poroshin on 24/11/2008 at 01:13
Mine should be arriving soon. I can't wait.
COD1 and 2 were some of my most favorite action games of all times. COD4 was a huge step forward, and still had that classic feel of chaos that the COD games create so perfectly.
Looks like this one's a winner, too: (
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FjiBIvr1Mc&fmt=18)
JediKorenchkin on 24/11/2008 at 02:46
COD 5 sucks. It's basically "Let's shit out a quick COD game so that we can make money while we're taking time to develop COD 6 to be awesome like COD 4 was."
gunsmoke on 24/11/2008 at 03:28
So it;s CoD 3 all over again?
sh0ck3r on 24/11/2008 at 04:06
is the COD4 single-player campaign really, really short?
june gloom on 24/11/2008 at 04:28
CoD4 can be beaten in about 6 hours. It's short but very, very sweet.
Andarthiel on 24/11/2008 at 04:58
They should have gone into the future with COD 5 and have a fictional world with fictional futuristic factions and of course futuristic weaponry but this looks like the same old WWII shooter. It could be ok because it's using the COD 4 engine. Have to try it before I pass further judgement.
Aja on 24/11/2008 at 06:38
Quote Posted by dethtoll
CoD4 can be beaten in about 6 hours. It's short but very, very sweet.
Takes a lot longer on Veteran. Not even counting reloads (which there are PLENTY of), but you have to play at a much slower pace. Took me at least ten hours, maybe more.
JediKorenchkin on 24/11/2008 at 10:37
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
So it;s CoD 3 all over again?
Basically. To its credit, a lot of the multiplayer maps are cooler/larger than COD 4. And it does have 4 player split screen, which I don't think COD 4 had. But those two things don't really make it a 'good' game.
gunsmoke on 24/11/2008 at 14:07
would a 2600+, 1 gig of RAM, and an ati 9800 PRO run CoD 4 on low settings? Would it be playable? i.e ~30 fps
