Miggle
FUCK UBISOFT
+1,411|6971|FUCK UBISOFT

I started up Team Fortress 2, it worked.

but srsly

Call of Duty United Offensive was easily the best CoD game ever made, followed up by CoD2. Then we get cod4 which is a bf2 wannabe game which takes the concepts of balance and teamwork, and ignores them completely. With the perks system you get stuff like martyrdom, last stand (yes, when i snipe someone and they fall down to a place I cant see, it pisses me off) 3x Frag, and sonic boom, along with countless others, you get gameplay that involves mindless, skilless, and pointless killing. Add in the Airstrike and Helicopter system and shitty maps and you get pure fail.

The Single Player game has more replayability than multiplayer. It takes longer to beat the game than to get to level 55, and arcade mode allows you to play it several times without getting bored. Levels like death from above and all ghillied up give an important break from the rest of the game, and character development is wonderfully done. The ending comes almost as a surprise (i knew it was impossible to kill that fucking chopper) but it closes the game beautifully. As the first CoD game with a fictional story, it is well thought out and really involving.

Multiplayer gets a 3/10 for it's shittiness, at least it's not as bad as halo.
Singleplayer gets an 8/10 for being pro, but not as good as the half life games.

Last edited by Miggle (2008-04-08 17:16:28)

https://i.imgur.com/86fodNE.png
steelie34
pub hero!
+603|6610|the land of bourbon
i really dont think this is a bf2 wannabe game.  not a whole lot in common.  i think they missed with the teamwork aspect, but with most gameplay modes, it's not like your team has to advance on a common goal together.

Last edited by steelie34 (2008-04-08 17:20:34)

https://bf3s.com/sigs/36e1d9e36ae924048a933db90fb05bb247fe315e.png
Miggle
FUCK UBISOFT
+1,411|6971|FUCK UBISOFT

steelie34 wrote:

i really dont think this is a bf2 wannabe game.  not a whole lot in common really
Lets see,

- Modern Warfare (you may not think this is copycatting, but after maybe 5 or 6 WWII games, going to Modern Warfare is a bit odd)
- Rank System (do i need to explain?)
- Class System (Up to this one, there has never been any form of classes in a CoD game)

there are probably more i'm not thinking of.
https://i.imgur.com/86fodNE.png
Docjones
Member
+7|6214|Connecticut

Miggle wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

i really dont think this is a bf2 wannabe game.  not a whole lot in common really
Lets see,

- Modern Warfare (you may not think this is copycatting, but after maybe 5 or 6 WWII games, going to Modern Warfare is a bit odd)
- Rank System (do i need to explain?)
- Class System (Up to this one, there has never been any form of classes in a CoD game)

there are probably more i'm not thinking of.
- Modern Warfare (you may not think this is copycatting, but after maybe 5 or 6 WWII games, going to Modern Warfare is a bit odd)CoD: Korea?
- Rank System (do i need to explain?) BF2 invented ranks
- Class System (Up to this one, there has never been any form of classes in a CoD game) /fail
steelie34
pub hero!
+603|6610|the land of bourbon

Miggle wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

i really dont think this is a bf2 wannabe game.  not a whole lot in common really
Lets see,

- Modern Warfare (you may not think this is copycatting, but after maybe 5 or 6 WWII games, going to Modern Warfare is a bit odd)
- Rank System (do i need to explain?)
- Class System (Up to this one, there has never been any form of classes in a CoD game)

there are probably more i'm not thinking of.
honestly the WWII genre is oversaturated with games.  cmon, that war was over 60 years ago.  modern warfare is where its at, based around real-world conflicts in the present date.  the rank system has been around in games prior to bf2 (maybe not multiplayer) but its just a way to make a game have more lasting replay value.  ranks are here to stay, im sure most games in the future are going to have some sort of online rank system.  and the class system is a bf2 ripoff?  no way!  they are customizable to whatever you want.  bf2 has no freedom at all with classes, but cod4 lets you create the kind of player you want to be.  you can be a sniper with c4, or a CQC specialist with an RPG.  it seems to me like they built the class system from the ground up, not as a cheap rip-off of another game.

