Why do people say Cod 5 was bad?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Coldzboy
Coldzboy

1960

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#1 Coldzboy
Member since 2004 • 1960 Posts

I get it, WWII.

But alot of people are just talking out of their asses/jumping on the bandwagon. I remember when I was 12 and wanted to get my post-count up by bashing good games. 4 Player co-op, Nazi Zombies, although it was still WWII, I haven't played alot of pacific campaign-based ones so it was still fresh. Put down any reason besides WWII to describe why WaW was bad.

Avatar image for 1357
1357

426

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 1357
Member since 2005 • 426 Posts

because it felt just like the 4 instead 5 had different guns.. not that is a bad thing i just didnt want to play a game that copies everything from the forth .. we want to see something new fromTreyarch instead of copyinginfinityward.. well thats me at leavst :P

ps i dont like ww2 settings

Avatar image for lucky326
lucky326

3799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 lucky326
Member since 2006 • 3799 Posts

Better than MW2 thats for sure.

Avatar image for Baranga
Baranga

14217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#4 Baranga
Member since 2005 • 14217 Posts

It was cool to bash Treyarch and praise IW back then. Poor Treyarch, they and Raven are the very definition of slave studios.

Avatar image for Crimsader
Crimsader

11672

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Crimsader
Member since 2008 • 11672 Posts

Oh, was it? ... and I liked it so much.

Avatar image for _Pedro_
_Pedro_

6829

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#7 _Pedro_
Member since 2004 • 6829 Posts

[QUOTE="lucky326"]

Better than MW2 thats for sure.

snover2009

ENOUGH WITH THE MODERN WARFARE 2 HATE ALREADY.

UNTIL IT IS RELEASED, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE QUALITY OF THE GAME WILL BE, SO WAIT UNTIL THEN.

please refrain from typing in caps. Besides there is NO reason to get MW2 for the pc, period. If you truly must play this game get it for the 360 or PS3, which is the same price + better online + more people playing it.
Avatar image for dakan45
dakan45

18819

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#8 dakan45
Member since 2009 • 18819 Posts
Well, it was inferior from cod4 and the weapons were way too accurate. Also they sounded pretty meh if you ask me. If you want a pacific WWII game get medal of honor pacific assault its a masterpiece.
Avatar image for undershot1
undershot1

129

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 undershot1
Member since 2009 • 129 Posts

[QUOTE="lucky326"]

Better than MW2 thats for sure.

snover2009

ENOUGH WITH THE MODERN WARFARE 2 HATE ALREADY.

UNTIL IT IS RELEASED, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE QUALITY OF THE GAME WILL BE, SO WAIT UNTIL THEN.

*Insert U MAD in here*

Avatar image for pvtdonut54
pvtdonut54

8554

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#10 pvtdonut54
Member since 2008 • 8554 Posts

I enjoyed it.

Avatar image for hartsickdiscipl
hartsickdiscipl

14787

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#11 hartsickdiscipl
Member since 2003 • 14787 Posts
COD 5 had alot of what I like to call "BS factors" in it. The AI was bad... the enemies regenerated continuously until you reached a certain point in the level, which is totally unrealistic and almost ruined the game for me. In real life, there are a set number of soldiers in a given area.. they don't respawn. The biggest gripe I had with the game was that it was insanely hard IMO... and not for the right reasons. The game was so glitchy that it got me killed many times (stuck behind objects, not able to move, too many grenades, etc..). I don't care what anybody says, Treyarch sucks. They did a crappy job with COD3, Quantum of Solace, and COD5 (best of the bunch). I still think the best game in the series was COD2. Infinity Ward is so far superior to Treyarch. EA just uses Treyarch as their "secondary" developer for the series to keep the cash cow going. Afterall... with 2 devs working on games you make more games and more money!
Avatar image for Mazoch
Mazoch

2473

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#12 Mazoch
Member since 2004 • 2473 Posts
I didn't really like WaW. It felt like they just took CoD4 and tossed on a WW2 skin. however they never really seemed to understand just what made Cod4 compelling. The few thing in CoD4 that i didn't like (the grenades and 'quick time event insta death dogs' were featured far more prominently in WaW. Basically they failed to show any innovation or originality but that the same time also failed to live up to the game they were copying items for item. Ok, the Nazi Zombies were a neat idea imho..
Avatar image for will952
will952

655

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#13 will952
Member since 2008 • 655 Posts

COD 5 had alot of what I like to call "BS factors" in it. The AI was bad... the enemies regenerated continuously until you reached a certain point in the level, which is totally unrealistic and almost ruined the game for me. hartsickdiscipl

All the Call of Duty games (except MW2) have had this.

