Call Of Duty

[Cookie Monster]

The latest nvidia drivers took care of my problem. Played a good 1 hour last night before being forced to retire by my "commander"...er wife!

[Traianvs]

it's not my kind of FPS (in multiplayer that is)

you need to stand still and aim in order to shoot someone. on top of that movement is kinda slow, and the skins move rather stiff... it doesn't give you a good natural feeling at all when playing

[Main_Brain]

Its short.
Damn short.

So short you can finish it on one Weekend and still have plenty o Sparetime :/

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Trajanus
it's not my kind of FPS (in multiplayer that is)

you need to stand still and aim in order to shoot someone. on top of that movement is kinda slow, and the skins move rather stiff... it doesn't give you a good natural feeling at all when playing

Sounds like it might actually be good. But what is the gameplay like - Is it all death match, capture the flag, or (as I hope) objectives like in Wolfenstien: Enemy Territory?

[Adagio]

I don't know Wolfenstein, but the game it objective based

[Dis]

watched my brother play yesterday.

there are various objectives. rescue this Major. Take this bridge. Clear a path to somewhere. Destroy radio communications equipment. Stuff like that.

There seem to be several objectives within each mission.

The machine gun fire is more realistic in that you get blinded by the muzzle flashes and there is significant recoil. So running and shooting probably isn't the best idea unless the enemy is running as well and you are in the open. But you can't go too slow on some of the timed missions.

I suck at FPS' so I doubt I'll get this.

[General Ludd]

I was talking about multiplayer - are there objectives in it, or is it just mindless combat?

[Flip McWho]

Righteo, I've been playing it for a day or so.

First impressions is that it is an awesome game. But yeah its gonna be a short game. I'm playing first pop on Hardened so its taking some time.

But, I think it's an excellant game. Lot more realistic than Battlefield. IMHO better overall than Battlefield.

As far as multiplayer goes I wouldn't have a clue haven't played it multiplayer as of yet.

Overall I must say that I'm really impressed by the game. The only complaint that I've heard so far is that it's too short.

[Adagio]

The only complaints I have about the game at present time is:

- There's 33% chance the game will run well, 66% risk the game runs like BField (i.e. it feels like MP lags when playing without enemies, everything on low)
- It's WW2 AGAIN :doitniw!:

Originally posted by Dissident
So running and shooting probably isn't the best idea unless the enemy is running as well and you are in the open. But you can't go too slow on some of the timed missions.

This is the only thing I've learned in the game for now (Running around, hitting targets at the same time, that is)... to stand still and hit a target is a little more diffecult it seems...

... I'm not a regular fps player...

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Overall I must say that I'm really impressed by the game. The only complaint that I've heard so far is that it's too short.

I agree and I'm not really a good FPS player. Probably they intend on releasing some expansion disks to get more life out of this game.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Zero
Another WWII game

I have a feeling that I'm gonna play it regardless.

any historically oriented FPS' other than WW2?