War. War never changes.. Same cut scene from the ending of MW2 and the start of Ghosts... Call of Duty... Call of Duty never changes... at least not after Cod 4 War never changes Same cut scene from the ending of MW2 and start Ghosts Call Duty at least not after Cod 4
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (301)
[ 301 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#7 - pearfield
Reply +152 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Call of Duty... Call of Duty never changes... at least not after Cod 4
User avatar #305 to #7 - gayboard
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(11/10/2013) [-]
You seriously forgot WaW
#146 to #7 - anon id: 8d0b2855
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Because GTA and Battlefield changed so much
User avatar #244 to #146 - psykobear
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
No one even mentioned GTA or Battlefield.
And GTA has changed... a lot.
Battlefield, not so much. But pretty.
#163 to #146 - anon id: 1d1e5e0a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
There was a significant difference between GTA IV and V, as well as BF2 and BF3.
User avatar #168 to #163 - rplix
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I agree with you.
User avatar #157 to #7 - nippuhl
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Comments like this are very naive. You're forgetting zombies.
User avatar #190 to #157 - gobnick
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
but that was a different company, and even still they copied their game over to a sequel as well
User avatar #195 to #190 - nippuhl
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
It's still Call of Duty, is it not?
User avatar #282 to #195 - gobnick
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
yes, but it still just plastered together stuff from the old one and called it a new game, in the same fashion as the content and in other ways as well
User avatar #289 to #7 - kattbajs
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Well BF3 and BF4(Feels like the same game)...Why complaning if you dont like CoD just dont ******* buy it. I dont like BF or CoD.Thats why i dont buy them. It's really easy to not complain about a game you dont like, Try it sometime :3
#290 to #289 - pearfield
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I don't buy them... I didn't buy BF4 either because it feels like the same as BF3. Your argument fails against me.
User avatar #23 - rabaneristo
Reply +40 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
MW2 is my favorite CoD so far.
#67 to #23 - anon id: 0d788027
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
It's not MW2, it's ME2,because it'sCalled Mass Effedt 2, retarded faggot
#83 to #23 - MasterManiac
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
For me MW2 is the one that ruined the franschise, and all later titles followed its example. It was the first one that added too many stupid attachments and customizations on weapons and classes, really bad effects (ie. what I call the "jam cam" when you get shot) and gameplay more like an arcade game than an FPS. It was still fun to play, like every CoD game to date, but you kind of felt something had been lost along the way. That's probably why CoD4 was my favourite, gameplay wise, and I think WaW probably had the most fun storyline. But hey, that's just my opinion.
For me MW2 is the one that ruined the franschise, and all later titles followed its example. It was the first one that added too many stupid attachments and customizations on weapons and classes, really bad effects (ie. what I call the "jam cam" when you get shot) and gameplay more like an arcade game than an FPS. It was still fun to play, like every CoD game to date, but you kind of felt something had been lost along the way. That's probably why CoD4 was my favourite, gameplay wise, and I think WaW probably had the most fun storyline. But hey, that's just my opinion.
#165 to #83 - anon id: 1d1e5e0a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Aside from Zombies, WaW was the one that began the downfall with the multiplayer.
It was basically just a re-skinned version of CoD4, but with tanks.
Terrible, terrible tanks.
User avatar #91 to #23 - analleakage
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I like CoD 2, 4 and MW2.

The rest is just ****, in my opinion
#104 to #23 - anon id: db8b199c
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
WaW > MW2 >MW > CoD 2 > **** > Every other call of duty
User avatar #129 to #23 - trygve
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Black Ops 2 was the best CoD ever made in my opinion.
User avatar #169 to #23 - rplix
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I liked MW2 the most as well. Mostly because I was damn good at it.