Last edited by steelie34 (2008-04-08 17:32:23)

https://bf3s.com/sigs/36e1d9e36ae924048a933db90fb05bb247fe315e.png
Mutantbear
Semi Constructive Criticism
+1,431|6194|London, England

If you can honestly say that halo had bad multiplayer than i cannot take anything you say seriously
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ https://i.imgur.com/Xj4f2.png
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6553|New Haven, CT

Miggle wrote:

I started up Team Fortress 2, it worked.

but srsly

Call of Duty United Offensive was easily the best CoD game ever made, followed up by CoD2. Then we get cod4 which is a bf2 wannabe game which takes the concepts of balance and teamwork, and ignores them completely. With the perks system you get stuff like martyrdom, last stand (yes, when i snipe someone and they fall down to a place I cant see, it pisses me off) 3x Frag, and sonic boom, along with countless others, you get gameplay that involves mindless, skilless, and pointless killing. Add in the Airstrike and Helicopter system and shitty maps and you get pure fail.

The Single Player game has more replayability than multiplayer. It takes longer to beat the game than to get to level 55, and arcade mode allows you to play it several times without getting bored. Levels like death from above and all ghillied up give an important break from the rest of the game, and character development is wonderfully done. The ending comes almost as a surprise (i knew it was impossible to kill that fucking chopper) but it closes the game beautifully. As the first CoD game with a fictional story, it is well thought out and really involving.

Multiplayer gets a 3/10 for it's shittiness, at least it's not as bad as halo.
Singleplayer gets an 8/10 for being pro, but not as good as the half life games.
I beat the game in five hours, while have played MP for twenty on one account and have only level 48.
DefCon-17
Maple Syrup Faggot
+362|6385|Vancouver | Canada

DefCon-17 wrote:

I swear the only thing that happens in this fucking forum is whining, bitching, and moaning.

Not pointing any fingers though..
Miggle
FUCK UBISOFT
+1,411|6971|FUCK UBISOFT

nukchebi0 wrote:

Miggle wrote:

I started up Team Fortress 2, it worked.

but srsly

Call of Duty United Offensive was easily the best CoD game ever made, followed up by CoD2. Then we get cod4 which is a bf2 wannabe game which takes the concepts of balance and teamwork, and ignores them completely. With the perks system you get stuff like martyrdom, last stand (yes, when i snipe someone and they fall down to a place I cant see, it pisses me off) 3x Frag, and sonic boom, along with countless others, you get gameplay that involves mindless, skilless, and pointless killing. Add in the Airstrike and Helicopter system and shitty maps and you get pure fail.

The Single Player game has more replayability than multiplayer. It takes longer to beat the game than to get to level 55, and arcade mode allows you to play it several times without getting bored. Levels like death from above and all ghillied up give an important break from the rest of the game, and character development is wonderfully done. The ending comes almost as a surprise (i knew it was impossible to kill that fucking chopper) but it closes the game beautifully. As the first CoD game with a fictional story, it is well thought out and really involving.

Multiplayer gets a 3/10 for it's shittiness, at least it's not as bad as halo.
Singleplayer gets an 8/10 for being pro, but not as good as the half life games.
I beat the game in five hours, while have played MP for twenty on one account and have only level 48.
good for you.

want a medal?

Mutantsteak wrote:

If you can honestly say that halo had bad multiplayer than i cannot take anything you say seriously
what could possibly be good about halo multiplayer?
https://i.imgur.com/86fodNE.png
Mutantbear
Semi Constructive Criticism
+1,431|6194|London, England

DefCon-17 wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:

I swear the only thing that happens in this fucking forum is whining, bitching, and moaning.

Not pointing any fingers though..
Did you srsly just quote yourself, arrogance is worse than bitching and moaning

Also @ Miggle, what is bad about halo multiplayer, it draws the biggest crowd of gamers ever. How can you say it sucks
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ https://i.imgur.com/Xj4f2.png
Miggle
FUCK UBISOFT
+1,411|6971|FUCK UBISOFT

Mutantsteak wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:

I swear the only thing that happens in this fucking forum is whining, bitching, and moaning.

Not pointing any fingers though..
Did you srsly just quote yourself, arrogance is worse than bitching and moaning

Also @ Miggle, what is bad about halo multiplayer, it draws the biggest crowd of gamers ever. How can you say it sucks
firstly, wow draws the biggest crowd of gamers

secondly, if you play your games on a 360, you are not a gamer

thirdly, it draws a huge crowd of screaming kids

fourthly, the weapons seem horribly unbalanced and it doesn't have anything in it that hadn't been done better in the early nineties.

Fifthly and finally, halo gets huge hype for being a fairly average game. If it weren't for halo, nobody would buy a 360, and microsoft would have a failing console, so they have to throw money at reviewers and advertisers, resulting in a higher metascore than TF2.

so what's good about it?

Last edited by Miggle (2008-04-08 18:34:38)

https://i.imgur.com/86fodNE.png
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6553|New Haven, CT

Miggle wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

Miggle wrote:

I started up Team Fortress 2, it worked.

but srsly

Call of Duty United Offensive was easily the best CoD game ever made, followed up by CoD2. Then we get cod4 which is a bf2 wannabe game which takes the concepts of balance and teamwork, and ignores them completely. With the perks system you get stuff like martyrdom, last stand (yes, when i snipe someone and they fall down to a place I cant see, it pisses me off) 3x Frag, and sonic boom, along with countless others, you get gameplay that involves mindless, skilless, and pointless killing. Add in the Airstrike and Helicopter system and shitty maps and you get pure fail.

The Single Player game has more replayability than multiplayer. It takes longer to beat the game than to get to level 55, and arcade mode allows you to play it several times without getting bored. Levels like death from above and all ghillied up give an important break from the rest of the game, and character development is wonderfully done. The ending comes almost as a surprise (i knew it was impossible to kill that fucking chopper) but it closes the game beautifully. As the first CoD game with a fictional story, it is well thought out and really involving.

Multiplayer gets a 3/10 for it's shittiness, at least it's not as bad as halo.
Singleplayer gets an 8/10 for being pro, but not as good as the half life games.
I beat the game in five hours, while have played MP for twenty on one account and have only level 48.
good for you.

want a medal?
I'd prefer having you realize that a statement saying the game takes longer to beat than it does to reach level 55 is horribly wrong.
Mutantbear
Semi Constructive Criticism
+1,431|6194|London, England

Miggle wrote:

Mutantsteak wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:


Did you srsly just quote yourself, arrogance is worse than bitching and moaning

Also @ Miggle, what is bad about halo multiplayer, it draws the biggest crowd of gamers ever. How can you say it sucks
firstly, wow draws the biggest crowd of gamers

secondly, if you play your games on a 360, you are not a gamer

thirdly, it draws a huge crowd of screaming kids

fourthly, the weapons seem horribly unbalanced and it doesn't have anything in it that hadn't been done better in the early nineties.

Fifthly and finally, halo gets huge hype for being a fairly average game. If it weren't for halo, nobody would buy a 360, and microsoft would have a failing console, so they have to throw money at reviewers and advertisers, resulting in a higher metascore than TF2.

so what's good about it?
... You can say whatever you want about halo, the truth is that there are millions of people that play the game. Either they all like shitty games or maybe you are just too stubborn to realize a well made franchise like halo
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ https://i.imgur.com/Xj4f2.png
Miggle
FUCK UBISOFT
+1,411|6971|FUCK UBISOFT

nukchebi0 wrote:

Miggle wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:


I beat the game in five hours, while have played MP for twenty on one account and have only level 48.
good for you.

