CoD: WaW is absolutely horrible
its just garbage

the story mode is ok but multiplayer is just pathetic
Nazi Zombie is the only part of the multi i like

They really blew it with the multiplayer. it's pretty obvious just by the number of people still playing COD 4. the number online dropped for a couple weeks after world at war came out, and now it's almost as high as it used to be

Its too bad that you can only have two people (in Nazi Zombie mode) per Xbox

cod3 was the best so far

call of duty 3 is easily and without a doubt, the WORST call of duty game ever made.

i think modern warfare is the best, but I prefer #2.

Brother has it, and nazi zombie mode is pretty addictive. The game overall is ok, but not a patch on COD4 in the multiplayer. I'd give it a 7/10.

How far have you guys reached on the zombie mode - which level? My brother and I have managed 12 levels, where it just gets ridiculous!

raygun just kills everything.

what I liked about cod 2 is that it had a ton of maps. 4 and 5 barely have any.

which would you rather play? CoD in civil war, WWI, or vietnam war?

apart from the glitch issues in the multiplayer of 3 the balance was the best by far i hate call of duty 4 its just spray and pray

WWI and add an advance melee system. Trench fighting was dirty, bloody with soldiers fighting with rifle butts, knives, shovels. Along with CoW usual shooting greatness that would be 11/10.

Yeah, but you would get killed a lot as you tried to reach the enemies trench

P baby....you gotta lighten up. Give all things their due respect. CoD3 May suck to some...but be amazing to others.....
CoD 4 and 5 are spray and pray. Seriously.....not too much to worry about but lack off ammunition.

Cod:WaW was a good game. The issues i see with it is that it tries too hard to be exactly like 4. This isn't a bad thing, but its not very original. Thus the campaign, while some interesting enemies, isn't as much fun as 4.
The multiplayer would be on par with 4 were it not for the maps. The maps are horridly designed. More often than not people are spending more time looking for fights than actually fighting them. Give the game some credit though: at least they didn't make the vehicles game-winning machines of death like they did in Halo.

In COD4 though, there wasnt much variety in weapons: machineguns, snipers and shotguns.
I like certain maps in Cod:WAW, for instance, Asylum and Castle, but others like Cliffside are way too big. And in the hanger map, everyone goes to the Hanger and ignores the rest of the map

There isn't much variety in appearance. The differences that matter are how you use each weapon. Example: The .50 calibur sniper is very powerful and has a huge recoil, so you would only fire one shot at a time to see if it hit. Not the case with the M21.
And some of the differences in WaW are frivolous. For example, The only real advantage bolt action rifles have over the other guns is it's sniper abilities. Other than that they would hardly ever win in a gunfight against other types of guns.
And yes, asylum and Castle go well, but if there are chunks of the map that no-one ever goes to (like Hanger) then the map is a bad map. Infinity Ward suceeded in that usually every area of their maps were possible and frequently used attack points.

Im not sure about this, but it seems like bolt action rifles do more damage than regular repeating rifles

yea well im sure all of you have heard of the dancing gibbon cheat code, rigt? EH?

Bolt action rifles can still be used without a scope and they're just as powerful. They're decent enough in a gunfight if you hit on the first shot often enough.

I don't like the tanks. Game would be better without them.

What is the dancing gibbon cheat?

And why cant you use tanks in splitscreen mode?

Yes, if you take a shot-to-shot comparison, then bolt action rifles are better. But this is generally the case for most sniper effective weapons. My complaint against the bolt-action rifle is that if you are in any kind of gunfight other than a sniper fight and you miss the first shot, chances are you will lose the fight thanks to how long it takes to reload. Generally the semi-automatic rifles can get in around 3 shots during the time that the bolt action is reloading, and in most cases thats usually enough.

Not if its a silenced bolt action rifle

Do you know whats even more effective, and deadly, and classic, than a 'silenced bolt action rifle'?




A Sword.

afreemason: Give the game some credit though: at least they didn't make the vehicles game-winning machines of death like they did in Halo.

say what?

Yes. In Halo if you didn't have a rocket launcher, spartan laser, or a good aim with plasma grenade, you were pretty much useless against a vehicle. Anyone that got into a Scorpion in that game was God and could literally turn the tide of the battle all on his own, unless the enemy fully concentrated on dealing with it, and even then the damage the tank would deal would've been extensive.
In WaW, however, you usually can't win games all on your own if you got into a tank. It's much more balanced because most player builds can actually contribute in some way to destroying a tank, so the advantage doesn't last for too long

Hm. Well, okay then. Maybe our play-styles are different. I know I have little problems dealing with vehicles in Halo. Even the larger ones I can typically deal with on my own. They're large and cumbersome, it's not hard to sneak on them and hop on their back and punch it a few times.

On that note, though, if you're playing team games, it's also not too hard to get those anti-vehicle weapons. I think it's basic team strategy. But, to each his own.