Call of Duty 5

[{Core}Craig]

Ive decided most people that have replied in this thread are losers. Mainly because they want uber realism OMG THATS NOT THE CORRECT WEAPON TO MATCH THE COLOUR OF THAT UNIFORM type stuff. CoD4 was great, not realistic, but why would they?? RO is realistic (ish) and it was never mainstream for a reason. You all want a history game, not an action game.

Imagine ROLadder if it had cod4's enjoyability and appeal.

The new game looks like it will be fun, not realistic, but fun. Thats all im after. I dont care if one one team has the wrong type of LMG or something like that, just as long as it shoots.

If you all want extreme realism, shouldnt you join the army??

 

[Pharnakes]

You all want a history game, not an action game.

Yes thats exactly what we want, thats why we are here on the boards for a REALISM game FFS.


Go post that on the cod forums where people might agree with you. Why can't people understand that this foum is made up of people who like ro (and this long after relese only the more dedicated are left). Why do you find it so suprising that RO fans are going to hate such a blatantly unrealistic game, and more importantly why do you get offened by it?


As for join the army, thanks but I'd rather not get shot IRL.


Incidentaly, I heard your attempts to set up a cod 5 dvision for {core} where rejected

 

[SheepDip]

There are so many things wrong with that post I can't even begin to respond to it.

 

[BlackLabel]

A Craig blooper...

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I reserve the right to praise or pick apart any game that somehow crosses these forums, as long as I do it while at least trying to be respectful to other posters.

COD5 single player looks like it might be decent, Co-Op ok, and multi-player looks like an abomination... or as that translates to me; NO FUN.

If you only listen to people who share your opinion only, then you end up with a distorted view of things IMO. Besides, do you really think that anyone trying to praise RO on some COD forums gets treated with kiddie-gloves? I would be surprised if the posts didn't disappear (talking from experience).

 

[smokeythebear]

I think gameplay, performance and visuals are more important then realism. Which is why I play a lot more COD4 then RO. COD5 may not be historically accurate, but I think it will be polished in the areas that are most important.

 

[D3terioNation]

You all want a history game, not an action game.

Yes thats exactly what we want, thats why we are here on the boards for a REALISM game FFS.


Go post that on the cod forums where people might agree with you. Why can't people understand that this foum is made up of people who like ro (and this long after relese only the more dedicated are left). Why do you find it so suprising that RO fans are going to hate such a blatantly unrealistic game, and more importantly why do you get offened by it?


As for join the army, thanks but I'd rather not get shot IRL.


Incidentaly, I heard your attempts to set up a cod 5 dvision for {core} where rejected

Haha pwnt!

 

[Oldih]

If you all want extreme realism, shouldnt you join the army??

And if I wanted to play AD\HD heaven with ww2 theme, super commando nazis, red-dot sights, papertanks, attack dogs, soldiers who runs faster than greased lightnings, tongue-in-cheek voiceacting, gameplay that looks rather odd and it is disguised visually as semi-realistic, I'd rather pick up RTCW or UT2004 or something like that.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

And if I wanted to play AD\HD heaven with ww2 theme, super commando nazis, red-dot sights, papertanks, attack dogs, soldiers who runs faster than greased lightnings, tongue-in-cheek voiceacting, gameplay that looks rather odd and it is disguised visually as semi-realistic, I'd rather pick up RTCW or UT2004 or something like that.

Good point. It reminds me of a game like those mentioned, just coincidentally with WW2 textures.

 

[Sidus Preclarum]

" WE'VE LOST THE LEAD!"
Way to instill a WW2 atmosphere.
It just seem that for most people, including the devs, making a WW2 games merely means clothing a UT/Quake game in WW2 skins. We don't. I personnaly think that's a waste, if you want to make an unrealistic and fast shooter, why chose a real setting? The devs are actually restricting themselves thus (then again, they're saving a lot of efforts that would have gone in creativity. Which is like the motto of the industry nowadays...). I mean, such shooters were ok in the early 2000s, because at the time, the gaming world didn't have much experience with FPSs and most "realistic" shooters attempts were deriving rom a fast shooter basis, and for the players CS , then DoD beta2.* were the pinnacle of "slow paced, "realistic" and intelligent" shooters". But now, in the late 2000s, keeping the same formulas always and always? That's a waste imho.

