These are some screenshots of COD5 published at pcgames.de.
I knew some one was gonna say something like that. I actually think cod5 looks quite good and there using the cod4 engine so its got potential
game looks great cant w8 to see gameplay
How can it be? It's the same engine just a different setting.
man,cod 4 engine doesn't automatically means it will be better than 4 it's the devolopers who make the story,levels,veraity and the most important factor(that cod3 lacks) is the groundbreaking pacing Im sure cod5 will never touch cod4 or even cod2. INFINTY WARD FTW.
<That is all.)
Just for future notice, CoD4 wasn't game of the year for it's incredible 3 hour single player campaign. It was game of the year for its multiplayer features. Therefor, yes the game can be awesome with a lack of single player -- look at halo 3 which everyone claims is #1 of all time. Also, you might want to read before you post with your panties in a bundle next time. I never once said 5 was better than 4 or even going to be better than 4. I was simply stating how can 4 be better than 5 if it's the same engine? Therefor it leaves us with only one thing -- development. It's the same graphics etc. etc. we leave it up to the dev's to give us the incredible multiplayer experience that everyone buys this game for in the first place. Face the facts, no one buys this game for its 3 hour SP campaign. @Wise rant monkey --- agreed, however cod2 > cod4 as well. ---
call of duty 4 game of the year????? super mario galaxy deserves(my opionion) it for it's awesome new,innovitave ideas,awesome gameplay,amazing level veraity and design,absolotely unforgetable soundtrack. a nearly flawless game. as will for cod5,maybe you'r right,we'll wait and see what's in store for the multiplayer mode. but you know with resistance2 coming nearly with cod5,I don't see why anyone gonna even look at cod5 60 players death match 8 player co-op FTW.
CoD4 was game of the year unfortunately I don't see why either. As far as I knew games were rated on single player but I could be wrong. As for Super Mario Galaxy I never played it but I've heard good things. With Resistance 2 the problem is it's exclusive and CoD5 is not exclusive. CoD5 will be more popular on the xbox 360 but it's arrogant to say that PS3 owners won't buy it. Some people like the more realistic shooter than the futuristic version. And as for the disagree's, I don't see what you disagree with, if you play CoD4 SP still...well, I don't know what to tell you it's 3 hours long and not much after you beat it once you're done.
defending the game you like from a game that hasn't even come out yet, and then arguing on and on about it.
xhairs - Do you really have to ask why you are getting disagrees? Since when is COD4 3 hours long? I've played through the single campain without a walkthrough guide on Hardened for my first play through. And I can tell you COD4 single player is not over in 3 hours. Now, I know that Call of Duty 4 isn't a long game. Not by any means, but - while it lasted - the single player story was brilliant and it certainly helped propel the game to game of the year. Packed, as it was, with plenty of stand out moments. As for CoD5. I hope these are early screens, because the characters look horrible. They look like mannequins covered in badly fitting clothes. It's like a video game adaptation of Thunderbirds or Joe 90. Maybe Treyarch has Captain Scarlet in the works for when they finish this.
As far as I'm concerned there's only 3 parts of CoD4 that truly stood out to me. As for the 3 hours of game play -- yes it can be beaten in 3 hours. As for not using a walkthrough...who really needs to? There's only one way to go and one way to do it a walkthrough would seem utterly ridiculous. And it's not about defending a game against a game that hasn't come out. It's the fact that everyone is claiming CoD4 is already BETTER than CoD5 and me trying to explain that how can it be when it's the same engine and all you can see is pictures? Without the story -- we can't even tell. Not to mention you claimed it was your first play through on the hardest difficulty...well that right there explains how it's not 3 hours. No one would beat that game in 3 hours on their first play through the hardest difficulty, but the fact still remains that it CAN be done therefor it is. So let me ask you again (I don't know why because disagree's don't really bother me anyways) why am I getting a disagree on my original post of: How can CoD4 > CoD5 if it's the same engine and we know nothing about the story line? The question isn't even able to be disagreed with because it's a question...you can't disagree with a question.
How can you have decided that COD4 is better than COD5 based on three screenshots? Maybe wait and play the game before you make up your mind.
