies guess. Large Maps by Mid February. Big Mod's could take a year! Depends on work rate really.

[[GCA]Tim270]

Re: A game worth the money

Pfft.. Why is this game getting soo much praise?

They actually balanced the weapons this time, made the rank system/prestige more extensive, added more gamemodes, incorporated the popular Zombie themed mods that have sprung up through most CoD's. I never read anywhere In any review or preview that WaW was trying to be some ground breaking new amazing game, they are taking what worked from the very popular CoD4 and improving on it.

[Kylee!]

Re: A game worth the money

Eh, I still think that IW does a better job... I feel like CoD5 just took another step deeper into the muck that is all this customizable, perk using, handicaped form of gameplay, people don't realize that simplicity is better in most if not all cases.

If I can come to one conclusion, I think that they did a better job in making a WWII game with CoD2.

However, I think the server side of things in CoD5 is fantastic and much better than CoD4.

[Kodakk]

Re: A game worth the money

^^ Agreed. They are putting too many things in the game to make it more "dynamic" but all this really does is mess with gameplay. I honestly feel that CoD4 (especially with promod/damn mod) has better balance and gameplay than CoD5 (even with damn mod or bolts only). Looks better, feels more natural, but that's just my opinion.

*By the way, I continue to see waaaay more of my friends on xfire playing CoD4 over CoD5. Maybe it's just my friends, but even a quick look at the last pug (which was over a week ago last I checked) shows that the love for CoD5 is dying.

[The_Eliminator]

Re: A game worth the money

The funny thing is nothing beats going back to Wolf:ET or CSS and playing a game with worse graphics but better, more simple gameplay.

All these new games may have the fancy ideas and good graphics but nothing beats good gameplay and simplicity.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: A game worth the money

Maybe Wolf, but not CS:S. Thats just crazy talk.



Crunch

[imported_Whiskey]

Re: A game worth the money

*By the way, I continue to see waaaay more of my friends on xfire playing CoD4 over CoD5. Maybe it's just my friends, but even a quick look at the last pug (which was over a week ago last I checked) shows that the love for CoD5 is dying.

If your friends are more serious/competitive players, then this isn't too surprising. Various "pro" players have been on the last few BASH podcasts, talking about how there is significant divide right now in the competitive community with COD4 vs COD:WW.

Because of the technical issues with even running COD:WW, lack of shader 2.0, lack of competitive mods, some map designs that don't really work, and the fact that it's only 1 year later and many players have gotten comfortable/very knowledgeable with COD4...a lot of the competitive community is leaning toward going back to it. They already have a good system that works, many are not wanting to start all over again with a new game, and a lot are also frustrated at how COD:WW runs (or doesn't run) on their PC's.

[Kylee!]

Re: A game worth the money

If your friends are more serious/competitive players, then this isn't too surprising. Various "pro" players have been on the last few BASH podcasts, talking about how there is significant divide right now in the competitive community with COD4 vs COD:WW.

Because of the technical issues with even running COD:WW, lack of shader 2.0, lack of competitive mods, some map designs that don't really work, and the fact that it's only 1 year later and many players have gotten comfortable/very knowledgeable with COD4...a lot of the competitive community is leaning toward going back to it. They already have a good system that works, many are not wanting to start all over again with a new game, and a lot are also frustrated at how COD:WW runs (or doesn't run) on their PC's.

Thats true, but when you look back at the switch from CoD2 to CoD4, it was pretty obvious that CoD4 was taking the pro scene away from CoD2, even though it was somewhat unfamiliar. Actually more so than CoD5 is to CoD4 because of the perks... and all the other features added when 4 came out.

The one major difference is that the gap between 2 and 4 was larger because of 3 not being a PC game.

I would also appreciate having the weapons stay on their respective sides of the war... its still possible for game balance. Always bothered me seeing Japanese soldiers running around with Thompsons and Springfields in MP. But thats just an IMO.

Maybe Wolf, but not CS:S. Thats just crazy talk.



Crunch

CS doesn't get the respect it deserves from most gamers... Probably the most skill based FPS out there at the moment, a little more so when you bring 1.6 into the picture.

[The_Eliminator]

Re: A game worth the money

Maybe Wolf, but not CS:S. Thats just crazy talk.



Crunch

I think any game that was "pre stats" has better gameplay than some of the games released today.

CSS was amazingly simple in its gameplay and still has one of the largest player databases.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: A game worth the money

Most people like CS:S and play and there is nothing wrong with that. I am not a fan, so my comment is more lopsided and in jest.

Crunch