COD4 and COD:MW2

[Monk]

COD4 for $20 is a steal. Get it.

The single player mode is short, maybe around 4-6 hours depending on difficulty, but it's very engaging. It takes the COD formula (which is a rail shooter at heart) and pushes it to its limits with a compelling story, hectic firefights and varied gameplay.

Multiplayer is.. alright. Trust me I know it's fun but there are way too many knife rushers and SMG spammers. Not to mention Martyrdom users (drop a live grenade when you die)! However i'd be completely lying if I said I didn't lose myself in that game 8 months ago. Worth $20? Oh heck yes. Will its appeal to you last as long as you want it? Now that I couldn't say.

[Hooahguy]

how is the campaign replayability fare? with some FPS games the campaign can be played over and over.

bear in mind im getting the PC version.

[Monk]

how is the campaign replayability fare? with some FPS games the campaign can be played over and over.

bear in mind im getting the PC version.

I found it enjoyable to play through multiple times. But you have to remember it's still a rail shooter, so your milage may vary. Me? I'm a sucker for good storytelling and that is exactly what CoD4 is.

[Hooahguy]

a rail shooter may actually be what im looking for. i found the crysis campaign, despite being able to do many different things, pretty boring at most times, even at the expert levels.

[Hooahguy]

ok i just ordered the game, costing me $25. why is tax so high? but at least its better than $50 at the store.

[al Roumi]

ok i just ordered the game, costing me $25. why is tax so high? but at least its better than $50 at the store.

You'll have fun! I got bored half-way through Crisis and Farcry2 single player, and returned to COD4 multiplayer.

I admit i'm comparing single with multiplayer there... IMO COD4's single player campaign is short, but very sweet. As Monk says, the storytelling is great -especially how gameplay and cut-scene cross over through special missions/story sections. All I'll say is that gunships kick ass.

For me, COD4 was so good it really benchmarked the genre. Even playing the COD5 beta just felt wrong, because of the little differences -I've never felt so "comfortable" in the control of my avatar in the game.

I should add that neither Crisis or Farcry2's multiplayer did it for me either. Not since Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory have I enjoyed multiplayer so much.

Anyway, you've be getting it soon now so I guess you'll be enjoying it for yourself!

[Hooahguy]

well, i dont have it yet. i will in a week or so.
and ya, the crysis MP was kinda pathetic.

[Monk]

For me, COD4 was so good it really benchmarked the genre. Even playing the COD5 beta just felt wrong, because of the little differences -I've never felt so "comfortable" in the control of my avatar in the game.

I've summed up my feelings for COD5 already, suffice to say after 4 it was a huge letdown for me. I went into it knowing what I was getting but even when expecting a copy+paste ww2 game I was surprised by how boring it was. Not to mention how disgusting the gore levels were for me.

Let me give you some perspective - I play a game so over the top in its violence that you can saw people in half with a chainsaw (Gears of War 2) and yet it was CoD5 that actually managed to turn my stomach with its gore levels. The first time I blew someone's arm off with a shotgun I was like "Oh yeah!" the second time around, however, it felt really really awkward. Gears of war seeks to be so over the top in its violence that it's hard to take it seriously, or for anything else than a good time. CoD5 feels far too serious, and thus I can't laugh off the gore levels.

edit: I'm not kidding. When i saw someone get both legs blown off from a land mine I had to turn off the game for a little while. I hope MW2 doesn't have all that messy gore...