want a medal?
I'd prefer having you realize that a statement saying the game takes longer to beat than it does to reach level 55 is horribly wrong.
I have a friend i would like you to meet, his name is Exaggeration, he's a cool guy, you should get to know him.
https://i.imgur.com/86fodNE.png
Miggle
FUCK UBISOFT
+1,411|6971|FUCK UBISOFT

Mutantsteak wrote:

Miggle wrote:

Mutantsteak wrote:

Did you srsly just quote yourself, arrogance is worse than bitching and moaning

Also @ Miggle, what is bad about halo multiplayer, it draws the biggest crowd of gamers ever. How can you say it sucks
firstly, wow draws the biggest crowd of gamers

secondly, if you play your games on a 360, you are not a gamer

thirdly, it draws a huge crowd of screaming kids

fourthly, the weapons seem horribly unbalanced and it doesn't have anything in it that hadn't been done better in the early nineties.

Fifthly and finally, halo gets huge hype for being a fairly average game. If it weren't for halo, nobody would buy a 360, and microsoft would have a failing console, so they have to throw money at reviewers and advertisers, resulting in a higher metascore than TF2.

so what's good about it?
... You can say whatever you want about halo, the truth is that there are millions of people that play the game. Either they all like shitty games or maybe you are just too stubborn to realize a well made franchise like halo

Miggle wrote:

So what's good about it?
about 20 of my friends were halo addicts, i've told them about TF2, some of them I've bought TF2 for, and i explained how halo wasn't that great. Now they all play TF2.

the problem is that people are lemmings, they hear halo is good, so they think it's good.

Last edited by Miggle (2008-04-08 18:43:58)

https://i.imgur.com/86fodNE.png
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6553|New Haven, CT

Miggle wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

Miggle wrote:


good for you.

want a medal?
I'd prefer having you realize that a statement saying the game takes longer to beat than it does to reach level 55 is horribly wrong.
I have a friend i would like you to meet, his name is Exaggeration, he's a cool guy, you should get to know him.
Lol...but with a difference so great, exaggeration doesn't apply.
DefCon-17
Maple Syrup Faggot
+362|6385|Vancouver | Canada

Mutantsteak wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:

I swear the only thing that happens in this fucking forum is whining, bitching, and moaning.

Not pointing any fingers though..
Did you srsly just quote yourself, arrogance is worse than bitching and moaning

Also @ Miggle, what is bad about halo multiplayer, it draws the biggest crowd of gamers ever. How can you say it sucks
Do you see my original post in this thread?
Mutantbear
Semi Constructive Criticism
+1,431|6194|London, England

DefCon-17 wrote:

Mutantsteak wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:


Did you srsly just quote yourself, arrogance is worse than bitching and moaning

Also @ Miggle, what is bad about halo multiplayer, it draws the biggest crowd of gamers ever. How can you say it sucks
Do you see my original post in this thread?
no
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ https://i.imgur.com/Xj4f2.png
DefCon-17
Maple Syrup Faggot
+362|6385|Vancouver | Canada

Mutantsteak wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:

Mutantsteak wrote:


Did you srsly just quote yourself, arrogance is worse than bitching and moaning

Also @ Miggle, what is bad about halo multiplayer, it draws the biggest crowd of gamers ever. How can you say it sucks
Do you see my original post in this thread?
no
So what can we establish from that little fact?
The_Lance_117
CANADA STRONG
+110|6165|CANADA
I sit down, b00t my system, load up CoD4, join a game, and get killed by some noob's martyrdom.
I quit CoD4 in anger, load up Bf2, and get massacred by some bunnyhopping medic's G36e.
I quit BF2 in anger, load up Crysis, and run over Koreans in my Black-Hole Launching TAC Tank. But then my system crashes even though I have 8800 GTS.
I shut down my computer, grab a book from my shelf, and read.
/rant
weasel_thingo
Member
+74|6556