Avatar image for pilouuuu2004
pilouuuu2004

1075

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#14 pilouuuu2004
Member since 2004 • 1075 Posts
Because it is too similar, but at the same time not as good as COD 4 and, while 4 ran like a dream, COD 5 is horribly optimized, even if it runs in the same engine.
Avatar image for ProjectPat187
ProjectPat187

2178

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#15 ProjectPat187
Member since 2005 • 2178 Posts
COD 5 went backwards IMO, when in the hell did they decide to use WW2 settings again is beyond me and this is what killed COD5 imo, WW2 is played the hell out and has been milked and milked over and over again in so many games
Avatar image for snover2009
snover2009

1730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#16 snover2009
Member since 2008 • 1730 Posts

[QUOTE="snover2009"]

[QUOTE="lucky326"]

Better than MW2 thats for sure.

_Pedro_

ENOUGH WITH THE MODERN WARFARE 2 HATE ALREADY.

UNTIL IT IS RELEASED, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE QUALITY OF THE GAME WILL BE, SO WAIT UNTIL THEN.

please refrain from typing in caps. Besides there is NO reason to get MW2 for the pc, period. If you truly must play this game get it for the 360 or PS3, which is the same price + better online + more people playing it.

First, I do not have a Xbox360 for PS3.

Second, the mouse and keyboard setup is much better than dual analog sticks, wich feels really strange after playing PC FPS for awhile.

Third, how would you know how many people will be playing it online or how good the online will be. Do youhave special psychic powers that lets you see into the future?

Fourth, does the PC version of a multiplatform game really need exclusive content to be worth a purchase?

Avatar image for RobertBowen
RobertBowen

4094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#17 RobertBowen
Member since 2003 • 4094 Posts

I enjoyed CoD:WaW a lot more than CoD 4, both in single player and multiplayer.

Though I must say I still prefer the original CoD and United Offensive.

Avatar image for _Pedro_
_Pedro_

6829

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#18 _Pedro_
Member since 2004 • 6829 Posts

First, I do not have a Xbox360 for PS3. Shame

Second, the mouse and keyboard setup is much better than dual analog sticks, wich feels really strange after playing PC FPS for awhile. How do you know it's much better when you don't own either a 360 or a PS3? Not a fan of the PS controller, but the 360 controller works great with shooters. Especially considering that this game was made around the 360 and NOT the Mouse/keyboard setup.

Third, how would you know how many people will be playing it online or how good the online will be. Do youhave special psychic powers that lets you see into the future? First off, ever heard of pre-orders? Console preorders are breaking records, while the pc version isn't even worth mentioning. As far as the console version will have better online? Both multiplayers are P2P based, but the PS3 and 360 have years of experience with it already while the PC version is more of experiment.

Fourth, does the PC version of a multiplatform game really need exclusive content to be worth a purchase? Ofcourse not, but it does need tweaks adjusting itself on a different platform.

snover2009

Avatar image for redneckdouglas
redneckdouglas

2977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 redneckdouglas
Member since 2005 • 2977 Posts

Lol if you want realistic, you shouldn't even be playing games. Health system in video games are too simplistic to be considered "realistic".

Avatar image for e135763
e135763

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 e135763
Member since 2009 • 25 Posts
[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]COD 5 had alot of what I like to call "BS factors" in it. The AI was bad... the enemies regenerated continuously until you reached a certain point in the level, which is totally unrealistic and almost ruined the game for me. In real life, there are a set number of soldiers in a given area.. they don't respawn. The biggest gripe I had with the game was that it was insanely hard IMO... and not for the right reasons. The game was so glitchy that it got me killed many times (stuck behind objects, not able to move, too many grenades, etc..). I don't care what anybody says, Treyarch sucks. They did a crappy job with COD3, Quantum of Solace, and COD5 (best of the bunch). I still think the best game in the series was COD2. Infinity Ward is so far superior to Treyarch. EA just uses Treyarch as their "secondary" developer for the series to keep the cash cow going. Afterall... with 2 devs working on games you make more games and more money!

AI, respawning enemies, glitches... how is that any different from cod4
Avatar image for jrorl63
jrorl63

723

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 jrorl63
Member since 2003 • 723 Posts
i hated the graphics of WaW because there wasnt much color. most of the game was just grey
Avatar image for snover2009
snover2009

1730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#22 snover2009
Member since 2008 • 1730 Posts

[QUOTE="snover2009"]

First, I do not have a Xbox360 for PS3. Shame I have a Nintendo Wii, that is all I need. Not enough money to get another console, but needed new computer anyway so I got specks to handle most next gen games.

Second, the mouse and keyboard setup is much better than dual analog sticks, wich feels really strange after playing PC FPS for awhile. How do you know it's much better when you don't own either a 360 or a PS3? Not a fan of the PS controller, but the 360 controller works great with shooters. Especially considering that this game was made around the 360 and NOT the Mouse/keyboard setup. I used the 360 controller when I played through the entire campaign for Modern Warfare and somewhat for World at War. The controler is fine but this is shortly after I played Metroid Prime 3 Corruptiion. After using the Wii Remote for FPS, using an analog stick ti aim just feels difficult IMO. Would be different if the Wii Remote didn't exist and I was playing all next gen Nintendo game with Gamecube like controller.