Although I have disagreed with you xhairs. I haven't clicked the disagrees, mine has only been verbal. I know it is actually possible to beat CoD4 really quickly (I don't actually know how long it is possible to do it in) BUT There is a difference in it being possible to beat the game in 3 hours and the game only being 3 hours long. To say CoD4 is only 3 hours long is a bit misleading as most average people will take at least double that playing on a normal difficulty. 3 hours assumes you have played the game several times before, you know where enemies spawn, you know what you are doing and are playing it on an easier difficulty level. It is possible to beat Mario Bros 3 quickly by using Warp whistles. Or MGS4 quicker by skipping sequences. But aren't games supposed to be enjoyed rather than reduced to the minimum time possible to race all the way through, by a veteran. You dismiss the CoD4 single player in one throw-away comment as a 3 hour excursion to the multiplayer, but in actual fact, while it lasts it is a brilliant single player that deserves to be enjoyed and is actually far longer than 3 hours for most people that play it... ...that's all I'm saying.
treyarch cod games were always average,just see cod:finest hour(ps2,gcn,xbox) cod2:big rid one(ps2,xbox) and thier latest game cod3 so, my expectation with cod5 is low,cause treyarch devolopers(with all respect to them)aren't nearly as talented as infinty ward infinty word cod's are the true cod games cod1 cod2 and cod4 heck,even before they went from EA(see wikipedia)and created IW with activision they made the classic moh:allied assault(pc)
As this is my last bubble I'll try to make it a good one. @JTucker- I understand what you mean by the average gamer, but lets look upon reviews of MGS4. Everyone says there is not enough gameplay, however there is upon the average gamer. You catch my drift? They're looking at it form a standpoint that it can be beaten in X amount of time. Unfortunately I feel the same way you do with the fact that it was brilliant, all I'm saying is that how can we tell CoD5 won't be Treyarch's best? Sure CoD3 blew, Big Red One - blew too (which was only an expansion pack I believe) etc. etc. But you have to start somewhere, I'm sure this time around they might actually have something. However if CoD4 does prevail over CoD5, then so be it. My only reasoning is that it can't be proven by a SS of the same engine. @ape007 - it's understandable you feel that way as do I, but at least this time around we're still getting newer battles. WW2 has been made time and time again, but now we actually fight the pacific. I believe this has only been done twice, once with Medal of Honor and again with The History Channel. I'm interested to see what happens, the new landscapes etc. etc. But by simply providing an assumption of their past games being crap (I agree) we can't put them down yet. This could be their best ever, we'll just have to wait and see. And again, a Screen Shot of the characters can't prove that.
well said friend I'll give it a chance, let's wait and see great comment btw
It is WW2.. But, this time it takes place during the Pacific War. Fighting against the Japanese. Instead of fighting in the Battle of the Atlantic and such against the Germans and Italians. Which I think has been done only once..?
I think you are right, i can only think of medal of honor.
I don't see anything but a blank page...
It's been fixed. However, I'm not very impressed by these stills. Time for them to release some gameplay videos.
call of duty 2008 zzzzz
Call Of Duty 2008, set in 1945.
It's a rental. lol
Yeah, this COD4 craze really suprises me, I played the hell out of COD3 multiplayer with my friends on my LAN. When COD4 came out, (I played every call of duty game to date and beat them all) I did what I always do, I played it, beat it, played a little online, and now I'm done. I dont' understand how people are still playing this game, it reminds me of the whole Halo fad... which I'm sure is not over, but I never want to see that game again.
GO TO YOUR ROOM....... in no way were the other cod's better, and how is this like the halo fad, its not like a game about modern warfare had'nt been done before its just that they made a really, really good game.
I don't believe I ever said the others were better man, and yeah, it's like the halo fad. There will come a time when you don't want to play that game anymore, even though it is BY FAR the best online FPS, still I've been playing shooters since... I don't know... Doom. So the whole premise is just wearing thin on me I guess
Pornlord im sure your one of a few who did not get addicted to cod4 online. I think ive been playin about 7days now. You most be too busy doing other things like err watching porn maybe.