 

[SheepDip]

Ive decided most people that have replied in this thread are losers. Mainly because they want uber realism OMG THATS NOT THE CORRECT WEAPON TO MATCH THE COLOUR OF THAT UNIFORM type stuff. CoD4 was great, not realistic, but why would they?? RO is realistic (ish) and it was never mainstream for a reason. You all want a history game, not an action game.

Imagine ROLadder if it had cod4's enjoyability and appeal.

The new game looks like it will be fun, not realistic, but fun. Thats all im after. I dont care if one one team has the wrong type of LMG or something like that, just as long as it shoots.

If you all want extreme realism, shouldnt you join the army??

Firstly, realism != reality. Just because we want a game to portray things accurately, doesn't mean we actually want to join the army.
I personally find it quite an insult to see (for example) a red dot sight on a G43 (not even mentioning how completely unnecessary it is putting it there in the first place). If you are going to take a real world item, portray correctly, at least visually.

Secondly, you can't really compare RO and CoD4. One is published, PC only, via Steam and is from a first time developer. And let's be honest, advertised pretty scarcely. Everyone I know personally who plays RO does so because of word of mouth. And even considering all of these factors, RO did very well.
CoD4 was published by Activision one of the biggest publishers going, on several platforms, and from a developer with some big name devs in the team, and with 2 big titles under their belt. Oh and let's not forget the massive advertising campaign, TV ads, cinema ads, online ads etc.

Action games don't have to be uber realistic to be good. But if you're setting them in a theatre that people know a lot about you could at least do your research and do it justice.

Imagine ROLadder, with CoD4's enjoyability and appeal....hmmm. Well I don't like CoD4, I think it has a very limited appeal, and I don't find it more enjoyable than, say CSS, DoD:S or any number of *FREE* multiplayer mods.

I might be able to understand the reasoning behind putting CoD4 into the guise of a ww2 shooter in order to lure in people who bypassed CoD4 because of its modern setting. But what I cannot understand is why you'd want to do it so poorly.

If you like CoD4, then ****ing play CoD4! You probably paid enough for it.

Why bother with CoD5 when it is just a shallow carbon copy?

 

[DraKon2k]

Yes thats exactly what we want, thats why we are here on the boards for a REALISM game FFS.

That's so wrong. First of all don't use 'we', you're speaking for yourself and not for everybody and not even for a majority. Also just because this game is more realistic than say CoD or BF, but still not a simulation like ArmA or at some point Project Reality for example, doesn't mean that on this forum everyone is a naive hardcore prick. We're in the Gaming sections, where you talk about other games and in fact most people who post in this section of the forums hardly play RO anymore if at all and play other games instead.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

That's so wrong. First of all don't use 'we', you're speaking for yourself and not for everybody and not even for a majority....

Well, to be fair, Craig did say "you all"...

 

[DraKon2k]

Well, to be fair, Craig did say "you all"...

Life ain't fair. >_>

 

[Murphy]

Life ain't fair. >_>

WAR ISN'T FAIR!
(Anyone else miss the action in the suggestions forum?)

 

[SiC-Disaster]

Life ain't fair. >_>

Life out to get you, eh?

 

[DraKon2k]

No just a senseless reply.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

But a very valid reply

 

[Pharnakes]

[Please explain how my reply is any less sensible than yours in this thread? Is it becuase I disagree with you, or just that you can't think of a valid counter argument? And I'm convinced that you are only defending this game out of habit, not even you can really think this could be a good game.

 

[DraKon2k]

[Please explain how my reply is any less sensible than yours in this thread? Is it becuase I disagree with you, or just that you can't think of a valid counter argument? And I'm convinced that you are only defending this game out of habit, not even you can really think this could be a good game.

Uh I was calling my own reply('Life ain't fair') s