I am a purist when it comes to FPS. No BS vehicles. Mano-a- mano is how it should be. Tanks negate the skill factor hugely.
They both negate and add to the skill factor. It takes skill to take down a tank, though not much skill to pwn with one. It's kind of a dubious influence. I don't like it when people snipe. . . . It takes aiming skill, but there are some maps where they have some incredible hiding spots. One thing I like about WaW is that they don't have a helicopter. The copter completely ruins a game when it's called in. MUCH moreso than a tank. I'm fairly purist in FPS games, but some games are better with vehicles. It's near impossible to imagine Halo with no vehicles- it just wouldn't be Halo. You should take a screenshot when you hit 1337 posts.
They both negate and add to the skill factor. It takes skill to take down a tank, though not much skill to pwn with one. It's kind of a dubious influence.
I don't think it adds to the overall gaming experience. All matches just become brawls to get into the tanks which is not fun at all.
I don't like it when people snipe. . . . It takes aiming skill, but there are some maps where they have some incredible hiding spots.
That's the point though. In COD4, the variety of maps meant that one couldn't be a sniper on every level, and would have to be skilled in a variety of weapons disciplines. Tanks remove that completely.
One thing I like about WaW is that they don't have a helicopter. The copter completely ruins a game when it's called in. MUCH moreso than a tank.
It's not the same though. It takes skill to call in a helicopter. You need to get 7 kills in a row. You can get in a tank whenever. I also disagree. Helis are good on some levels, on others, not so good, depending on the cover.
I'm fairly purist in FPS games, but some games are better with vehicles. It's near impossible to imagine Halo with no vehicles- it just wouldn't be Halo.
I am not saying that vehicles are bad, but for a game like COD, they are a no-no. What makes Halo different is the weapons available, many of which can take down a vehicle no problem. The easy accessibility of these weapons and the fact that most vehicles aren't one hit kill balances it out. Plus, you can mount and hijack vehicles in Halo, which you can't do in COD.
I don't think it adds to the overall gaming experience. All matches just become brawls to get into the tanks which is not fun at all.
Not all stages have tanks. . . . -------
That's the point though. In COD4, the variety of maps meant that one couldn't be a sniper on every level, and would have to be skilled in a variety of weapons disciplines. Tanks remove that completely.
Once again, not all maps have tanks. ------
It's not the same though. It takes skill to call in a helicopter. You need to get 7 kills in a row. You can get in a tank whenever. I also disagree. Helis are good on some levels, on others, not so good, depending on the cover.
But the helicopter, no matter what, throws a wrench in the match's progress, because every player on the opposing team scurries to cover until the copter finally goes away. I'm not arguing that WaW was better, in fact COD4 was much better, but you're disillusioned with some of the features of WaW. ?I don't like tanks myself, but my point is that they're not necessarily a bad thing- you just need practice taking them down.
But the helicopter, no matter what, throws a wrench in the match's progress, because every player on the opposing team scurries to cover until the copter finally goes away.
That's what makes tanks even worse. They don't just go away eventually. You have to take them down. Even then, they respawn fairly quickly.
I'm not arguing that WaW was better, in fact COD4 was much better, but you're disillusioned with some of the features of WaW. ?I don't like tanks myself, but my point is that they're not necessarily a bad thing- you just need practice taking them down.
Of course they are a bad thing. They reduce almost every match to tank stand offs.
I believe WaW is somewhat easy. If you can aim without a freaking scope. I've accomplished completing it on Hardened and almost on Veteran. I just hate 'Vendetta' and 'Blowtorch and Corkscrew' otherwise i beat the game on Veteran. CoD 4 doesn't have as many ambushes and problems with people charging at you and your allies. Plus the chance of dieing is a little more likely :S.
um.. the same engine was used to create the games the only thing different is the rendering in WaW which allows the gore feature. The reason the graphics don't look exactly alike I'm not really sure about, but it may have to do with the light (it's a lot brighter in MW than WaW)
IMO CoD 4 has better maps, weapon balance, and better spawns. WaW has Zombies
I havn't really played COD W@W online that much, but I honestly don't lke it. I guess the gameplay is a little bit better in COD 4 because it takes place in the present. Whereas COD W@W takes place in WWII, and I have played so many WWII games, that its... well... boring...
Like alot of comments, WAW is Good and addicting because of gameplay and Nazi Zombie, But WW2 Games get old after 15yrs. of the same type of games. MW is good because it uses alot of modern Technology. Sure lots of new fetures such as attack dogs are used in WAW but lets just face it. WW2 was almost 50yrs. ago.
