The single-player campaign is over in a flash, but the high quality of that campaign and its terrific multiplayer options make Call of Duty 4 a fantastic package.
MW 2019 is five years old at this point and on previous gen hardware, but it is still the best looking Call of Duty game to date.
MW was an excellent videogame. They messed up Spec Ops big time, but aside from this it was a huge step in the right direction initially. Most notably, at launch it seemed to come from a very cohesive creative vision that was felt across gameplay, to story to art style/visual direction. It was also very notably written by prominent ex-Naughty Dog guys that quit almost immediately before release.
That COMPLETELY dissolved through post-launch content and the full pivot to a "cross-mode" narrative that completely obliterated the cohesion in overall story direction. Warzone then "became" the new face of Call of Duty and the franchise completely removed itself from anything remotely creatively "good". It is a pure money machine, so I kinda get why they're doing it....but I personally completely lost interest.
I would love to see Infinity Ward move off CoD and get to make their own product with full control. They clearly have some massive talent in their ranks but it's perverted by Activision's corporate interests.
Call Of Duty is back with its yearly instalment, but is Modern Warfare 3 breaking new ground, or just a lazy cash grab? The answer may not surprise you in today's review from JDR.
The original Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 games have been drawing players back in
I really hope we get other activision games on GP soon. My dream would be Scarface but I know the license probably expired
None of those games had dedicated servers on console in the first place? Were always player hosted. Did something change?
Another low and stupid score form GameSpot. COD4 deserves 9.5/10 at the very least. Halo 3 had a short singleplayer but a superb multiplayer and GameSpot gave them 9.5/10. Now COD4 also has a short singleplayer but a superb multiplaye plus some of the best graphics on any console/PC (Won graphics award at E3) and yet they give it 9.0/10?
isnt the PS3 version confirmed to play in 1080p, cause they said this in the second page:
"Despite claiming 1080p support on the back of the box, COD 4 appears to run in 720p on the PlayStation 3. Either way, you'd be hard-pressed to tell it apart from its Xbox 360 counterpart. And all versions control just fine, making the decision over which version to buy totally dependent on which controller you like the most."
WTF???
is that only the PS3 version of the game was reveiwed, i just checked the 360 section but it hasn't been released yet. now i'm begining to wonder are they gonna give the 360 fanbase something to war about and Dare be baised AGAIN and give the 360 version a 9.5/10 versus the PS3 version because then you'd know that they are out to get and hate sony. as it's been confirmed that every review has said it's identical on all platforms.
Also, WTF! They didn't give it the "Outstanding Visual Design" medal/award, something that they gave to Jericho. COD'4 art design was praise during E3 by many including GT and many people are calling it's animation and art among the best of 2007 and yet GameSpot does not want to give that the artistic award.
There is not a splitscreen online multiplayer. This is a huge let down for me. I enjoy playing online just me on the machine, but I enjoy having some buddies over to play multi player online more. This is the same on the PS3 and Xbox 360. That is the main reason I got rid of call of duty 2. They do have 4 player split screen off-line, but that is it.
When the beta came out the question was posed as to if splitscreen was going to be in the final version. They told us it would and now it isn't.
I will still get the game, but will end up playing Halo 3 or Warhawk more because of the lack in split screen.