Miggle wrote:

about 20 of my friends were halo addicts, i've told them about TF2, some of them I've bought TF2 for, and i explained how halo wasn't that great. Now they all play TF2.

the problem is that people are lemmings, they hear halo is good, so they think it's good.
halo and TF2 are both terrible
halo= guns that are just spray and pray, no skill
TF2= guns that are just spray and pray, no skill
halo= unbalanced guns, whoever has the better gun generally wins (unless opponent is retarded)
TF2= unbalanced guns, whoever has the better gun generally wins (unless opponent is retarded)

people hear TF2 is good, so they think its good
and its player base like halo is full of fanboys and idiots (more so than other games)

and TF2 hardly deserves the metascore it got
what is good about it?

and because getting ranks means beating the multiplayer then i finished TF2 before i finished CoD4, but i must admit TF2 did have a great singleplayer

also lol at you saying CoD4 is a wanabe BF2 game, classes didnt originate in BF2. this is ignoring the fact that CoD1 did have classes anyway
modern warfare, lots of other games did it as well, CoD already had done WW2 twice if they did it again you would probs saying "OMG WW2 HAS BEEN DONE SO MANY TIMES WHY DIDNT THEY MAKE IT MODERN HURR HURR HURR"

also to you complaining about perks, while lots of them are shit i admit, TF2 has crits, which is worse than most of the perks
DefCon-17
Maple Syrup Faggot
+362|6385|Vancouver | Canada

weasel_thingo wrote:

Miggle wrote:

about 20 of my friends were halo addicts, i've told them about TF2, some of them I've bought TF2 for, and i explained how halo wasn't that great. Now they all play TF2.

the problem is that people are lemmings, they hear halo is good, so they think it's good.
halo and TF2 are both terrible
halo= guns that are just spray and pray, no skill
TF2= guns that are just spray and pray, no skill
halo= unbalanced guns, whoever has the better gun generally wins (unless opponent is retarded)
TF2= unbalanced guns, whoever has the better gun generally wins (unless opponent is retarded)

people hear TF2 is good, so they think its good
and its player base like halo is full of fanboys and idiots (more so than other games)

and TF2 hardly deserves the metascore it got
what is good about it?

and because getting ranks means beating the multiplayer then i finished TF2 before i finished CoD4, but i must admit TF2 did have a great singleplayer

also lol at you saying CoD4 is a wanabe BF2 game, classes didnt originate in BF2. this is ignoring the fact that CoD1 did have classes anyway
modern warfare, lots of other games did it as well, CoD already had done WW2 twice if they did it again you would probs saying "OMG WW2 HAS BEEN DONE SO MANY TIMES WHY DIDNT THEY MAKE IT MODERN HURR HURR HURR"

also to you complaining about perks, while lots of them are shit i admit, TF2 has crits, which is worse than most of the perks
Every single FPS is spray and pray if you make it that way.
Mutantbear
Semi Constructive Criticism
+1,431|6194|London, England

DefCon-17 wrote:

Mutantsteak wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:


Do you see my original post in this thread?
no
So what can we establish from that little fact?
There wasn't a post before you quoted yourself...
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ https://i.imgur.com/Xj4f2.png
Defiance
Member
+438|6900

Mutantsteak wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:

Mutantsteak wrote:

no
So what can we establish from that little fact?
There wasn't a post before you quoted yourself...
The correct answer is it doesn't really matter, outside of a bit of irony.

See, def was either lazy or unmotivated enough to not type out the same message in an original reply. However, he did feel compelled to go all the way back here and quote his post from another thread. Which is just really fucking weird.

Last edited by Defiance (2008-07-05 16:47:36)

DefCon-17
Maple Syrup Faggot
+362|6385|Vancouver | Canada

Mutantsteak wrote:

DefCon-17 wrote:

Mutantsteak wrote:


no
So what can we establish from that little fact?
There wasn't a post before you quoted yourself...
I said it in another thread, and since this thread is just whining too, I figured I might as well say the exact same thing.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard