Call of Duty 4 Discussion

stealth toilet said:
Multiplayer, while fairly fun, doesn't stack up to Halo 3's. Because of the plethora of modes and maps, not to mention the forge and theater, Halo is still the multiplayer king.

I have to disagree about the multiplayer here. CoD4 trounces Halo in almost every aspect. Sure it doesn't have as many maps, which I'm sure there will be more in upcoming updates, but the maps they do have allow you to be much more tactical and force you to strategize. Modes? In Halo nearly everyone sticks to the usual slayer, Big Team Battle, etc. etc. Hardly anybody plays other modes. Every time I'm online almost every map and mode that is first suggested immediately gets vetoed. I mean seriously what good are they if nobody plays them? CoD4 sticks to the best modes which allows for more fun. You can shoot through walls, you can run, plant claymores, launch flash grenades, YOU CAN UPGRADE YOUR WEAPONS, you can call in air strikes, etc. I can go on and on but CoD4's multiplayer cuts the fat that Halo has and makes it more fun.
 
CreepinDeth said:
In Halo nearly everyone sticks to the usual slayer, Big Team Battle, etc. etc. Hardly anybody plays other modes. Every time I'm online almost every map and mode that is first suggested immediately gets vetoed. I mean seriously what good are they if nobody plays them?

Yeah, that bugs me, too. It's always frustrating when you get a decent map with a bad game type, so you veto it and get a worse map with a worse gametype. I'm not sure why they even bothered with the veto system since you can only veto once. No matter what happens you're going to be playing something you don't want to play sometimes; might as well just get used to it.

I haven't had as much time to put into CoD4's multiplayer, but the only thing that bugged me about that is I got thrown in with higher ranked people who therefore had access to better weapons/better perks. It's not as fair as it could be, IMO.
 
CreepinDeth said:
I have to disagree about the multiplayer here. CoD4 trounces Halo in almost every aspect. Sure it doesn't have as many maps, which I'm sure there will be more in upcoming updates, but the maps they do have allow you to be much more tactical and force you to strategize. Modes? In Halo nearly everyone sticks to the usual slayer, Big Team Battle, etc. etc. Hardly anybody plays other modes. Every time I'm online almost every map and mode that is first suggested immediately gets vetoed. I mean seriously what good are they if nobody plays them? CoD4 sticks to the best modes which allows for more fun. You can shoot through walls, you can run, plant claymores, launch flash grenades, YOU CAN UPGRADE YOUR WEAPONS, you can call in air strikes, etc. I can go on and on but CoD4's multiplayer cuts the fat that Halo has and makes it more fun.

Well, I can't speak to online mutliplayer too much. I have played both online for an evening here and there, but I certainly haven't experienced it enough to find any mode or map "usual." When I talk about the "multiplayer" of a game I'm referring to the experience you get on a split screen with three other people in the room with you. Secondly, I'm not saying CoD4's mutliplayer is bad in any way, I have had a good amount of fun with it and expect I will for some time, but I have more fun playing Halo 3 on multiplayer. Call of Duty 4 is more tactical and strategic, but that kind of pulls away from the fun. To me Halo 3 is just a hodge podge of well crafted elements that, with some creativity and ingenuity, make for a wide variety of incredibly intense and fun multiplayer matches. CoD4, while also fun, doesn't really have any random elements or neat gameplay elements to toy around with. It would be like playing Super Smash Bros. Melee without any items and only using one map. I know there are people out there who do play the game this way, but I am not one of them, and it is difficult for me to fathom why anyone would play the game that way.

If you are a super tactical online shooter fan (and you don't play Counterstrike) then you may enjoy CoD4 more than Halo 3. If you like hopping into a match with a few buds where the object of the game involves more than just killing everyone else, and you all start with rocket launchers, and anti-grav pods, then Halo 3 is probably the one you want to get. Also, if you want to make your own maps and choose what weapons you want to use (instead of having to upgrade them) and add vehicles into the mix to spice things up and watch replays of amazing things that happened during the match... you may not be satisfied with CoD4. Maybe it's just the way we play those games, but my friends and I tend to play Halo 3 together more than CoD4, and we enjoy it more.
 
Strubes said:
Way to miss MY point. :)
Since he said he trusts Frodus's opinion, that means he's open to listening to what other people think, so your comment was kinda...thrown in.
 
In all honesty, I still stay true to Halo 3's multiplayer on a couple ground points.

Although CoD4's multiplayer is indeed awesome, it still draws some flaws to it. Like stealth said, CoD4 is not as frantic and run-out-and-gun-everyone as Halo is. It's more about strategy and sitting in a corner or looking out a window to see if anyone's dumb enough to come out in the open. But hey, some people like that better.

Halo requires you to be quick and witty if somebody attacks you or is trying to snipe you. You have to be creative in order to win. CoD4 repeats some of the same elements...just not quite as drawn out. It could just be that I have more fun playing in a highly unrealistic Sci-Fi setting rather than a photo realistic war game, I don't know. Halo just has this appeal to it that no other shooter has. Once you play Halo, you get this buzz and you just don't want to stop.

I mean, who doesn't enjoy a good assination or knocking the crap out of somebody with the gravity hammer? Also, customization is key to Halo. Everybody makes their own game variants with different starting weapons, vehicles, etc. While you can't call in an airstrike or helicopter on Halo, you can hop in vehicles, get in an elephant, use a sword and giant hammer, and a multitude of things that realistic games just don't have embedded into their gameplay elements.

I will say this though. It's a crap load easier to rank up in CoD4 than it is in Halo 3. And, IMO, CoD4 is easier than Halo. Three shots, boom. Dead. In Halo, it's more like gun at 'em for about 10 seconds, toss a grenade, reload, fire some more rounds, then boom. Dead. Just more fun, IMO.

~Jack
 
well you see that's why i like CoD4 more than halo3 because you have to think more in CoD4 than in halo
 
Zidart said:
well you see that's why i like CoD4 more than halo3 because you have to think more in CoD4 than in halo

Right, and that's cool. I just prefer more frantic gameplay to strategic gameplay. Hence why I never play any of those Ghost Recon or Rainbow Six games.
 
Jack said:
In Halo, it's more like gun at 'em for about 10 seconds, toss a grenade, reload, fire some more rounds, then boom. Dead. Just more fun, IMO.

or u just 3 shots and a quick melee which is pretty much the same thing.
 
yea except the fact u dont need to think to win a match in Halo and when I mean 3 shots it was one burst from the assault rifle and the first one to hit the melee would win all luck no skill.
 
Fr0dus Maximus said:
yea except the fact u dont need to think to win a match in Halo and when I mean 3 shots it was one burst from the assault rifle and the first one to hit the melee would win all luck no skill.

You need to think in order to win any shooting match, frodus. Games like Cod4 just require it to a higher degree.
 
Jack said:
You need to think in order to win any shooting match, frodus. Games like Cod4 just require it to a higher degree.

ok I kinda take back what I said. But, only for the Halo 3 matchtypes that are CTF and such. any of the others in Halo 3 like slayer, team slayer or even king of the hill u just go out and get like 3 kills then die, rinse, repeat.
 
Back
Top