Call of Duty 5

[DraKon2k]

What

I said that you're naive if you honestly believe that RO had just as much impact iron-sights-wise as OFP. I'd even say that CoD had more impact than OFP because everybody thought CoD was great, the game quckly had very many fans, it was made by the MoHAA devs and the ironsights actually were in 3D(not like in OFP).

 

[SiC-Disaster]

I said that you're naive if you honestly believe that RO had just as much impact iron-sights-wise as OFP. I'd even say that CoD had more impact than OFP because everybody thought CoD was great, the game quckly had very many fans, it was made by the MoHAA devs and the ironsights actually were in 3D(not like in OFP).

If they are 3d doesnt matter that much if they dont get unalligned when you quickly turn around, meaning that the 3d model doesnt drag behind.

 

[Jubei]

My only question is...How did a thread about Cod5 turn into a pissing contest about how innovative or revolutionary RO is? RO is a great game and so was COD and OFP. They all have there good points and there faults but they are games.

 

[husbert]

they should make a vietnam cod

 

[EvilAmericanMan]

Let's do something like the Napoleon campaigns man. Maybe even further back, Roman times even hah way back....kinda dreaming here but I think IW could pull it off. As for CoD 5....I dunno.

 

[Makabi]

they should make a vietnam cod

play the first Vietcong, it's better than anything you'll find in the CoD series.

 

[Colt .45 killer]

regardless of how many people disagree with the consesnsus to hate COD stlyed games its because they dont know better, just like most people do that "what da F is this SH1t" when they buy RO, decide they have nothing to do for 2 hours, 2 hours later "im hooked!!". many gamers dont realise that playing on a huge map and having some travel time before combat adds tankerloads to immersion and opens up many new possiblities for gameplay.

on cod 5, its pathetic so far, the cod 4 engine, although +1 you went to the pacific, the not so a$$ raped land of ww2 games. i just cant wait for gamers of america and canada to graduate from F- intelligence levels, Euro gamers already favour larger games like opf, and from friends who play wowish games, apparently on euro servers people are actually really nice compared to american servers.

 

[Fedorov]

this is teh internets, people likes to argue

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Well, they have a chance to make a decent game, but I doubt it (at least by my standards...)

 

[fOgGy]

I've heard in another source that Call Of Duty 5 will be in a "new military theatre" – implying it won't be back to WWII as rumoured to keep up with the increase in profits and due to the success of COD4. I suspect it might be another modern-day setting but because it's being developed by Treyarch I'm assuming we might be getting bigger maps and vehicles in the next instalment.

 

[Zips]

"New Theater" typically means... same era, different location. Nowhere has anyone (besides Kotaku) mentioned the Pacific theater. For now, it's just confirmed as a new Theater, nothing else beyond that is known for a fact.

 

[KrazyKraut]

I'd actually be surprised if they would NOT continue with a modern setting. I think one of the reasons for CoD4's success is the fact that it's based in a modern setting. Since Counterstrike (Source) there hasn't been any modern warfare multiplayer fps (without vehicles) that was really successful. That's the gap that CoD4 filled.

Free-aim plus iron sights minus crosshairs minus iron-sight zoom; resting your weapon almost everything; sniper zoom only in the sniper scope; actual one-hit-one-kill gameplay; ww2 without the usual popular factions; manually armable grenades plus over-hand and under-hand throw; suppression effects like blurring and sway; MG-barrel changes; barrel over-heating based on map-temperature; classnames in their native language; manual bolting; heavy emphasis on bolt-action rifles (!); actual authentic rate of fire for MGs including the MG42 instead of substituting it with more damage or infinite ammo; tanks that are more realistic than in any other first-person shooter; bullet physics

A lot of these features have been done by games before RO (OFP, Infiltration...) and others are nice details that contribute to the overall level of authenticity in RO... but have only marginal impact in RO itself and even less outside the RO world.

Most games have a set of features that is "unique" in its configuration, that doesn't mean they all are revolutionary. Like DraKon said, to be revolutionary you need to have a lasting impact on games that followed and i don't see that with RO. To name every current realism fps as an example doesn't hold because RO is far from the first realism game / mod. The examples you mentioned (Insurgency, RnL, COD hardcore...) have about as much in common with RO as they do with much older realism games such as Infiltration or OFP. You can't say Bioshock revolutionized first person shooters, when really System Shock did.

 

[Murphy]

Neither System Shock nor Bioshock revolutionized the shooter genre by your own definition of "revolutionary". Let's be a little cohesive, shall we?

Revolutionary also only means that something attempts a revolution, in my understanding of the word. Whether it succeeds or not doesn't matter for the term. Portal, for example, is a revolutionary game although it didn't change a whole lot on the gaming market up to now.

