CoD went downhill after CoD2

Who else agrees that the CoD franchise went way downhill after Call of Duty 2?

I just feel it became too arcadish for me. With the sprinting, "perks", and custimizable loadouts crap. It just felt unrealistic and less balanced. I'm not saying the pre-chosen loadouts you chose from in CoD2 were perfect, but they were very close in their balance. Plus a one speed running speed felt much more close to traditional shooters of the past, and more balanced.

I guess I miss the shooters of old where map control(or weapon control) meant everything, and there were no special loadouts to pick from and everyone would start with the same thing.

Who else yearns for another one of these?

Totally agree.

Not only that, but the settings and WW2 scenarios from 1 & 2 were cool and they destroy this modern garbage.

Could care less about CoD after 2.

I'm playing the Merciless Matador mod for CoD 2 right now, which adds some really nice gore and removes crap like health regen. Also using the console to get rid of the HuD, removed the direction of fire indicators in the config files..

Makes it a much less noob friendly/casual game and a lot more intense.

I don't agree. I was never all that interested in the Call of Duty games until Modern Warfare, now I love the games. I really enjoy the bombastic single player campaigns and the online multiplayer with all the killstreaks, perks, and numerous weapons and upgrades. I'm not really into the WWII setting unless it has a sci-fi twist to it.

I agree, CoD 2 was so good. I love its atmosphere, mission design, ending. That's why it's my favourite in the series, while COD MW3 is my worst game of all time.

Disagree.

World at War is still my favorite, campaign-wise. The MW series have great campaigns too. World at War introduced Zombies. I just wish CoD would let the futuristic stuff go and come up with something else.

I only started at Call of Duty 4 and haven't played all of them since that but I would say that the series probably had a shift in tone. I think the earlier ones were grittier and obviously more story driven (I think they didn't have a online component but I'm not 100% sure). The new ones have surely been affected by the rise of things like MLG and online gameplay.

It's such a big game now that it tries to appeal to as many people as possible and along the way alienates some older fans. The campaign is a hollywood blockbuster now and many people I know now only play it for zombies.

I wouldn't say it went downhill, but it changed, for better or worse.

It would be interesting to see how people would react to a new one designed the old ways.

I would say COD went properly downhill after MW2. I spent hours and and hours on MW1 and MW2 in both campaign and online but after 2, it just got a bit garbage. I don't play COD anymore at all now.

campaign wise i think most people who started playing from the first game would welcome a switch back. i found the first two games and uo much more gritty, intense and atmospheric compared to all this sci-fi / michael bay inspired stuff

I actually liked them up until MW2 but I definitely prefer the World War II setting.

Campaign was great up till MW2.

Multi did not start until MW1.

World at War was the last one I actaully quite enjoyed. I lost the spark for the series after it.

I played all the way until MW. I have played MW2 and Black Ops but not online... It took me years to play MW3. Only played the campaign. Online gaming isn't as fun as it used to be.

It went downhill after United Offensive.

Iv started thinking that after call of duty 4, the perk system was a change, and was ok for that game, but then activision and every other gaming company started incorporating that into they're shooters and its caused the downfall of most shooter's now...

I thought MW3 was good and miss the mode where there are waves of CPU enemies and you and another person see how long you can last. I also really liked those maps. I can't remember what exactly that mode was called. Zombies is so stupid and the series can't seem to part with it. As for weapons customization, I actually think that's one thing CoD gets right, with all the diversity (why wouldn't you want to choose your class?). But there are definitely way too many perks and the franchise would be so much better if it lost all the sci fi garbage and the cheesy "specialists" that are in BO3. I can't understand why they won't let you create a character with many options for customization, why is that something the series just can't get right? It's what's keeping the online from being a memorable experience. Also, I think it's stupid to even comment on the series campaign. They should get rid of the campaign and make the entire game an online campaign (like GTA online/Destiny/etc). CoD is trying to be too many things at once. I don't think the game would be GREAT, but I think it would be a pretty good FPS/online game if these things changed. Right now it's a just the same shitty games and no memorable gameplay. It's just a fun game to kill an hour when you're drunk

I liked the WW2 setting better, but I really enjoyed COD3. The first Modern Warfare was fun at the time too, and I don't care for anything that came after.

I think MW and MW2 were great too, as well as the Black Ops series (haven't played BO 3 yet, though). Still, I prefer the WWII over "modern" shooter games.

I am enjoying the CoD single player games still. I like how the new games are playing with possible tech. Their staging is still great and always trying new things.

I never like WW2 shooters and I hope that they limit themselves in that time frame.

Agreed. Cod4 was really good online, and MW2 was good.. and could be a lot of fun with a group of 6 working together.