Third, how would you know how many people will be playing it online or how good the online will be. Do youhave special psychic powers that lets you see into the future? First off, ever heard of pre-orders? Console preorders are breaking records, while the pc version isn't even worth mentioning. As far as the console version will have better online? Both multiplayers are P2P based, but the PS3 and 360 have years of experience with it already while the PC version is more of experiment. Well from my experience on Steam, it has almost always been, including now, in the "Top Sellers" tab. So alot of Steam users pre-ordered it at least, still doesn't show high amount of PC pre-orders though.

Fourth, does the PC version of a multiplatform game really need exclusive content to be worth a purchase? Ofcourse not, but it does need tweaks adjusting itself on a different platform. The only difference I see that the PC version needs is good key placement, video settings to optimize performance, and an easy way to play online with friends and strangers. Kinda like how Steam only games work like Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress 2.

_Pedro_

Avatar image for Nibroc420
Nibroc420

13571

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#23 Nibroc420
Member since 2007 • 13571 Posts

[QUOTE="_Pedro_"]

[QUOTE="snover2009"]

First, I do not have a Xbox360 for PS3. Shame I have a Nintendo Wii, that is all I need. Not enough money to get another console, but needed new computer anyway so I got specks to handle most next gen games.

Second, the mouse and keyboard setup is much better than dual analog sticks, wich feels really strange after playing PC FPS for awhile. How do you know it's much better when you don't own either a 360 or a PS3? Not a fan of the PS controller, but the 360 controller works great with shooters. Especially considering that this game was made around the 360 and NOT the Mouse/keyboard setup. I used the 360 controller when I played through the entire campaign for Modern Warfare and somewhat for World at War. The controler is fine but this is shortly after I played Metroid Prime 3 Corruptiion. After using the Wii Remote for FPS, using an analog stick ti aim just feels difficult IMO. Would be different if the Wii Remote didn't exist and I was playing all next gen Nintendo game with Gamecube like controller.

Third, how would you know how many people will be playing it online or how good the online will be. Do youhave special psychic powers that lets you see into the future? First off, ever heard of pre-orders? Console preorders are breaking records, while the pc version isn't even worth mentioning. As far as the console version will have better online? Both multiplayers are P2P based, but the PS3 and 360 have years of experience with it already while the PC version is more of experiment. Well from my experience on Steam, it has almost always been, including now, in the "Top Sellers" tab. So alot of Steam users pre-ordered it at least, still doesn't show high amount of PC pre-orders though.

Fourth, does the PC version of a multiplatform game really need exclusive content to be worth a purchase? Ofcourse not, but it does need tweaks adjusting itself on a different platform. The only difference I see that the PC version needs is good key placement, video settings to optimize performance, and an easy way to play online with friends and strangers. Kinda like how Steam only games work like Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress 2.

snover2009

Snover. TF2 and L4D both have dedicated servers. It's different.
Avatar image for jimmyjammer69
jimmyjammer69

12239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 jimmyjammer69
Member since 2008 • 12239 Posts
I wouldn't say it was particularly bad; there just wasn't anything that stood out from the crowd.
Avatar image for snover2009
snover2009

1730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#25 snover2009
Member since 2008 • 1730 Posts

[QUOTE="snover2009"]

[QUOTE="_Pedro_"]

Nibroc420

Snover. TF2 and L4D both have dedicated servers. It's different.

I know that, but sometimes I don't play on a dedicated server.

Did I experience any more lag on servers that where not dedicated? Maybe a little, but not enough to get me worried about it.

Avatar image for Nibroc420
Nibroc420

13571

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#26 Nibroc420
Member since 2007 • 13571 Posts

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="snover2009"]

snover2009

Snover. TF2 and L4D both have dedicated servers. It's different.

I know that, but sometimes I don't play on a dedicated server.

Did I experience any more lag on servers that where not dedicated? Maybe a little, but not enough to get me worried about it.

Thats 4v4 at most. we're talking about more than double that number of players on the same connection. Lag central.
Avatar image for ag3ntz3rox0x
ag3ntz3rox0x

1534

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#27 ag3ntz3rox0x
Member since 2007 • 1534 Posts

wasnt aware there was a cod 5, thought there was a cod waw.

Avatar image for Nibroc420
Nibroc420

13571

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#28 Nibroc420
Member since 2007 • 13571 Posts

wasnt aware there was a cod 5, thought there was a cod waw.

ag3ntz3rox0x
COD MW is refered to as the 4th, W@W is the 5th and MW2 is 6th. no need to act dumb.
Avatar image for Falkien123
Falkien123

207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 Falkien123
Member since 2009 • 207 Posts

because it felt just like the 4 instead 5 had different guns.. not that is a bad thing i just didnt want to play a game that copies everything from the forth .. we want to see something new fromTreyarch instead of copyinginfinityward.. well thats me at leavst :P

ps i dont like ww2 settings

1357

Same reason and same feeling tired of World War games..