I also didn't say modern realism games copied from RO but I said that RO leveled the way for them. There was a time when realistic games were considered boring by mainstream gamers and RO's comperatively big success for a pure multiplayer realism game showed to devs that there is interest in such games and to gamers that realism doesn't equal boring.
Now we see a huge influx of realism mods such as Insurgency, Ham and Jam, etc. while we can witness a decline in the typical Counterstrike or TacOps clones that were oh so common a few years ago.

 

[DraKon2k]

Neither System Shock nor Bioshock revolutionized the shooter genre by your own definition of "revolutionary". Let's be a little cohesive, shall we?

Revolutionary also only means that something attempts a revolution, in my understanding of the word. Whether it succeeds or not doesn't matter for the term. Portal, for example, is a revolutionary game although it didn't change a whole lot on the gaming market up to now.

I also didn't say modern realism games copied from RO but I said that RO leveled the way for them. There was a time when realistic games were considered boring by mainstream gamers and RO's comperatively big success for a pure multiplayer realism game showed to devs that there is interest in such games and to gamers that realism doesn't equal boring.
Now we see a huge influx of realism mods such as Insurgency, Ham and Jam, etc. while we can witness a decline in the typical Counterstrike or TacOps clones that were oh so common a few years ago.

Ham & Jam? It has exactly nothing to do with RO. Ham & Jam is more like a mix of RnL and DOD:S closer to DoD:S. As for 'RO's big success'. How do you want to know that? How many people are playing online now? Imo the problem here is a) that we have different definitions of the word revolutionary and b) you're a bit biased towards RO(well if I think back about 2 years I was one of the most fanatic ro-defenders).

 

[Murphy]

How do you want to know that? How many people are playing online now?

For the first question: I was there...
For the second question: Welcome to the year 2008. How many other UnrealEngine 2.0/2.5 games do you know that are still being played at all apart from UT2004?

Imo the problem here is a) that we have different definitions of the word revolutionary

I already posted mine. Explain yours please.

 

[KrazyKraut]

He already did that and I repeated it for you. And the question should rather be: how many games that are two years and are still being played do you know. Answer: a lot. But we're going in circles and
it's obvious this isn't going anywhere so let's just stop it.

 

[DraKon2k]

For the first question: I was there...
For the second question: Welcome to the year 2008. How many other UnrealEngine 2.0/2.5 games do you know that are still being played at all apart from UT2004?

I already posted mine. Explain yours please.

How many other online-games are using UE2.5?
How many people are still playing way older games like DoD or CoD/UO?
Bad argument.

I already posted mine. Explain yours please.

Like DraKon said, to be revolutionary you need to have a lasting impact on games that followed and i don't see that with RO.

 

[Fedorov]

"Like DraKon said, to be revolutionary you need to have a lasting impact on games that followed and i don't see that with RO"

You will see it when RO2 is ready

 

[Murphy]

How many other online-games are using UE2.5?
How many people are still playing way older games like DoD or CoD/UO?
Bad argument.

1. If you count in the UnrealEngine 2.0, which is basically the same, a lot.
2. No one. Have you tried finding a DoD server to play on recently?

And I said 'comperatively big success for a realism focused game' so forget about CoD or UO.

I also posted a few ways in which RO was 'successfully revolutionary' to suit your definition of the word, but if you insist on ignoring them, do as you please.

@Kraut: Well, RO is still being played too so what's your point? That there are games more successfull than RO? So what? Who ever denied that and what does this have to with anything said in this argument?

 

[DraKon2k]

Lol it's funny how you are just ignoring the facts and making up senseless points.

1. If you count in the UnrealEngine 2.0, which is basically the same, a lot.

We won't count UE 2.0, it's a different engine (version) and I at least am talking about RO:O.

I did a quick search for UE2.5 powered (MP) games:

SWAT4 - there are still many people playing it, I'd say at least as many as RO or maybe a few less. But you can always find a server(I'm still playing some coop myself here and then). Plus it has SP and various MP gameplay modes.

Raven Shield - There are still enough people playing it(mostly vegas haters), maybe a bit less than RO(but that's just my guess last time I played was half a year ago, could be even more players). However this game other than RO atm has 3 successors.

Dark Age of Camelot - Uhh, 45.000 Players

Americas Army - no comment needed here I guess

2. No one. Have you tried finding a DoD server to play on recently?

Uhh, you got to be kidding here. I just did a quick search and found at least 70+ servers(no password, has users playing). I even controlled 10 20+ servers if they were just filled with bots, but nope there were real players.

And I said 'comperatively big success for a realism focused game' so forget about CoD or UO.

You don't have any numbers so don't talk as if you'd know about that.

I also posted a few ways in which RO was 'successfully revolutionary' to suit your definition of the word, but if you insist on ignoring them, do as you please.

For the XXth time: Those were nothing but a few innovative features that may have made RO special however did not revolutionize the genre or anything.