I'm still waiting to buy a Ps3, but I did play Call of Duty 3 online locally and I must admit we were having a blast. I was expecting all of us to put it down and play another MP fest like Halo 2, or Smash Brothers on the Wii. We never did. We were having too much fun running over each other with vehicles. How immature of us.
For once I actually agree with you. I own Call of Duty 3 and I'm not really that impressed...the opening level was fantastic, and the combat is somewhat intense, but other than that it gets very repetitive and boring.Â
I haven't played R:FoM but it looks much more fun...I should have bought CoD3 based on reviews alone. Â
Greg Kassavin is a pretty harsh reviewer at times. Judging from his previous ratings, he likes big open world games that have a good adventuring element. Resistance didn't have as much of this, and Greg showed this through his score.
Thinking the same thing. CoD is one of the best FPS franchises there is. It would have scored higher then RFOM on PS3 also if its verion didn't come out gimped.
Resistance: Fall of Man and Call of Duty 3 are pretty similar in my opinion. Both feel warn out and generic and bring nothing new to the table for FPS. Also, both were scored too high on GS.
[QUOTE="advertise_this"]cause its a better game ... KeyWii
It is not. I have already pointed out the differences, how can you say that? cause i rather trust a veteran reviewer than u quite frankly ... i didn't play either of those games so that's the only thing i can base my diagnosis on.
[QUOTE="advertise_this"]cause its a better game ... Blackbond
Thinking the same thing. CoD is one of the best FPS franchises there is. It would have scored higher then RFOM on PS3 also if its verion didn't come out gimped. You have not played R:FOM extensively (if at all) to make that assessment.
[QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="advertise_this"]cause its a better game ... KeyWii
Thinking the same thing. CoD is one of the best FPS franchises there is. It would have scored higher then RFOM on PS3 also if its verion didn't come out gimped. You have not played R:FOM extensively (if at all) to make that assessment. And you haven't played COD
[QUOTE="advertise_this"]cause its a better game ... KeyWii
It is not. I have already pointed out the differences, how can you say that? ....cause that and your statement are clearly just opinions. Mind boggling isn't it? Personally I say that CoD3 is better, but being that I haven't played FoM (and let's face it, I probably never will) ...my side of the arguement is fairly bias.
Both are FPS and both are kinda generic...but CoD3 is far and away the more generic shooter...its about the most overused concept in shooters and is a intense but VERY unremarkable game. Resistance owns that piece of crap.
[QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="marinebro0306"]Everything in the original post is debatable.nintendogamer6
Then debate it. CoD3 It has a better single player campaign.
It has better graphics.
It has bigger & better online component.
It has better guns.
there.....
1) No, R:FOMs is more interesting. We've already seen Call of Duty WW2 ravaged environments before. In R:FOM we go into "alien" tunnels, lairs, and encounter some truly frightening creatures. R:FOM has vehicle based missions just as COD3, perhaps COD3 has the edge there. But R:FOM has MUCH better weapons that keep the gameplay fresh.
2) No. R:FOM has better animations, character models, glass & snow effects. Call of Duty 3 has better explosions and smoke effects. Textures are equal. 3) No. 40 player online, more modes, each side has different skill assets (Berserk, Sprint) 4) No. You know better than that. You didn't bring up any good points at all. Dismissed.
Both games FPS, both games reviewed AFTER Gears of War.
R:FOM
It has a better single player campaign. (I have to agree)
It has better graphics. (Debatable considering R:FOM has worser textures than COD 2 but it also has larger environments and more effects on screen. Read the reviews. Graphically, both are on par with each other. My preference goes to R:FOM but I can't say the same about others)
It has bigger & better online component. (Online is judged on the amount of "fun" not just modes or number of players. A good example is GeOW - multiplayer game of the year. COD 2 was the most played Xbox 360 live game in 2005 and COD 3 continues the trend. I can't say the same about R:FOM)
It has better guns. (Seriously, COD 3 has to remain authentic to the WWII period. Thats how it was judged and frankly speaking, I enjoyed the guns in both games)
Call of Duty 3
It has vehicles in online modes.
