Right, well seing as I have both, I have come to some conclusions based on my own opinions, see if you agree.
Weaponary - CoD4 has a reasonable amount of guns, with quite alot of variation, with guns like the AK47 and AK74u being the best. CoD5 has a smaller amount of weapons, with bolt actions and semi autos split up into seperate classes. The fact that you need need to get 25 kills with a bolt action to turn it into a sniper rifle is stupid and needless in my opinion. Grenades also seem to be solid lead in CoD5, taking real effort to throw them further than about 10 ft. So overall, CoD4 wins.
Maps - CoD4 has a couple of really good maps, like Strike and Countdown. CoD5 doesn't have a snigle good map, they all suck, either being too big or too small. Also, on Roundhouse, you can glitch into the area under the map, and shoot up, big glitch. CoD4 wins.
Perks - Exactly the same in both games, with CoD5 adding a couple of pointless Perks, like vehicle perks, and they changed the name of a couple. As with CoD4, the only perkset worth using is Bandolier, Stopping Power and Steady Aim. Draw.
Gameplay - CoD4 is a very easy game to play, with mucho pick up and play ability. CoD5 loses all of that, in favour of making it more rigid, and most of the guns having ridiculous levels of recoil, and you die easier than in CoD4 aswell. Everything in CoD5 has been done before, namely in CoD2, and done better. CoD4 wins.
Graphics - CoD4 has reasonable graphics, CoD5 has terrible graphics. There are about 4 different colours; brown, green, grey and muzzle flash. I have based this on PS3 vs PS3, I have yet to play CoD5 on PC. CoD4 wins.
Sound - CoD4 has fairly flat sound, with none of the guns feeling particularly meaty. CoD5 on the other hand makes every gun sound awesome, they have a really meaty and loud soundtrack. CoD5 wins.
The players - CoD4 takes little skill to be good at, but 'pr0s' use a relatively large variation of weapons. CoD5 involves using the Thompson or the STG-44 if you want to get even close to dominating a server. Treyarch may aswell have not bothered with the rifles, no one uses them. The last bad move by Treyarch, was putting the Silencer as the first Marksman reward, because 95% of people then feel that they HAVE to use it, and considering they make little to no noise, it gets tedious. CoD4 wins.
Vehicles - As you may have heard, CoD4 doesn't have vehicles, whereas CoD5 sees the addition of Tanks. Lovely. Well it would be if they didnt take over 9000 rockets to even cause a scratch, and they weren't slower than a paralysed snail. CoD4 wins, this series doesn't need vehicles.
Ranks - Added 10 more ranks (55 -> 65) through adding a "III" to most of the lower ranks. All it does is make ranking up more tedious. Again, consoles get Prestige mode, a bit of a gimmick. BUT, if you go through the Prestige levels, you get 10 classes! Good idea, if it didn't involve going thorugh the ranking up process 11 times, fuck that. But on the lengthening and increased classes, CoD5 wins.
Conclusion - CoD5 is not a game to be played on consoles, recoil is too hard to control, and the general play suits PC more, which isn't really what it should be, considering it is a console port. In this comparison, CoD4 is obviously my choice, which is a shame, because I really had high hopes of CoD5, but it is an improvement over that terrible mess of a game called CoD3.
About a week ago, I saw CoD2 for sale in Gamestation for £7.99, so I bought it. Fucking hell. It's so simple, but yet so great. I can't seperate it from CoD4, but it's certainly what a WW2 game should be. Roll on, CoD6.
Weaponary - CoD4 has a reasonable amount of guns, with quite alot of variation, with guns like the AK47 and AK74u being the best. CoD5 has a smaller amount of weapons, with bolt actions and semi autos split up into seperate classes. The fact that you need need to get 25 kills with a bolt action to turn it into a sniper rifle is stupid and needless in my opinion. Grenades also seem to be solid lead in CoD5, taking real effort to throw them further than about 10 ft. So overall, CoD4 wins.
Maps - CoD4 has a couple of really good maps, like Strike and Countdown. CoD5 doesn't have a snigle good map, they all suck, either being too big or too small. Also, on Roundhouse, you can glitch into the area under the map, and shoot up, big glitch. CoD4 wins.
Perks - Exactly the same in both games, with CoD5 adding a couple of pointless Perks, like vehicle perks, and they changed the name of a couple. As with CoD4, the only perkset worth using is Bandolier, Stopping Power and Steady Aim. Draw.
Gameplay - CoD4 is a very easy game to play, with mucho pick up and play ability. CoD5 loses all of that, in favour of making it more rigid, and most of the guns having ridiculous levels of recoil, and you die easier than in CoD4 aswell. Everything in CoD5 has been done before, namely in CoD2, and done better. CoD4 wins.
Graphics - CoD4 has reasonable graphics, CoD5 has terrible graphics. There are about 4 different colours; brown, green, grey and muzzle flash. I have based this on PS3 vs PS3, I have yet to play CoD5 on PC. CoD4 wins.
Sound - CoD4 has fairly flat sound, with none of the guns feeling particularly meaty. CoD5 on the other hand makes every gun sound awesome, they have a really meaty and loud soundtrack. CoD5 wins.
The players - CoD4 takes little skill to be good at, but 'pr0s' use a relatively large variation of weapons. CoD5 involves using the Thompson or the STG-44 if you want to get even close to dominating a server. Treyarch may aswell have not bothered with the rifles, no one uses them. The last bad move by Treyarch, was putting the Silencer as the first Marksman reward, because 95% of people then feel that they HAVE to use it, and considering they make little to no noise, it gets tedious. CoD4 wins.
Vehicles - As you may have heard, CoD4 doesn't have vehicles, whereas CoD5 sees the addition of Tanks. Lovely. Well it would be if they didnt take over 9000 rockets to even cause a scratch, and they weren't slower than a paralysed snail. CoD4 wins, this series doesn't need vehicles.
Ranks - Added 10 more ranks (55 -> 65) through adding a "III" to most of the lower ranks. All it does is make ranking up more tedious. Again, consoles get Prestige mode, a bit of a gimmick. BUT, if you go through the Prestige levels, you get 10 classes! Good idea, if it didn't involve going thorugh the ranking up process 11 times, fuck that. But on the lengthening and increased classes, CoD5 wins.
Conclusion - CoD5 is not a game to be played on consoles, recoil is too hard to control, and the general play suits PC more, which isn't really what it should be, considering it is a console port. In this comparison, CoD4 is obviously my choice, which is a shame, because I really had high hopes of CoD5, but it is an improvement over that terrible mess of a game called CoD3.
About a week ago, I saw CoD2 for sale in Gamestation for £7.99, so I bought it. Fucking hell. It's so simple, but yet so great. I can't seperate it from CoD4, but it's certainly what a WW2 game should be. Roll on, CoD6.
#rekt