Prestiged to 10 then reset then got to prestige 9 in 160 hours playtime
User avatar #174 to #23 - nervaaurelius
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I prefer Cod4. I remember the only "noob" weapon was the p90(even though thinking about it now it wasn't that bad. Really most of the things that were considered noobish in Cod4 were nothing compared to the things added in later installments. Also the three kill streak allowed for a less likely chance of a guy to one man army the other team and encouraged more teamwork. I also liked how the servers were combined so sometimes play with brits and that was pretty fun for me. Honestly I wish they would release a Cod that kept the simplicity of Cod4 and just added in better graphics and new maps. I know that will never happen though and I can only hope for another WW2 set COD.
User avatar #33 to #23 - moosespoon **User deleted account**
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Jesus, how old are you? You've obviously never played any before MW2 then.
User avatar #37 to #33 - rabaneristo
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
I'm 25 years old.
The thing is I didn't like FPS untill this generation of consoles. And now even the best ones of older consoles seem too unappealing if I try to play.
User avatar #35 to #23 - captainnedkelly
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Mines between CoD 3 and WaW
User avatar #26 - popesoybean
Reply +38 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
"Gosh, I'm so glad I got BF4 instead! It's totally different! EA would never rehash things in the name of profit!"
#181 to #26 - arcticassassin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
It's not exactly a new, revolutionary game. It's more of an overall improvement. But then again, name one thing this year that is totally new and completely original.
#188 to #181 - squalllionhart
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
#201 to #181 - DJFatcat
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Ride to Hell: Retribution

Sometimes, it's best to stick to the beaten path
User avatar #214 to #26 - jordanish
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Battlefield has such glorious exploits/bugs/obvious beta moments though. How can you not love launching tanks across buildings?
User avatar #251 to #26 - sergeantnovak
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Something I've learned about shooters and just a lot of games that have successive titles in general is that the players don't like change to the core gamepley. Players want the same kind of game with improvements. I think BF4 had a good balance of that. Halo: Reach I think changed the formula of Halo way too much and now the fanbase is in perpetuating ******* since Halo 4 continued from it's changes.

If anything Call of Duty is a testament to how to maintain a franchise. It may get a lot of hate on the internet, but godamn does it pull in revenue.
#46 to #26 - infernis
+6 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#2 - thehumor
Reply +19 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
I got ghosts, and i ******* hated in in less than a day
I got ghosts, and i ******* hated in in less than a day
User avatar #9 to #2 - dapape
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Can you really honestly say you're suprised? You knew this was coming.
User avatar #86 to #2 - mitchellking
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
If you're on pc i feel the pain, Its a HORRIBLY optimised port... At the beginning of every game you lag hard core for like 1-2 minutes.
User avatar #139 to #2 - batmanbeyonddgrave
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
well if you don't want it.. i'll take it
User avatar #206 to #2 - grayham
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Why? if you don't mind me asking.
User avatar #264 to #206 - thehumor
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Campaign was horribly predictable, an idiotic premise, and characters you dont care for. and the multiplayer has a **** ton of issues
User avatar #275 to #264 - grayham
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Well that sucks, but is not entirely unexpected i guess. Did you like the other CODs? (I only ask because i'm considering buying ghosts, but am not sure yet)
User avatar #276 to #275 - thehumor
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I did enjoy mw2 and 3
User avatar #283 to #276 - grayham
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Huh... alright thanks for the input. Here's a thumb for your time.
#5 to #2 - johangran
Reply +32 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
>implying you should take this because it is dangerous out there   
>implying we should have sex
>implying you should take this because it is dangerous out there
>implying we should have sex
#15 to #5 - saxong
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
#10 to #5 - dieterkaiser
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#126 - squalllionhart
Reply +28 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
oh no a generic modern military shooter isn't being original
oh no a generic modern military shooter isn't being original
User avatar #144 to #126 - nyuORlucy
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
theres a difference between lacking originality and copying and pasting
User avatar #185 to #144 - TittyCinnamon
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
^ exactly
User avatar #4 - tittylovin
Reply +25 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Homage? Running joke? or shameless copy and pasting? or is it just manipulated to look similar?
#6 to #4 - anon id: 8cc592d0
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Shameles copy pasting.

Kinda what happens when you have to pump out a new game every year. And their target audiences doesnt notice, or care.
#247 to #6 - anon id: 4390a141
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Infinity pumps out one COD game every second year not every year......
User avatar #167 to #6 - pvtgoblin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I noticed, and I saw it as a nice little throwback. Maybe it wasn't, but it doesn't really bug me.
User avatar #149 to #6 - retentions
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
every 2 years*
User avatar #115 to #6 - swagloon
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Well someone notice.
User avatar #137 to #115 - licestr
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
reviewers.
#240 to #137 - anon id: 9061fc57
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Hey alucord.

