[QUOTE="HoldThePhone"][QUOTE="Uncle_Uzi"][QUOTE="HoldThePhone"] Two completely differenrt styled games, and frankly COD4 is more appealing to the masses. Learn more about your games.
Uncle_Uzi
HAHAHA
This is probably the most justifiable comparison of games in the history of man. These two games are in precisely the same genre. YOU sir need to learn more about your games. 8)
Same genre yes, but completly differnt from eachother.
Explain to me how they are the same, because i dont feel like wasting my time on you.
You crack me up.
A) if you don't feel like wasting your precious time, then why did you even post?
B) They are both realistic tactical shooters. They both have real-world weapons, and they both play realisticly. They both have class-based MP, and they are both set in present day. There are many more similar features and characteristics between the two series, far more than I feel like listing.
But yes, there you go. I doubt you've played both - like I have. Because if you did, then you'd wish you never asked.
You showed how naive you are about gaming when you said, "both are realistic tactical shooters."
That description only fits R6 (or at least a little now that it has been casualized).
In R6 Vegas you:
Breach rooms using flash bangs, blowing up doors, using optical gear, rappelling into glass windows, all sorts of techy stuff. Enemies die in a couple shots (as do you). All about being careful, tactical, and using a squad to rescue some hostages, defuse a bomb or some other run of the mill Tom Clancy BS.
Not only do these factors widely distance R6 from games like COD4, but the fact that it implements a cover system in the game makes it an extremely different styled game. You utilized cover with the LT button and pop out when you feel like it.
Call of Duty 4 is a completly different game:
You have a squad, but you have no control over them, they infact have more control over you. In COD4 you are basically a one many army taking on a bunch of Middle Eastern or Russian baddies. There is no cover system, it's more a arcade run-and-gun styled shooter.
And this way of thinking plays into the multiplayer mode as well. Players are not rewarded in playing tactically, but more in how well they can shoot their gun (similar to counter-strike). Multiplayer games are chaotic fire fight kill fests where the quicker trigger finger wins.
There is an entire Perk system than practically defines the COD4 multiplayer in which you can give yourself outrageous skills like Iron Lungs (hold breath forever), Matyrdom (drop a live grenade when you die), Double Tap (increased rate of fire). A bunch of unrealistic but outrageously fun features to use. This is why the game is considered to be arcade styled because it focuses on the heat of battle, while R6 focuses on the realistic details of battle.
About the only realistic thing about COD4 is the shakey sniper scope -- that's it.
So if you think a COD4 fan is going to pick up Vegas 2 and call it the new king, you are sadly mistaken. While R6 is a great franchise, it appeals to a different audience. Granted, it may attract some of the same audience because of its setting as a modern-day shooter like you said, it is simply far too different from COD4 to steal its fame. The sales of previous R6 games illustrate that the R6 Vegas will be a great seller, but it won't be stealing any spot lights.
Call of Duty 4 is more popular then Halo 3 -- I hope you knew that.
Actually I hope you just leave these forums and stop talking about videogames as if you know what they are.
Log in to comment