Why are all games with guns compared to CoD4 ?

dart1415

dart1415

CAGiversary!
Its the ultimate comparison, is what i believe lots of other CAG members will reply with but why is it that all shooting games with multiplayer compared a to CoD4 when they are totally different.

My perfect example is Far Cry 2, a new release and one i have picked up and am enjoying as a free roaming adventure/shooter. Now Far Cry 2 has an online multiplayer but when the game developers were creating the game they were focusing on what the game is a single player game with an online mode bundled in o provide a platform to share and play the user created map content which they have been ranting on about in all their interviews.

I am interested in what other people have to say on this matter whether i am wrong or write but i am fed up with every shooting game being compared with CoD
 
People just compare games in a genre to their favorite game in that genre. I don't think there's any more to it than that. CoD4 comes up a lot as it's hugely popular.
 
It's because as far as the past year or two there hasn't been a FPS that has attracted the huge following that CoD has. That's due to simple gameplay but with excellent presentation and level design that keeps people coming back. The multiplayer is also appealing because there's not too much to it. You pick a gun and jump in. Even if you're new it doesn't take forever to get decent guns, in actuality some of the default guns are the best in the game (Hi M16 and MP5). Essentially CoD hits a perfect balance between depth and playability.
 
Personally, I consider Call of Duty 4 to be extremely limited in terms of multiplayer. If they had some kind of vehicle combat that might have saved it for me, but frankly, I quickly get bored of constantly shooting the same guns in the same landscapes at the same dickheads.

Give me the ability to drive 2 tons of steel up their ass.

~HotShotX
 
Before that they used to compare all the FPSs with halo, now its cod4, next will be another game, and so on.
If your going to get fed up every single time i suggest you go ask your doctor for some anti-anger pills right now.

Or a more simple solution is to get over it.
 
This is news to me. As far as I'm concerned, FPS is held to two standards. Half Life, and Duke3D.

Halo is too generic to be a legitimate basis for comparison.
 
I thought the comparison was to Halo, at least in terms of multiplayer on the console front. Single Player wise, it's Half Life.
 
Unless they're wildly different, I compare new FPS games to two older games.

For singleplayer games, I think of Half-Life 2 with its gorgeous cinematics, good story, and solid gameplay.

For multiplayer and replay value, TimeSplitters: Future Perfect (my favorite FPS) comes to mind. It had co-op, tons of unlockables and extra content such as maps, character models, cheats, game modes, etc., a great map maker (for a console game), and so much customization; even the story mode was great, with a wide variety of environments, some fun sidekicks, and plenty of humor.


Sidenote: Because of TimeSplitters, I had been quite excited for Haze (both developed by Free Radical), and that didn't turn out so well, so I'm glad that they have decided to return to the TS2 engine for the 4th game in the TS series. At least, I think I heard they were....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='KingBroly']I thought the comparison was to Halo, at least in terms of multiplayer on the console front. Single Player wise, it's Half Life.[/QUOTE]

A lot of people dug CoD4 more because of all the perks, leveling up and unlocking guns, challenges etc.

So I think people who dug that compare other online shooters to that system, as it made it a bit tough to play death matches that have no leveling system, nothing to unlock etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top