Which Call Of Duty ?

[JPB]

Ok guys and gals, if you were to purchase a new game, and your ONLY choices were Call Of Duty 4 Modern Warfare and Call Of Duty World At War, Which one would you go for and why ?

By the way, I prefer the single player missions in this series. Have never tried the multiplayer.

I plan on collecting all of the releases. Except for Call Of Duty 3 which I think was only released on consoles. Correct me if I am wrong.

My current Call Of Duty Collection

Call Of Duty
Call Of Duty : United Offensive
Call Of Duty 2
Call Of Duty : World At War

So which one to get first is what I am trying to decide.

 

[darom]

Call Of Duty 4 Modern Warfare

 

[Dorkenstein]

2, 4 and World at War are exceptionally good so far.

 

[philbrown23]

WAW is almost the same but adds a few better features WAW FTW!!

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Modern Warfare, no contest. World at War was fun but MW is in a totally different league. In my opinion CoD4 is one of the greatest single player games of the past few years. World at War, on the other hand, seemed like just more of the same (although still above average).

 

[pontifex]

i liked both, but i;d have to say MW. it''s more polished and I think it is longer than WaW.

 

[Crizza]

Do you like modern weapons or WWII weapons? That's what it pretty much boils down to. The games are almost identical except WaW has a few extra MP options and larger maps.

Both are great and you're not going to go wrong either way. Make your decision on what setting interests you more.

 

[Maximilian]

CoD 4 because infinity ward made it, not the other guys, treyarch? i think theyre called.

 

[Billyzeke]

They are both very good. I prefer COD4 though, because the multiplayer rules and the single player is a little longer with a better storyline.

 

[JPB]

Seems the majority voted for Modern Warfare. So I guess that makes it unanimous.

I read that there are like 15 missions in World At War and 18 missions in Modern Warfare.

 

[flyboy84]

Originally posted by: JPB
Seems the majority voted for Modern Warfare. So I guess that makes it unanimous.

I read that there are like 15 missions in World At War and 18 missions in Modern Warfare.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: flyboy84

Originally posted by: JPB
Seems the majority voted for Modern Warfare. So I guess that makes it unanimous.

I read that there are like 15 missions in World At War and 18 missions in Modern Warfare.

I lol'd too

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
CoD4 is one of the greatest single player games of the past few years.

+1

 

[chizow]

The single player campaigns play very differently. COD4 plays like SpecOps, small tactical type missions. WaW feels much bigger scale, battles are more sustained but the story and missions seem to have less direction and focus. In general I'd say I like the gameplay in WaW more but enjoy MW's story more.

Multiplayer is a different story. I much prefer COD4's multiplayer although there's some nice changes in WaW. Biggest difference in WaW is bigger maps, but much more cover. Air Strikes have been replaced with less lethal, but longer duration/spammy Artillery and choppers have been replaced by hunting dogs. Also fewer grenade spam, but much more camping/squatting.

 

[Dorkenstein]

Yeah I notice a lot more camping also, much to my chagrin.

 

[F1shF4t]

Have both. Haven't really had a chance to try out WaW multiplayer cause my net sucks.
MW has a much better single player campaign though.

 

[lifeobry]

COD4 is an enigma to me as I found it to be soulless and devoid of fun yet most people like it a lot and it has very good reviews. I'd say try the demo first. I ranted on why I didn't like the game in this thread:

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...AR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: zerocool84

Originally posted by: flyboy84

Originally posted by: JPB
Seems the majority voted for Modern Warfare. So I guess that makes it unanimous.

I read that there are like 15 missions in World At War and 18 missions in Modern Warfare.

I lol'd too

Definition fail.

 

[JPB]

flyboy84 / zerocool84 / GodlessAstronomer = Grow up !

Anyway, I picked up Call Of Duty World At War last night. Decided to go for the underdog. I bought it because I like World War II weapons better and the whole fact of Berlin.

However, I am going to pick up Modern Warfare on Monday. Because I do not want to miss out on that one either. Although I will probably never play either one multiplayer.

But I can honestly say, I am already about 5 missions in, and I absolutely LOVE World At War.

 

[JPB]

And another thing, what is your all opinions on Medal Of Honor Airborne ?

 

[SJP0tato]

Originally posted by: JPB
And another thing, what is your all opinions on Medal Of Honor Airborne ?

I picked it up a couple weeks ago on Amazon for $10 along with a few other titles that were cheap.

I'm pretty happy with Airborne, ecstatic for the pricetag overall. It's a good "play for 30 minutes" shooter. Not a ton of depth, but the visuals look nice and it helps keep things interesting by letting you level up the weapons you use.

The only thing I didn't like was the "Super Soldiers" at the end. Until then it was very enjoyable (and still is on my 2nd playthrough maxing out all the weapons now).

 

[JPB]

Originally posted by: SJP0tato

Originally posted by: JPB
And another thing, what is your all opinions on Medal Of Honor Airborne ?

I picked it up a couple weeks ago on Amazon for $10 along with a few other titles that were cheap.

I'm pretty happy with Airborne, ecstatic for the pricetag overall. It's a good "play for 30 minutes" shooter. Not a ton of depth, but the visuals look nice and it helps keep things interesting by letting you level up the weapons you use.

The only thing I didn't like was the "Super Soldiers" at the end. Until then it was very enjoyable (and still is on my 2nd playthrough maxing out all the weapons now).

I really hope you are not saying, that the single player campaign is only 30 minutes long?



Or rather just stating that it gets boring after 30 minutes ?

 

[chizow]

MOH: Airborne is actually pretty good. Its UE3.0 so it actually looks pretty good. Has some really bad jaggies though, so at least 4xTRMSAA is a must imo. The campaign is very short though....maybe 5 missions, an hour for each if you really stretch it. It has some cool things in the way of weapon upgrades but nothing else really ground-breaking here. Its like $10 at BB and a few other places though, well worth it if you haven't played it yet. Not sure about multiplayer, I looked at the server list and it was pretty dead so I never bothered with it.

 

[JPB]

Thanks for the info chizow.

Yea, I will never play these types of games in multiplayer, just never seemed interested in it.

I found that I can get the 10th Anniversary of Medal Of Honor for $40. Which includes....

Medal of Honor Allied Assault
Medal of Honor Spearhead Expansion Pack
Medal of Honor Breakthrough Expansion Pack
Medal of Honor Pacific Assault Director's Edition
Medal of Honor Airborne

Do you think this is a good buy ?

Medal Of Honor 10th Anniversary $39.99 @ Amazon

 

[chizow]

Ya its not a bad price if you don't have any of them. Might be able to save a few bucks if you found them piece-meal. Gogamer has the same price though after shipping. The earlier MOH games besides Airborne were all very good but they're more like BF/COD 1 and 2 in terms of graphics generation. Still look pretty good though.