I like the apostrophe use in any case.
COD 5: World at War
- Thread starter Biscuit1871
- Start date
They're annoying feckers charging you with bayonets so you have to tap a key just in time to save yourself, like the Dogs in COD4. Japanese levels are a bit rubbish, not just because of the bayonet charges either. The Russian parts are ok
Anyone up for game now?
Anyone else heavily agree COD4 >>>>>>>COD5?
Very bored of this online. Difference in player skill between the levels are ridiculous, and for the first time in ages I experienced horrible lag on Live. Shot everyone... and I fell over and died. From the death replay thing, the fecker was shooting into thin air, and somehow hitting me. fecking thing. Anyway, i guess I wont get any better sitting and moaning about it.
But I have enjoyed it.
Very bored of this online. Difference in player skill between the levels are ridiculous, and for the first time in ages I experienced horrible lag on Live. Shot everyone... and I fell over and died. From the death replay thing, the fecker was shooting into thin air, and somehow hitting me. fecking thing. Anyway, i guess I wont get any better sitting and moaning about it.
But I have enjoyed it.
This was apparent before COD5 was released.
Hmm, you make a good point Kaos.
Ok, how about this -
How good COD5 is >>>>>> Your expectation of how good COD5 was going to be
It was spot-on to exactly what I thought it would be - a decent shooter with a fairly good multiplayer but an overused formula (WWII) in singleplayer.
So yes it still doesnt compare to COD 4.
Im already awaiting COD 6 (or 5 for those who refuse to brand this as number 5), itll be by Infinity Ward and hopefully this whole WWII craze can be finally put to bed.
Isn't COD 6(5) supposed to be set in WWII again?
Was the first COD not set in WW2...?
Yes, but the first COD game was perhaps the most ground-breaking WWII title with its Enemy at the gates-esque, immersive gameplay. I remember playing the Stalingrad level for the first time, and the first few levels felt like something out of Band of Brothers. Was truly a great game. The only previous game that could compare was Medal of Honour: Allied assault.
However 20 WWII games later, its getting abit boring.
Anyone trying to play through the game on Veteran difficulty?
Im stuck on Relentless - level 7.
Im stuck on Relentless - level 7.
the zombie thing is shite also...cant be arsed to finish that level 
Is this game worth trading in COD4 and a bit of money for it?
If your sick of COD 4 and are not bothered playing it anymore then why not.
If not though i wouldn't
the zombie thing is shite also...cant be arsed to finish that level
im guessing you know it goes on forever
Not particularly. No improvement on COD4 imo, just World war 2
id say it was the change is refreshing and nazi zombies is amazing
As criminal as it sounds I have never played cod 4 and was nagged by alot of people to get this before it came out and i'm really glad I did.The online play on this game is so much fun and i'm hooked and have been playing daily.
I'm loving it at the minute, seriously shit mind, as never played 4 online dues to shite internet, need some tips...
Oh and the dogs are easy to sort out, get yourself backed against a wall, wait for the fecker to jump and knife him.
Oh and the dogs are easy to sort out, get yourself backed against a wall, wait for the fecker to jump and knife him.
I love COD World at War.
I didn’t play that much COD4 - i just completed the story missions once. Never got into playing online.
Now im playing through World at War on Veteran. Playing on Veteran is the only way to do it. If i now play a level on hardened, it seems really easy.
Playing it on Veteran gives you a trophy for each level completed.
I didn’t play that much COD4 - i just completed the story missions once. Never got into playing online.
Now im playing through World at War on Veteran. Playing on Veteran is the only way to do it. If i now play a level on hardened, it seems really easy.
Playing it on Veteran gives you a trophy for each level completed.
I've played it on my mates ps3 will go through it on my 360 this week some time, not sure what level I'll do it first on mind..
Veteran does take a while - you have to be patient.
Its taken me upto 2 hours to get from one checkpoint to the next at some points. Relentless was a very hard level on veteran. I believe “Heart of the Reich” is even harder but, im not upto that one yet.
Im thinking that if i do it on Veteran, i will be a better player when i take it online.
Your probably correct, I may have ago later, enjoying online at the moment.
You Ps3 or 360/?
You Ps3 or 360/?
I'm going to try and pick this up soon, then we will see who is the worst COD5 player manx.
Get on it, get it tonight
I've decided I don't like this
The dogs annoy me, and it's basically the same as last years, but with weapons that aren't as good. Prefered the modern theme in the last one too...WW2 games have become boring.
The dogs annoy me, and it's basically the same as last years, but with weapons that aren't as good. Prefered the modern theme in the last one too...WW2 games have become boring.
The problem is that they shovel this shit down your throat year after year, no different to FIFA, PES, and all the others. Yet people keep on buying the fecking thing, so why wouldn't they?
Does the setting really matter? Would it be any less boring if it was set on the Moon or Mars? The gameplay mechanics are the same. Surely, it's first person shooters that have got to saturation point? Yet people keep on buying them, and let platformers for example go to the dogs.
PS3.
I think it is important.
With futuristic ones, there's more scope to be creative whereas with old ones your pretty much stuck with what's happened in the past.
i think Bioshock is probably the only game i can think of that's set in the past and manages to be brilliantly different.
Sure, but Bioshock is not meant to be a "realistic" game in the same way as Call of Duty is so there is more scope for imagination. COD uses real weapons of the era.
The most important thing is the quality of the game. I think World at War is great.
Its not the fault of FPS's that platform games are not great at the moment.
If a studio has a good idea and executes it well, then a platform game can be great - like LBP and Super Madio Galaxy. For me, they are the best games of the 07 and 08.
I haven't even tried the offline play. People like me are killing story modes.
I'm not saying that it is the fault of the games, what I am saying is that there are probably far too many shooters, that for some reason this generation the balance is wrong.
I do miss the day of the good platform games
Ratchet comes the closest to being brilliant. Bring back Gex!
Ratchet comes the closest to being brilliant. Bring back Gex!
Ratchet is probably the only 3D platformer done well on the PS3, but even Tools of Destruction had a lot of shooting in it. Quest for Booty is much more platform oriented. However, considering how long these consoles have been out, there is very little.
Its probably just because they sell well.
I would imagine that platformers are also far harder to create, must be hard to think of a new and original concept and new characters.
Would it also be because FPS games sell well to PC gamers, so the developers get a better ROI?