This topic is locked from further discussion.
Hmm I liked the way the game look but then it was slammed by reviews. Mabey I will give it a rent How are the controls for the game? Graphics will not bother me but controls would.TheColbertthe controls aren't that bad. the online gameplay is what makes this game a passible grade for me. i give it a 6.5 now Call of duty world at war is the game that makes all first person games look stupid except for MOHH2 and MP3.
The multi is totally awesome, no doubt about it. CoD plays very differently.
The single player is so-so. I love the death animations and hit zones of enemies, and some levels play a bit like Goldeneye (the first one). Others are just scripted fluff and/or rooms fulll of enemies.
The game is definitely fun. Isn't awesome, however. The graphics are decent, no more. The controls are better than Red Steel but not as good as Call of Duty World at War or Medal Of Honor. The online is fun, but simple, and only has 4 players. It's worth a rental, and you'll enjoy it.The multi is totally awesome, no doubt about it. CoD plays very differently.
The single player is so-so. I love the death animations and hit zones of enemies, and some levels play a bit like Goldeneye (the first one). Others are just scripted fluff and/or rooms fulll of enemies.
borgking73
comparesd to other versions , wii has the best version of the game i own it for 360 to but you know what, no split screen and thats a killer , because
1 after 360 is done, and 720 or what ever replaces it the game would end up being single player only,
2 we pay 50 for 13 months of online mines almost up gotta reup in feb
3 who wants to do this every year or time ,
simple fact wii has split screen at least multiplayer is functional for free even online,
also its miore challenging on the wii, the traditional 360 pad made this game a walk in the park on 360 much like any other game,
more skill is a need ,
then luck is,
I strongly disagree with more not being better. This game needs more people. Some players just hide in the corner the entire game. I once played a game where no one died in 5 mins of gameplay. That is pathetic. If you don't think more people add to online, play Medal of Honor 2 online and you will see!I liked the levels much better than CoD's And 4 players is just as good as 8 players, i's jsut different. The levels are perfect for 4 players. More isn't always better.
And what about the controls? On Advanced they were at least MP3 level.
borgking73
I strongly disagree with more not being better. This game needs more people. Some players just hide in the corner the entire game. I once played a game where no one died in 5 mins of gameplay. That is pathetic. If you don't think more people add to online, play Medal of Honor 2 online and you will see!santiagochile
Well okay, if there is too many n00bs or diehard campers, more are better. I mostly played with FC or splitscreen with skilled players and that's where QoS takes off.
In QoS, you often have those oldschool one-on-one confrontations, except they get much more tactical with the cover system.
We had lots of fierce battles and I can't say it was ever boring. I also played 2 player splitscreen and if both players are of equal skill, this really feels like two agents outwitting each other.
Also I must say while WaW is a great game I personally like the QoS levels a bit better, except for Airport they are almost all instant classics and PERFECTLY suit a 2-4 players game.
I'd say anyone who can afford it, should get both QoS AND WaW. WaW for war-like squad combat in large levels, QoS for more tactical, slow paced (but still exciting) "secret agent" action. In some ways, QoS on multi is more like Goldeneye than Nightfire could ever hope to be.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment