martinist Posted May 27, 2009 Posted May 27, 2009 CoD4 was pretty much the only call of duty game i liked. The others didn't really pull me in, you can only play through WW2 so many times untill it gets boring. Pre-ordered this a few days ago, should be kick ass.
The-Ironflame Posted May 27, 2009 Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) Cod4 was much more mainstream/arcadey in terms of gameplay, the earlier games were much more epic and more niche as it was harder to master especially online. Not that it's a bad game but it's fairly easy to rack up kills. Edited May 27, 2009 by The-Ironflame
The fish Posted May 27, 2009 Posted May 27, 2009 Cod4 was much more mainstream/arcadey in terms of gameplay, the earlier games were much more epic and more niche as it was harder to master especially online.Not that it's a bad game but it's fairly easy to rack up kills. The fact it was subtitled modern warfare explains the increased kill count - the prevalence of automatic weapons and telescopic sights makes the killing easier...
Cube Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 Why isn't there a thread already? Anyway, looks like a lot of fun. Big disappointment: announcement of map packs. They should think about stuff like that once the game is finished.
Dyson Posted June 1, 2009 Author Posted June 1, 2009 There is one, it got moved. Hang on. Wait, nevermind, it's still in Other Consoles. http://www.n-europe.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24249
Happenstance Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 COD online to be subscription-based? Activision may be considering a subscription-based multiplayer option for the Call of Duty series. The service would be "in addition" to features the series offers today, according to a mysterious survey drudged up by Destructoid. In other words: you wouldn't lose, only gain. The paid-for service "may" offer early access to content like map packs and betas; increase character customisation options; add enhanced statistic-tracking and community features; include exclusive in-game modes and challenges; and open a suite of team-management services for competitive play. Examples given are persistent attributes that carry over from game to game, War Rooms to meet and plan in and exclusive tournaments and leagues. These will be paid for monthly, quarterly or yearly, or included with Special Edition versions of the game at retail. The survey asks, "How likely are you to purchase or subscribe to this online service when the next Call of Duty game comes out?" Activision told Eurogamer it does not comment on rumour and speculation. But it's not the first time Activision has mulled over the idea of a more ambitious online approach for Call of Duty - a series that has an already popular and robust multiplayer segment. "When you think about other properties that we own and control like Call of Duty, and what would be the natural evolution of a property like Call of Duty into a massively multiplayer environment, and how do you monetise that, the same rules apply," said Kotick in March 2008, leaking learning from talks with Blizzard while the pair discussed mergers. Taken From Eurogamer
Deathjam Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Seeing as I have never play a COD game, initially I care little. BUT if this were to prove successful, or at least be acceptable to some gamers, I would not be surprised if other FPS developers copied the idea. Thus if this idea spread to the few fps that I own and play online, I would be a little more than pissed as really, I associate such pricing structures with MMOs and that's it. SO...if I were to take this survey I would say big fat HELL NO. Also, with Activision's recent activities and the way they like to milk franchises, I am totally not surprised by this bit of news and actually suspect they could have purposefully leaked this info to see what people's reactions would be.
Happenstance Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 If its just the suggestions they make in the article like access to new maps early or betas then I wouldnt mind at all, if people want to pay for that then thats fine with me as long as it doesnt mess up my gaming, which it shouldnt do.
Hero-of-Time Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Also, with Activision's recent activities and the way they like to milk franchises, I am totally not surprised by this bit of news and actually suspect they could have purposefully leaked this info to see what people's reactions would be. I listened to this weeks Invisible Walls episode and couldn't believe what kind of things they have been upto lately. Activision certainly seem like a nasty piece of work since the success of the G-Hero and CoD franchises have kicked in, clearly its went to their heads. As much as I love the CoD series I wouldn't pay anymore than my Live subscription to play it online.
Dyson Posted June 17, 2009 Author Posted June 17, 2009 Ridiculous. But just watch the general public lap it up. Also, can we get a thread merge with the one from the second post? Just for completionists' sake
MATtheHAT Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Now, I would be willing to pay a small subscription fee. But only if the content was worth it. If they release regular Map Packs and game content, then I would not mind at all. Shit, I have spent nearly £30 on CoD Map Packs already.
dwarf Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 They say 'you won't lose, only gain from it' well no, because if you have paid full price for a game you expect the full thing bar DLC. If they can do better stats and stuff they should do it for everyone. What a shit scam. Not saying I won't get it though, MatHat still wants to murk me because he lacks skills in other games.
dwarf Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 Oh right the name change was known already, unless someone changed it within the last few minutes.
MATtheHAT Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 Oh right the name change was known already, unless someone changed it within the last few minutes. Its been known for a while now mate. Take a look at my sig.
dwarf Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 Classic boxart tbh. Nothing exciting but does the job because people will recognise it.
flameboy Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 See for me that boxart tries to show that its more than just a shooter. Trying in some way to display how it will show one mans role in war that make sense?
Babooo Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 boxart is nothing special.....i'm sure the game will be though
MATtheHAT Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 Don't care, just have the game ready for the 10th of November please Infinity Ward.
LegoMan1031 Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 Don't care, just have the game ready for the 10th of November please Infinity Ward. I like this mans thinking!
Ganepark32 Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 Should be ready for 10th November. Activision have cleared room for it by moving its other titles, like Singularity has been move to next year, so if it's not there, then Act-ey will be mega-pissed. Anyway, the Call of Duty bit looks like a bad photoshop job. Seriously, could they not have done a better placement for it. Like, lower the 'Modern Warfare 2' logo a bit and centre the Call of Duty bit at the top above the soldier's head. Regardless, the Call of Duty bit really doesn't fit so perhaps they should change the font to the Modern Warfare 2 bit.
Babooo Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 Should be ready for 10th November. Activision have cleared room for it by moving its other titles, like Singularity has been move to next year, so if it's not there, then Act-ey will be mega-pissed. Anyway, the Call of Duty bit looks like a bad photoshop job. Seriously, could they not have done a better placement for it. Like, lower the 'Modern Warfare 2' logo a bit and centre the Call of Duty bit at the top above the soldier's head. Regardless, the Call of Duty bit really doesn't fit so perhaps they should change the font to the Modern Warfare 2 bit. exactly what i was thinking
Recommended Posts