Do not buy Call of Duty 5

Here are the reasons why:

1. This game is made by Treyarch, not Infinity Ward. Treyarch made Call of Duty 3, Infinity Ward made 2 and 4. Don't get me wrong, I think COD3 was a great COD game, but remember, that was without a doubt, the glitchiest game on XBOX, in Multiplayer.

2. Perks and vehicles, and together, not a good mix. Remember, COD3 had bigger maps, and COD2 and 4, had smaller maps. Perks worked out well on smaller maps, but not bigger maps.

3. Treyarch didn't really make a good campaign, so don't expect a good campaign.

4. Co-op Call of Duty? No, that won't work out.

5. There are a lot of better games coming out, than this, and with less people, bigger maps, slower gameplay.

DO NOT BUY THIS GAME

Didnt Infinity Ward make 2 and 4, Activision is a publisher which is also publishing World at War, so sir, you fail.

Also I would have loved coop in COD4, for both single player and online, it makes it more fun to play with friends.

Don't worry, I know my stuff, just a bit of a mistakepsu5

ya u were referring to this thread rite?

You guys make me laugh, jumping to conclusion that this will be the best COD game to date. I'll name all the types of glitches in COD 3

Elevator Glitching-On the same network, on player lays down, and the guest pushes, both against a wall, and they will both floar up.

Motorcycle Glitching- Driving a motorcycle up to a wall, jumping out the cycle, and into a wall

Tank jumping-Jump out of a tank, next to a high wall, and ending up there.

Invisible tanks- people have some bad connections, so they drive invisible tanks

Also, it isn't the party type game, you have to join custom made games, but that's from cod 3, it may change

Treyarch got alot more time on this game than they did CoD3 and they're using the CoD4 game engine. So it'll likely be much more polished.

Perks work the same no matter how big the maps are. What difference does the size of a map make? I thought perks was a bad idea in general though. I've never been one to support throwing off balance, but everyone seemed to enjoy it in Call of Duty 4, so what ever.

Call of Duty 4 had a bad campaign. So what difference would it make if we got another one?

Why would co-op be bad in Call of Duty?

I'll likely buy it. Unlike Call of Duty 4 it'll be giving us back vehicle combat and it'll be adding co-op campaign. The only reason everyone thought Call of Duty 4 was so good was because it was the first Call of Duty game most people played. Call of Duty 1, UO and 2 were all WAY better. I doubt World at War will be as good, but it'll probably be at least better than 4.

And if your not getting it simply because Infinity Ward didn't make it then don't expect to ever play another Call of Duty game again because Infinity Ward is working on a new IP where they have creative freedom and will be the only developers of, so don't expect them to ever go back to Call of Duty.

You guys make me laugh, jumping to conclusion that this will be the best COD game to date. I'll name all the types of glitches in COD 3

Elevator Glitching-On the same network, on player lays down, and the guest pushes, both against a wall, and they will both floar up.

Motorcycle Glitching- Driving a motorcycle up to a wall, jumping out the cycle, and into a wall

Tank jumping-Jump out of a tank, next to a high wall, and ending up there.

Invisible tanks- people have some bad connections, so they drive invisible tanks

Also, it isn't the party type game, you have to join custom made games, but that's from cod 3, it may change

psu5

I havent seen anyone here say it is the best COD game to date. Also have you ever heard of fixing things and getting rid of bugs and glitches. Dude, do you have the game to see any glitches?? Whats that, its not even out yet :shock:, then how the hell do you know this game sucks.

Here are the reasons why:

1. This game is made by Treyarch, not Infinity Ward. Treyarch made Call of Duty 3, Infinity Ward made 2 and 4. Don't get me wrong, I think COD3 was a great COD game, but remember, that was without a doubt, the glitchiest game on XBOX, in Multiplayer.

First of all, the glitchiest game is NHL 08 and second they will obviously be improving and fixing the glitches.

2. Perks and vehicles, and together, not a good mix. Remember, COD3 had bigger maps, and COD2 and 4, had smaller maps. Perks worked out well on smaller maps, but not bigger maps.

Why won't they work? What do perks have to do with the size of maps? If the maps are so big, whats wrong with vehicles. Post a link that says the maps will be big in the first place..

