IW developed COD or MW makes every other FPS game on the plaent WORTHLESS!!!!!!

It's true IW really hit the nail on the head with the way they Incorporated the EXP and such especially in online play. When you play other shooters online they just feel dull and lame and generic in comparison to a IW developed FPS game.

MW is GOD

I find that the experience meter deters teamwork. Everybody just wants to get the highest score they can, they don't actually want to win the matches.

I found COD4 ok for a few months then I got bored of it. Its all the same, every single match. The glitchers, the lag and random drop outs, the preteen kids. It got crap basiclly.

I found COD4 ok for a few months then I got bored of it. Its all the same, every single match. The glitchers, the lag and random drop outs, the preteen kids. It got crap basiclly.

clyde46

Yet go play other FPS games online and you will still say MW is the best anyway.

BS.

1) The EXP system in COD4/WAW is nothing more then a cheap way of letting anyone eventually reach the highest ranks regardless of skill. What good is a ranking system that doesn't take anything but time to achieve? What good is a ranking system that doesn't even attempt to match a players skill level to keep games competitive?

2) Perks make the game(s) unbalanced

3) Unlocking "better" weapons and perks breaks balance even further Now not only are vets more skilled with the game and map layouts, they have better equipment/bonuses as well? Stupid.

The only thing good in COD multiplayer is smooth framerates.

[QUOTE="clyde46"]

I found COD4 ok for a few months then I got bored of it. Its all the same, every single match. The glitchers, the lag and random drop outs, the preteen kids. It got crap basiclly.

Pimp_Dog09

Yet go play other FPS games online and you will still say MW is the best anyway.

BS.

1) The EXP system in COD4/WAW is nothing more then a cheap way of letting anyone eventually reach the highest ranks regardless of skill. What good is a ranking system that doesn't take anything but time to achieve? What good is a ranking system that doesn't even attempt to match a players skill level to keep games competitive?

2) Perks make the game(s) unbalanced

3) Unlocking "better" weapons and perks breaks balance even further Now not only are vets more skilled with the game and map layouts, they have better equipment/bonuses as well? Stupid.

The only thing good in COD multiplayer is smooth framerates.

Metalscarz

unless its Hardcore mode i wont go anywhere near COD4. i cant stand the acrade casual 8bullets to kill regular mode

BS.

1) The EXP system in COD4/WAW is nothing more then a cheap way of letting anyone eventually reach the highest ranks regardless of skill. What good is a ranking system that doesn't take anything but time to achieve? What good is a ranking system that doesn't even attempt to match a players skill level to keep games competitive?

2) Perks make the game(s) unbalanced

3) Unlocking "better" weapons and perks breaks balance even further Now not only are vets more skilled with the game and map layouts, they have better equipment/bonuses as well? Stupid.

The only thing good in COD multiplayer is smooth framerates.

Metalscarz

So wait so having a better perk becuase you trained more and harder to earn it is a bad thing?:? So right I guess even in a real war if just a grunt solder goes head to head with say a Green Beret or Navy seal is he going to yell out NO WAIT this is not fair let me leave the battlefield becuase you will own me?

How can you say having perks is bad? If you get owned well sounds like you need to work harder and get better perks and level up more. Don't hate becuase others have better perks.

I find that the experience meter deters teamwork. Everybody just wants to get the highest score they can, they don't actually want to win the matches.

Wasdie

Funny you should say that, I got bored with MW's online rather quickly. BFBC on the other hand, well I played that consistently for ages. Now I'm hooked on BF1943.

Cod4 was good, but not like, amazing... and certainly not the best console shooter.

CoD is the definition of dull and lame and generic.AAllxxjjnn

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CS and if you do well then perks in that game $$$ buy new items so don't even go there.

COD4 is easy compared togames where they actually put you against people with your same skill level

Cod4 was good, but not like, amazing... and certainly not the best console shooter.

VendettaRed07

Well It's fine that some of you are down on IW developed COD or MW games. But clearly MILLIONS think other wise. And they expect MW2 to shatter all game sales records at launch and there after.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]CoD is the definition of dull and lame and generic.Pimp_Dog09

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CS

[QUOTE="Metalscarz"]

BS.

1) The EXP system in COD4/WAW is nothing more then a cheap way of letting anyone eventually reach the highest ranks regardless of skill. What good is a ranking system that doesn't take anything but time to achieve? What good is a ranking system that doesn't even attempt to match a players skill level to keep games competitive?

2) Perks make the game(s) unbalanced

3) Unlocking "better" weapons and perks breaks balance even further Now not only are vets more skilled with the game and map layouts, they have better equipment/bonuses as well? Stupid.

The only thing good in COD multiplayer is smooth framerates.

Pimp_Dog09

So wait so having a better perk becuase you trained more and harder to earn it is a bad thing?:? So right I guess even in a real war if just a grunt solder goes head to head with say a Green Beret or Navy seal is he going to yell out NO WAIT this is not fair let me leave the battlefield becuase you will own me?