Go **** yourself. Just cause you have a block profile doesn't mean we can't get you. www.funnyjunk.com/search/?q=alucord&search-target=comment&s=thumbs&o=desc&l=30&u=

User avatar #171 to #4 - puut
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Well, as a game maker, reusing assets is ridiculously effective time saving technique. It's really a pain in the ass to do it every time.
#16 - skinstiches
Reply +21 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
War... what is it good for?
User avatar #36 to #16 - ninjamyles **User deleted account**
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Edwin Starr - War (What Is It Good For?)
User avatar #50 to #16 - fredthemilkman
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
I'd say its good for killing people
User avatar #64 to #16 - esmebuffay
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
That song always reminds me of Small Soldiers.
#66 to #16 - anon id: b84013fa
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
I would disagree, war forces innovation. With war many technologies have been created.
Without it we wouldn't be where we are today.
#68 to #66 - anon id: 0d788027
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Without it, we wouldn't have guns, bombs, tanks, jets, nuclear weapons...

Yeah, war is really good... NOT
#92 to #68 - anon id: 63314291
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
the modern computer, radio, microwave, nuclear science, different kinds of natural energy sources, and insanely big amounts of medicine was developed to the level they're at today because of war. i don't like war, but it's a bigger question than you'd think, you can't just give an absolute about it. if a war ends in a result that's better for the greater good of the majority of the world, but still makes it worse for some, is it then a good war? and the war hadn't been there, would we have percieved whatever "good things" that came out as the war, as someone to strive for?



sorry im writing a project about ethics and what it means that something is "good" at the moment
User avatar #116 to #16 - hoponthefeelstrain
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
ah! say it again!
User avatar #197 to #16 - mikoli
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
huh?
#81 - asasqw
Reply +18 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
War remained relatively unchanged till the rise of atomic weapons. At that point no major powers dare to go into war with one another due to mutually assured destruction. War now is fought in cloak and dagger, puppet wars, and economics.
User avatar #94 to #81 - ihatem
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
The French guerilla changed war, so did the mounted Mongolians, the early Chinese, the Ottomans, the Greek, Spartans, Shogunate Japanese, the Seljuk Turks.
User avatar #96 to #94 - asasqw
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
It went from club people to stab people to shoot people to hiddey shooty people to trenchy shooty people to nazi shooty people to nukes. Nothing was so drastic of a change, just strategists and weapons but it remained the same, throw people on your side at people on their side till someone runs out of people.
User avatar #106 to #81 - trivdiego
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
war between powers you mean. you forgot guerilla war between those that oppose the powers yet refuse to be easily wiped out
User avatar #3 - rynkar
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Ghosts is a joke. Even on the best graphic settings, it still looks like CoD 4.
User avatar #20 to #3 - breaken
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
The textures are garbage
#40 to #3 - anon id: 1f7e6b1d
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
Too bad its not nearly as good as CoD 4.
#69 to #3 - Sampsy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/07/2013) [-]
That''s because it is COD 4
#131 - sinclairr
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
-Warning, long post-   
   
I liked MW2 more than any other CoD game. CoD 4 was pretty good too, but I think MW2 bettered it in multiplayer, even if the community kinda sucked. It felt like a game you could play, and have the worst weapons, yet still win because you have strategy involved. Perks felt more like perks, rather than in other games where it was either A-'pick a perk that makes you a ******* space marine' or B-'pick a perk that makes you walk .0000000000002 meters faster'.   
   
The maps felt more centeral, and were fun to navigate around, finding weak points in the other team's defenses. Yeah, spawns could suck ass, but most people were too stupid to take advantage of the spawns. I felt like the game types were well balanced and fun for everyone, no matter what you wanted. Teams didn't suck because you could go solo and avoid your team completely, but you could also work with them, which I almost never did because everyone was about 12 years old.   
   
Black ops was fun, but had that definite edge to it that made it more about attacking and having the best gun, not using weapon attachments/perks/kill streaks as strategic uses.    
   
Black Ops 2 sucked ass. Everything felt like cardboard, the maps were meh, and the community- oh jesus- sucked dick.   
   
CoD Ghosts feels very... weak. The maps are too open, and the whole 'solo-rambo' thing is thrown out the window so you HAVE to work with your team, which ruins the game for me. They also broke a lot of little things like kill streaks, the map, the fact you now buy things rather than work for them, and a lot more. It feels like they force you to do so much, which may make the game feel smoother, but makes it so boring.    
   
>MFW people tell me to stop playing MW2 and get play the newer games
-Warning, long post-

I liked MW2 more than any other CoD game. CoD 4 was pretty good too, but I think MW2 bettered it in multiplayer, even if the community kinda sucked. It felt like a game you could play, and have the worst weapons, yet still win because you have strategy involved. Perks felt more like perks, rather than in other games where it was either A-'pick a perk that makes you a ******* space marine' or B-'pick a perk that makes you walk .0000000000002 meters faster'.