3. Treyarch didn't really make a good campaign, so don't expect a good campaign.

Alright this is where I become confused, you say COD3 was a great game, but the campaign wasn't good and the online was glitchy as balls. You make no sence..

4. Co-op Call of Duty? No, that won't work out.

Why the HELL won't it work? I think its a great idea personally. I've been wanting a coop COD for a while. You forget to tell us why it won't work..

5. There are a lot of better games coming out, than this, and with less people, bigger maps, slower gameplay.

Just shut-up, I don't think you know what your talking about..

DO NOT BUY THIS GAME

Because what this guys says, goes!

psu5

One, it's not called Call of Duty 5. Two, just as IW improved upon their game from CoD2 to CoD4, I'm expecting as much improvement upon Treyarch's game from CoD3 to the new CoD World at War.

Treyarch had, I believe, 11 months to make CoD3. They've had two years to make WaW. I'm looking forward to a great game.

One, it's not called Call of Duty 5. Two, just as IW improved upon their game from CoD2 to CoD4, I'm expecting as much improvement upon Treyarch's game from CoD3 to the new CoD World at War.

Treyarch had, I believe, 11 months to make CoD3. They've had two years to make WaW. I'm looking forward to a great game.

Schumach5

Batman: Dark Knight = Without a doubt, BEST movie I have ever seen. By a long shot!

Treyarch is still using the same engine as Infinity Ward did to make COD4 so I will be buying it.

Why does it matter who makes it anyway. As long as it's fun, I don't care.

The only complaint i have is it runs on the CoD4 engine. Don't get me wrong, its not bad or anything. I would just like to see the enemies die in different ways than the terrorists in Modern Warfare. I think I will feel like im playing the same game somehow.

[QUOTE="Schumach5"]

One, it's not called Call of Duty 5. Two, just as IW improved upon their game from CoD2 to CoD4, I'm expecting as much improvement upon Treyarch's game from CoD3 to the new CoD World at War.

Treyarch had, I believe, 11 months to make CoD3. They've had two years to make WaW. I'm looking forward to a great game.

snipeshot11

Batman: Dark Knight = Without a doubt, BEST movie I have ever seen. By a long shot!

Agreed, I loved the disappearning pencil trick, it was awesome.

let me refine your argument, you shouldnt buy call of duty 5 for these reasons,

1) this is the fifth installment in 5 years. yes, 5 measly years. yes, that is a call of duty game every single flipping year. the formula, just like madden, has yet to change. why then does halo get criticized for being the same thing as the previous installment when call of duty is three times worse? call of duty's core gameplay mechanics havent changed, will not change, and you should not support a game that cannot change through time and continuously releases the same product over and over again year after year.

2) why after having such a huge hit with modern warfare are we going back to world war 2? i dont care if its been a section of world war 2 we havent covered, i dont want to shoot russian ak's or german mp-40's or american thomsons or whatever the heck the asians shoot anymore. ive done that for the past 10 years and dont care to do it anymroe!

3) perks are ridiculously unbalanced and should never have been put in a multiplayer game to begin with. why give huge advantages to people who have grinded thousands of hours over people who just inserted the disc? this eliminates a decent amount of skill from the game.

4) as you mentioned, treyarch hasnt proven to be nearly as good as infinity ward and that alone should give us reason to pass for this year, rest our xboxs from call of duty, and wait for next year, which their inevitably be another call of duty out then.

5) there are too many other great games this fall/winter that are much more worthy of your money than yet another piece of garbage run of the mill fps call of duty, so "spit out that piece of gum already. or we will find you"-stride commercials.

[QUOTE="snipeshot11"][QUOTE="Schumach5"]

One, it's not called Call of Duty 5. Two, just as IW improved upon their game from CoD2 to CoD4, I'm expecting as much improvement upon Treyarch's game from CoD3 to the new CoD World at War.

Treyarch had, I believe, 11 months to make CoD3. They've had two years to make WaW. I'm looking forward to a great game.

gustavog117

Batman: Dark Knight = Without a doubt, BEST movie I have ever seen. By a long shot!

Agreed, I loved the disappearning pencil trick, it was awesome.

Haha I'd say, Joker was a god.

I'am sorry but your just being ignorent part of the reason that CoD 3 was a disapointment was because Treyarch only had 12 months to complete the game and now Treyarch has a full 24 months to make the game incredible and also their increasing the number of people who can play in one match (18 player at once, which is higher then the the 12-16 players that played before in CoD4). Also the game has a flamethrower how many WW2 games you know have a flamethrower at least you have the deceny to not buy the game based on the sole fact that it's a WW2 shooter.

Didnt Infinity Ward make 2 and 4, Activision is a publisher which is also publishing World at War, so sir, you fail.

Also I would have loved coop in COD4, for both single player and online, it makes it more fun to play with friends.

gustavog117

well said

One, it's not called Call of Duty 5. Two, just as IW improved upon their game from CoD2 to CoD4, I'm expecting as much improvement upon Treyarch's game from CoD3 to the new CoD World at War.

Treyarch had, I believe, 11 months to make CoD3. They've had two years to make WaW. I'm looking forward to a great game.

Schumach5

I most definetly agree. Im a bit iffy on the 4 player coop(i think its 4 player at least).

Just to let you guys know, Activision has already announced that this isnt going to be Call of Duty 5

But just Call of Duty World at War

so basically not the true sequel but more like a branch in the franchise.

This thread made me laugh.

First off, as already stated, the next Call of Duty is going to be callled "Call of Duty: World at War" ... not "Call of Duty 5" so the title is lol worthy. I also think it's funny how the TC thought he could influence some one not to purchase a game that has not even been released yet. We don't know the content of the game except for the trailer and screens shots, so how could you possibly trash it? And just because Treyarch is working on the next CoD, doesn't mean that it will be a bad game. Obviously Treyarch's Call of Duties are successful, or they wouldn't be in business to make the next one. I'm not sure wether or not I will buy World at War, but I know I'm excited to see it and play it, as are a lot of people. In my opinion Call of Duty 4 was not perfect in any way, in fact it got old to me after a while and it's hard to get back into. But it was good while it lasted, so, I think that Treyarch can take what Infinity Ward has done with CoD4, and put their own spin on it, to make a successful CoD game, like they have done with previous CoD installments, which really weren't that bad.

But, no one can judge this game, until it comes out, and they play it for themselves. So, to the TC and anyone out there who has been influenced by him to not buy this game, try this thing people like to call "common sense" next time. But then again... I don't think 5 year olds have really developed that yet.

i cant stop laughing at how pathetic this post is and how pointless it is.

how do you know perks wont work on big maps, have you tried? did you hack cod3 and put in perks?

Here are the reasons why:

1. This game is made by Treyarch, not Infinity Ward. Treyarch made Call of Duty 3, Infinity Ward made 2 and 4. Don't get me wrong, I think COD3 was a great COD game, but remember, that was without a doubt, the glitchiest game on XBOX, in Multiplayer.

2. Perks and vehicles, and together, not a good mix. Remember, COD3 had bigger maps, and COD2 and 4, had smaller maps. Perks worked out well on smaller maps, but not bigger maps.

3. Treyarch didn't really make a good campaign, so don't expect a good campaign.

4. Co-op Call of Duty? No, that won't work out.

5. There are a lot of better games coming out, than this, and with less people, bigger maps, slower gameplay.

DO NOT BUY THIS GAME

psu5

I hope #4 come bak and bites u in the @$$ LMAO that would be hilarious :lol: like another person said, i dont care who makes it as long as its gonna b good...it looks promising so far...I'm def gettin it!

Here are the reasons why:

1. This game is made by Treyarch, not Infinity Ward. Treyarch made Call of Duty 3, Infinity Ward made 2 and 4. Don't get me wrong, I think COD3 was a great COD game, but remember, that was without a doubt, the glitchiest game on XBOX, in Multiplayer.

2. Perks and vehicles, and together, not a good mix. Remember, COD3 had bigger maps, and COD2 and 4, had smaller maps. Perks worked out well on smaller maps, but not bigger maps.

3. Treyarch didn't really make a good campaign, so don't expect a good campaign.

4. Co-op Call of Duty? No, that won't work out.

5. There are a lot of better games coming out, than this, and with less people, bigger maps, slower gameplay.

DO NOT BUY THIS GAME

psu5

well thanks for that, but im pretty capable of making my own decisionschaoscougar1