It has better sound.
So how exactly did Call of Duty 3 outscore R:FOM? It could be that Greg Kasavin is a tougher reviewer than Aaron Thomas. But come on....
[QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="advertise_this"]cause its a better game ... KeyWii
Thinking the same thing. CoD is one of the best FPS franchises there is. It would have scored higher then RFOM on PS3 also if its verion didn't come out gimped. You have not played R:FOM extensively (if at all) to make that assessment.
Oops I jumped the gun :P I thought we were talking about the CoD franchise in general my bad. You are right I have no room to talk about this thread but not because I haven't played RFOM but because I haven't played CoD3 yet. I refuse to play that game on a console.
[QUOTE="KeyWii"]Both games FPS, both games reviewed AFTER Gears of War.
R:FOM
It has a better single player campaign.
It has better graphics.
It has bigger & better online component.
It has better guns.
Call of Duty 3
It has vehicles in online modes.
It has better sound.
So how exactly did Call of Duty 3 outscore R:FOM? It could be that Greg Kasavin is a tougher reviewer than Aaron Thomas. But come on....
KeyWii
Resistance has laughable graphics
Say what you will, it's better than Call of Duty 3's.... and R:FOM's graphics are really ragged on too much in System Wars... I think cod3 actually has better graphics but probably gets beat in single player.
Both games FPS, both games reviewed AFTER Gears of War.
R:FOM
It has a better single player campaign. I thouroughly enjoyed the variety in CoD...sure, it's not groundbreaking, but Resistance isn't fresh either.
It has better graphics. Negative.
It has bigger & better online component. Bigger, yes. But by virtue of Live, CoD has a better online component.
It has better guns. If by better you mean unrealistic, then yes. CoD has very realistic and period guns. I can't imagine CoD having a lazer gun or something in it...it's adjusted to the time.
Call of Duty 3
It has vehicles in online modes.
It has better sound.
Graphics Controls AI Replay value Online IMO Historic cutscenes
So how exactly did Call of Duty 3 outscore R:FOM? It could be that Greg Kasavin is a tougher reviewer than Aaron Thomas. But come on....
[QUOTE="KeyWii"]Both games FPS, both games reviewed AFTER Gears of War.
R:FOM
It has a better single player campaign. I thouroughly enjoyed the variety in CoD...sure, it's not groundbreaking, but Resistance isn't fresh either.
It has better graphics. Negative.
It has bigger & better online component. Bigger, yes. But by virtue of Live, CoD has a better online component.
It has better guns. If by better you mean unrealistic, then yes. CoD has very realistic and period guns. I can't imagine CoD having a lazer gun or something in it...it's adjusted to the time.
Call of Duty 3
It has vehicles in online modes.
It has better sound.
Graphics Controls AI Replay value Online IMO Historic cutscenes
So how exactly did Call of Duty 3 outscore R:FOM? It could be that Greg Kasavin is a tougher reviewer than Aaron Thomas. But come on....
marinebro0306
Happy now? It's quite clear you never played R:FOM extensively (if at all), come back when you have. Thanks.
It has a better single player campaign. I thouroughly enjoyed the variety in CoD...sure, it's not groundbreaking, but Resistance isn't fresh either.
It has better graphics. Negative.
It has bigger & better online component. Bigger, yes. But by virtue of Live, CoD has a better online component.
It has better guns. If by better you mean unrealistic, then yes. CoD has very realistic and period guns. I can't imagine CoD having a lazer gun or something in it...it's adjusted to the time. Graphics Controls AI Replay value Online IMO Historic cutscenes
Call of Duty 3 advantages It has vehicles in online modes.
[QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="marinebro0306"]Everything in the original post is debatable.KeyWii
Then debate it. CoD3 It has a better single player campaign.
It has better graphics.
It has bigger & better online component.
It has better guns.
there.....
1) No, R:FOMs is more interesting. We've already seen Call of Duty WW2 ravaged environments before. In R:FOM we go into "alien" tunnels, lairs, and encounter some truly frightening creatures. R:FOM has vehicle based missions just as COD3, perhaps COD3 has the edge there. But R:FOM has MUCH better weapons that keep the gameplay fresh.
2) No. R:FOM has better animations, character models, glass & snow effects. Call of Duty 3 has better explosions and smoke effects. Textures are equal. 3) No. 40 player online, more modes, each side has different skill assets (Berserk, Sprint) 4) No. You know better than that. You didn't bring up any good points at all. Dismissed. I see your yet to understand the concept of an opinion
[QUOTE="marinebro0306"][QUOTE="KeyWii"]Both games FPS, both games reviewed AFTER Gears of War.
R:FOM
It has a better single player campaign. I thouroughly enjoyed the variety in CoD...sure, it's not groundbreaking, but Resistance isn't fresh either.
It has better graphics. Negative.
It has bigger & better online component. Bigger, yes. But by virtue of Live, CoD has a better online component.
It has better guns. If by better you mean unrealistic, then yes. CoD has very realistic and period guns. I can't imagine CoD having a lazer gun or something in it...it's adjusted to the time.
Call of Duty 3
It has vehicles in online modes.
It has better sound.
Graphics Controls AI Replay value Online IMO Historic cutscenes
So how exactly did Call of Duty 3 outscore R:FOM? It could be that Greg Kasavin is a tougher reviewer than Aaron Thomas. But come on....
KeyWii
Happy now? It's quite clear you never played R:FOM extensively (if at all), come back when you have. Thanks.
How exactly do you know that? it just sounds like you're dismissing anyone who has a differing opinion. :?
How exactly do you know that? it just sounds like you're dismissing anyone who has a differing opinion. :?
The_Game21x
Because you didn't elaborate on any point that involved R:FOM... Discussing single player you just said you enjoyed COD3 and said neither were groundbreaking.... Wow, how very general! Thanks.
I agree. The scores should be reversed. R:FOM should have clocked in with an 8.8 and COD3 with 8.6. But both games are pretty close to each other, but GameSpot had it backwards. In a time where people complain about sequels and whine about how there is no new material, R:FOM should receive bonus points just for being original and not being the 3rd installment in an ongoing franchise. (Which Infinity Ward does better than TreyArch)
How exactly do you know that? it just sounds like you're dismissing anyone who has a differing opinion. :?
KeyWii
Because you didn't elaborate on any point that involved R:FOM... Discussing single player you just said you enjoyed COD3 and said neither were groundbreaking.... Wow, how very general! Thanks.
Umm, what? I haven't said anything about either one.
How exactly do you know that? it just sounds like you're dismissing anyone who has a differing opinion. :?
The_Game21x
Because you didn't elaborate on any point that involved R:FOM... Discussing single player you just said you enjoyed COD3 and said neither were groundbreaking.... Wow, how very general! Thanks.
Umm, what? I haven't said anything about either one.
Oh, I thought that was marinebro0306 who said that.... Sorry. Well you were defending him, so you should know the context of the remarks.
How exactly do you know that? it just sounds like you're dismissing anyone who has a differing opinion. :?
KeyWii
Because you didn't elaborate on any point that involved R:FOM... Discussing single player you just said you enjoyed COD3 and said neither were groundbreaking.... Wow, how very general! Thanks.
Umm, what? I haven't said anything about either one.
Oh, I thought that was marinebro0306 who said that.... Sorry. Well you were defending him, so you should know the context of the remarks.
I understand that his remarks weren't the most, "substantial" if you will, but that doesn't automatically mean he hasn't played Resistance.
Log in to comment