Originally posted by owais12
Lol, no, nostalgia isn't a part of why people this cod4 was the best.
It had the best maps by far. It was fast-paced and not ridden with a ton of shit killstreaks so most kills you got were with your gun. The gameplay and game-engine used was so fluid and easy to use. Most of all, it rewarded good players and not noobs, which is something that hasn't happened since W@W.
Obviously, it was the first "modern" cod with perks and stuff, so it had a few flaws such as no host migration. However, it is still miles ahead of any other cod game.
The issue here is that each new cod gets more and more complex, and that just isn't the way to improve a game. Good maps, a focus on fast-paced gun fights and a few perks is what cod should be about.
If you remade cod4, introduced host migration, nerfed the ak47, removed juggernaut, fixed any hacks and added a couple of decent new maps in, i guarantee you people would love it more then BO2 or any other COD.
No commando, Noobtubes, and/or Danger Close and MW2 is just as good as COD4 if not better.
I'm not saying COD4 isn't great but I think nostalgia of the time influences people's take more than the actual game. The feeling that "these kids ruined the good days of Call of Duty" is almost what it usually sounds like.
Gun kills are great but I haven't met someone who didn't love the feeling of getting a mutli with an AC130 or saying an objective with a Pred missile. MW2 also had better overall guns imo. Death streaks, Tubing and to an extent hacking ruined MW2. Simplicity is great sure but if COD4 is an A+ then MW2 is an A-
---------- Post added at 03:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:41 PM ----------
Originally posted by Cronicx187
No offense but if you think BO2 is the best cod then you didnt play cod4 and if you did play cod4 ad still think BO2 is the best you are delusional.
He is usually delusional...But I'd agree COD4 is better in simplicity and overall execution. But BO2 is more fun and has more things to keep you playing.