The maps felt more centeral, and were fun to navigate around, finding weak points in the other team's defenses. Yeah, spawns could suck ass, but most people were too stupid to take advantage of the spawns. I felt like the game types were well balanced and fun for everyone, no matter what you wanted. Teams didn't suck because you could go solo and avoid your team completely, but you could also work with them, which I almost never did because everyone was about 12 years old.

Black ops was fun, but had that definite edge to it that made it more about attacking and having the best gun, not using weapon attachments/perks/kill streaks as strategic uses.

Black Ops 2 sucked ass. Everything felt like cardboard, the maps were meh, and the community- oh jesus- sucked dick.

CoD Ghosts feels very... weak. The maps are too open, and the whole 'solo-rambo' thing is thrown out the window so you HAVE to work with your team, which ruins the game for me. They also broke a lot of little things like kill streaks, the map, the fact you now buy things rather than work for them, and a lot more. It feels like they force you to do so much, which may make the game feel smoother, but makes it so boring.

>MFW people tell me to stop playing MW2 and get play the newer games
#135 to #131 - anonmynous
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I agree
User avatar #140 to #131 - kommandantvideo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
World at War was the best IMO. The only people that play now are hackers, though.
User avatar #154 to #140 - sinclairr
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
I also liked WaW, but it felt VERY overpowered once you got to level 65 (I think) and could use a heavy machine gun and a flame thrower...
User avatar #166 to #154 - kommandantvideo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Yeah, I never personally did that. I liked the game because of the time, so I always enjoyed mixing it up. I had special classes for different countries. I never mixed guns of different countries, for instance a Japanese pistol with a German gun. It was stupid to me. I enjoyed the era of the game, and the weapons, more than the gameplay really, but that's not saying the gameplay isn't great. I had so many great hours on that game. It is what REALLY got me into WWII and history, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

What I wouldn't give to just play a game of it without hackers....
#141 to #131 - trygve
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Try go back to MW2. It sucks. Maps are good, but guns are terrible and the streaks are laughably OP. MW2 had certain roles you could play as, and it was difficult to mix playstyles up.

Black Ops 2 have 10 point create a class system, so a lot more variety, fun game modes, but decent maps.

Ghosts is the first cod that doesnt stick to the regular formula where run and gun is a playstyle. Ghosts forces the pace down with huge maps and laser cannon guns.

I believe millitary shooters will die out, as with all trends and Ghosts is a reminder that IW have the balls to try out something new.
User avatar #147 to #141 - sinclairr
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
'Military shooters will die out'
-trygve

y'know, they said that back in Wolfenstein times too!
User avatar #148 to #147 - trygve
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
>Believe

Step up faggot I can believe whatever I want
#162 to #131 - anon id: 4e0bd8bc
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
MW2 had worst perks and kill streaks in my opinion. Only perk sets were stopping power, a commando lol 21foot knife, and explosives that got more explosives from kills. Kill streaks were awful because it was just a race to a ~9 kill streak, and then they get a chopper, leads to ac130, and then game over nuke.
User avatar #173 to #131 - falloutplayer
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
Wut about MW3? I loved it
#192 to #131 - turretbuddy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
>the whole 'solo-rambo' thing is thrown out the window so you HAVE to work with your team   
How is this bad   
play FFA if you want to do that   
   
>Game starts   
>TEAM DEATHMATCH-GET READY   
>TEAM DEATHMATCH   
>team deathmatch   
>kil da oter guiyz
>the whole 'solo-rambo' thing is thrown out the window so you HAVE to work with your team
How is this bad
play FFA if you want to do that

>Game starts
>TEAM DEATHMATCH-GET READY
>TEAM DEATHMATCH
>team deathmatch
>kil da oter guiyz
#204 to #131 - jammesss
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
MW2 was fun. Spent a whole lot of time on that game. The main problem though was it had no post support. Glitches/exploits took forever to patch ( javelin glitch) or was never fixed (Noob Tubes). To me, those were the killers of the game
MW2 was fun. Spent a whole lot of time on that game. The main problem though was it had no post support. Glitches/exploits took forever to patch ( javelin glitch) or was never fixed (Noob Tubes). To me, those were the killers of the game
#138 to #131 - applesdied
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(11/08/2013) [-]
couldn't have said it better myself
couldn't have said it better myself