How can you say having perks is bad? If you get owned well sounds like you need to work harder and get better perks and level up more. Don't hate becuase others have better perks.

You've obviously never played a PC FPS... Go sit down kid and stop making yourself look like a fool.

Protip:

Shooting through walls came from Counter Strike (released in 2000 as retail)

FPS games have been using XP for a while now. Granted they were FPS RPG's, they were more balanced in their weapons and "perk" equivalents. Example. Planet Side.

Man, I love my consoles, especially my PS3, but its undeniable that PC is the pioneer platform for games... undeniable.

[QUOTE="Pimp_Dog09"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]CoD is the definition of dull and lame and generic.Stevo_the_gamer

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CS

[QUOTE="Metalscarz"]

BS.

1) The EXP system in COD4/WAW is nothing more then a cheap way of letting anyone eventually reach the highest ranks regardless of skill. What good is a ranking system that doesn't take anything but time to achieve? What good is a ranking system that doesn't even attempt to match a players skill level to keep games competitive?

2) Perks make the game(s) unbalanced

3) Unlocking "better" weapons and perks breaks balance even further Now not only are vets more skilled with the game and map layouts, they have better equipment/bonuses as well? Stupid.

The only thing good in COD multiplayer is smooth framerates.

Pimp_Dog09

So wait so having a better perk becuase you trained more and harder to earn it is a bad thing?:? So right I guess even in a real was if just a grunt solder goes head to head with say a Green Beret or Navy seal is he going to yell out NO WAIT this is not fair let me leave the battlefield becuase you will own me?

How can you say having perks is bad? If you get owned well sounds like you need to work harder and get better perks and level up more. Don't hate becuase others have better perks.

[QUOTE="Pimp_Dog09"]

[QUOTE="Metalscarz"]

BS.

1) The EXP system in COD4/WAW is nothing more then a cheap way of letting anyone eventually reach the highest ranks regardless of skill. What good is a ranking system that doesn't take anything but time to achieve? What good is a ranking system that doesn't even attempt to match a players skill level to keep games competitive?

2) Perks make the game(s) unbalanced

3) Unlocking "better" weapons and perks breaks balance even further Now not only are vets more skilled with the game and map layouts, they have better equipment/bonuses as well? Stupid.

The only thing good in COD multiplayer is smooth framerates.

clyde46

So wait so having a better perk becuase you trained more and harder to earn it is a bad thing?:? So right I guess even in a real war if just a grunt solder goes head to head with say a Green Beret or Navy seal is he going to yell out NO WAIT this is not fair let me leave the battlefield becuase you will own me?

How can you say having perks is bad? If you get owned well sounds like you need to work harder and get better perks and level up more. Don't hate becuase others have better perks.

i know theres no point in using any other perk besides like, juggernaut, or the increased bullet damage one. If you dont, you wont be able to kill anyone because it takes more bullets to put them down, and youll die in like one hit.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]CoD is the definition of dull and lame and generic.Pimp_Dog09

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CS and if you do well then perks in that game $$$ buy new items so don't even go there.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]CoD is the definition of dull and lame and generic.Pimp_Dog09

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CS and if you do well then perks in that game $$$ buy new items so don't even go there.

I like playing various fps games depending on my mood. Some fps games accommodate on parts where other fps games don't do too well or don't have.

CoD4 mp is a fun game, but it's not perfect. It has its flaws like how some maps are unbalanced (ex. Blog) or the respawn issues. Aside the mp I love their single player campaigns. Enjoyed their games since MOH:AA.

[QUOTE="Pimp_Dog09"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]CoD is the definition of dull and lame and generic.Stevo_the_gamer

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CS

Good game but still the amount of players on COD servers still say better then the amount of players on TF servers

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]

[QUOTE="Pimp_Dog09"]

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CSPimp_Dog09

Good game but still the amount of players on COD servers still say better then the amount of players on TF servers

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]

[QUOTE="Pimp_Dog09"]

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CSPimp_Dog09

Good game but still the amount of players on COD servers still say better then the amount of players on TF servers

[QUOTE="clyde46"]

I found COD4 ok for a few months then I got bored of it. Its all the same, every single match. The glitchers, the lag and random drop outs, the preteen kids. It got crap basiclly.

Pimp_Dog09

Yet go play other FPS games online and you will still say MW is the best anyway.

Team Fortress 2 pops its head in to say "hi" and "you're full of it"

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]

[QUOTE="Pimp_Dog09"]

So tell us what online shooters are better? Don't even say CSPimp_Dog09

Good game but still the amount of players on COD servers still say better then the amount of players on TF servers

ya the money system in cs is genius, and really adds strategy to competitive play

although in source competitive play you start with $16000 which almost defeats the purpose of proper money management, especially with it only being 12 rounds a half, unlike in 1.6 where you start with $800 and its 15 rounds a half

You've obviously never played a PC FPS... Go sit down kid and stop making yourself look like a fool.

Protip:

Shooting through walls came from Counter Strike (released in 2000 as retail)

FPS games have been using XP for a while now. Granted they were FPS RPG's, they were more balanced in their weapons and "perk" equivalents. Example. Planet Side.

Man, I love my consoles, especially my PS3, but its undeniable that PC is the pioneer platform for games... undeniable.

zero_snake99

How wrong you are I used to be big into PC games.

Played them all CS 1.6 CSS HL1 TF1 UT UT3-4 MOH COD1-also UO add on. Rainbow Six series. I've played them all pretty much any worth playing PC game.

ya the money system in cs is genius, and really adds strategy to competitive play although in source competitive play you start with $16000 which almost defeats the purpose of proper money management, especially with it only being 12 rounds a half, unlike in 1.6 where you start with $800 and its 15 rounds a half

kidcool189

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]

You've obviously never played a PC FPS... Go sit down kid and stop making yourself look like a fool.

Protip:

Shooting through walls came from Counter Strike (released in 2000 as retail)

FPS games have been using XP for a while now. Granted they were FPS RPG's, they were more balanced in their weapons and "perk" equivalents. Example. Planet Side.

Man, I love my consoles, especially my PS3, but its undeniable that PC is the pioneer platform for games... undeniable.

Pimp_Dog09

How wrong you are I used to be big into PC games.

Played them all CS 1.6 CSS HL1 TF1 UT UT3-4 MOH COD1-also UO add on. Rainbow Six series. I've played them all pretty much any worth playing PC game.

The whole "experiance means more then before" was a good mechanic but that dosen't outdo the other leaps made in the genre like half lifes graphics or Farcry's map maker or evenCrysis's extremely open maps giving you freedom that CoD dosen't.

ya the money system in cs is genius, and really adds strategy to competitive play although in source competitive play you start with $16000 which almost defeats the purpose of proper money management, especially with it only being 12 rounds a half, unlike in 1.6 where you start with $800 and its 15 rounds a half

kidcool189

[QUOTE="kidcool189"]

ya the money system in cs is genius, and really adds strategy to competitive play although in source competitive play you start with $16000 which almost defeats the purpose of proper money management, especially with it only being 12 rounds a half, unlike in 1.6 where you start with $800 and its 15 rounds a half

BigDaddyPOLO

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]

You've obviously never played a PC FPS... Go sit down kid and stop making yourself look like a fool.

Protip:

Shooting through walls came from Counter Strike (released in 2000 as retail)

FPS games have been using XP for a while now. Granted they were FPS RPG's, they were more balanced in their weapons and "perk" equivalents. Example. Planet Side.

Man, I love my consoles, especially my PS3, but its undeniable that PC is the pioneer platform for games... undeniable.

Pimp_Dog09

How wrong you are I used to be big into PC games.

Played them all CS 1.6 CSS HL1 TF1 UT UT3-4 MOH COD1-also UO add on. Rainbow Six series. I've played them all pretty much any worth playing PC game.

ya, of course they can do that, but when it comes to pub servers i prefer to start out with 16k anyway since i go to pubs just to mess around or warm up for a scrim

but im really not sure why they made it $16k default in source scrims, i LOVE pistol round in 1.6 scrims, especially if you gotta save and stick with a pistol that round, take a guy or 2 out and get their rifle...big money saver

[QUOTE="BigDaddyPOLO"]

[QUOTE="kidcool189"]

ya the money system in cs is genius, and really adds strategy to competitive play although in source competitive play you start with $16000 which almost defeats the purpose of proper money management, especially with it only being 12 rounds a half, unlike in 1.6 where you start with $800 and its 15 rounds a half

Pinkyimp

MW is fun at first but gets boring fast. it takes no skill. couple hours of play and i manage to destroy every1. the game is for kids. no teamwork. just everybody running around doing there own thing. and the amount of kids that play that game is a joke.

ya, of course they can do that, but when it comes to pub servers i prefer to start out with 16k anyway since i go to pubs just to mess around or warm up for a scrim but im really not sure why they made it $16k default in source scrims, i LOVE pistol round in 1.6 scrimskidcool189

Ya ya ya I played TFC a lot back in the day very fun for it's time. I honestly still LOVE UT 1999 Man that is great still better then most today.

MW is fun at first but gets boring fast. it takes no skill. couple hours of play and i manage to destroy every1. the game is for kids. no teamwork. just everybody running around doing there own thing. and the amount of kids that play that game is a joke.

noble_aryan

counter strike 1.6 >>> modern warfare kidcool189

The thread should have ended with this post.

I find that the experience meter deters teamwork. Everybody just wants to get the highest score they can, they don't actually want to win the matches.

Wasdie

Not to mention the unbalanced guns and noob-friendly perks. THe game is a complete joke.