WWII yuck, after the awesomeness and success that was cod4 why did they feel that they had to go back to this over used war.
Well, I guess it's back to WWII. If you ask me, the Call of Duty series was literally non-existent until Call of Duty 4, and with COD5 going back to WWII, I'm sure that a lot of people will be buying it, but I wont be. I like using modern day weapons in a shooter a lot more. For me, a shooter can't be too Futuristic like Halo 3 and it' can't be set to far back in the past like COD5.
Nah the series had quite a following prior to COD4. It's just that COD4 had one hell of a single player mode that keep the user engaged while telling a story (Hideo I'm looking at you) with killer multiplayer that's easy to pickup and keeps people hooked. That sent it over the top into a mega hit despite being short on the single player side.
Does it have an engaging story? Will we see decent character development? Or do I just aim and shoot, again? Come to think of it...just put together a bunch of maps and let the gamers "create" the story! *SIGH*
This sucks. I'll just stick to COD 4.
[droid mode on] EPIC FAIL, 360 the lead version??. FAIL FAIL FAIL, WW2?? BORING AS HELL, COD4>COD5. EPIC FAIL FAIL FAIL, yes people i don't even know this game but i can tell it's going to suck. EPIC FAIL. [Droid mode off] COD5 looks very good and the most importan part, the multiplayer, sound to be better than COD4, can't wait.
Open Zone ---->
Looks like the flash bang screenshots to me.
this should be interesting in multiplayer http://www.pcgames.de/?menu... Duty: World at War
Not Getting. I'm tired of the lame ass WW2 crap. And why would I want to play this after playing tech savy ip's like COD4 and MGS4? No disrespect for fans and anticipators of COD;5 but COD:4 did well because it strayed from the WW BS. How much more of that crap do we need. IMO COD:5 is a huuuge step backwards for the Call Of Duty franchise even with the COD4 engine being used. I will go on record now and say that this wont do as remotely well as COD4 did in terms of sells. Count me out but for the peepz who do want, Enjoy guys.
Damn looks like Battlefield Vietnam graphics. Not bad if you're in year 2003.
Im passing on this like gas.
The Never Ending War.
what a stupid comment "COD4>COD5" .. how do u know that? if the game is great, who cares about WWII?
I care. I'm friggin sick of the whole SNOOZE FEST WW era popping up in games. My point is, if you want to play COD5... Just play COD1,2,3. 5 just looks better and you can bring a sword to a gunfight. Its a step backwards. This decision by Infinty Ward reminds me of your Avatar_ I just dont get it!
i was gonna pass but now with these screenies and a flame thrower , i think there is gonna be some surprises. looks good. go treyarch. 1up also said that they saw it and it looks very very good. maybe you get to use a catapult? maybe.
Looks like we can use swords =]
i personally think it looks the same as cod3...
cod5 will be good because cod3 was good. it seems like treyarch are trying really hard with this title and the game should turn out nicely. i just hope the large mp maps return. just because infinity ward arent making it doesnt mean its going to be crap. cod3 was treyarchs first next gen fps so now they have experience they should make a really good game. i like the idea of the darker theme with horror elements. imagine japanese suicide bombers jumping out from behind of trees and getting caught in traps. and another thing is ww2 games arent old its just ea made too many medal of honors. there are loads of modern combat games out and space marine style games but no1 complains.
I'm getting bored of "modern" warfare, it's always in the same place. Middle east and eastern Europe, it's getting worse then ww2 games.
Do you think Kat Williams will be in the game? I'm just saying that songs the sh1t now don't play that song no mo:) Keep on hustling.......:)) Everyone lighten up, the game could be great, IF could of and I'm sure thought this whole thing threw and probably have a few "new" tricks up there sleve or else they wouldn't be allowed to even do this version of the COD franchise. Damn, have you noticed how fast the woman walk in Libery City?:)))
Didn't the History Channel put out a game where you fight in the Pacific?
is make a mod that changes the japanese to aliens and make it a PS3 exclusive and the PS3 fanatics will magically believe that it's one of the greatest games ever.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.