TGR's In Hindsight: Call of Duty 4 - "Well-crafted, Feature-complete"

TGR - "While the last game we looked at In Hindsight, Gears of War, has been out for quite a while, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is, well, more modern, having been released a full year later and still being relatively current. Not only was it almost universally lauded by critics, but its impact both on the industry and the community has been disproportionately profound, considering its short presence in the marktplace thus far. Call of Duty 4 sold remarkably well on all three platforms (don't talk to me about the Nintendo DS version; you know that doesn't count) and constantly trades places back and forth with Halo 3 as Xbox Live's most played multiplayer game, but what can account for such phenomenal success?"

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Relin3722d ago

I absolutely hated my first few hours online with this game, and Martyrdom was the least of my worries (screw the P90, seriously). I have no problems with offering rewards to more experience players, but don't stick them in matches with new players.

shine13963722d ago (Edited 3722d ago )

you beat me to the whoever the reviewer is: don't say its feature complete when it ain't. no co-op missions lan or online... plus no matchmaking: WTF?
at least give us the option to choose play against the best of the best.

Relin3722d ago

Yeah, "well-crafted" is a good tag line, but it's missing a few important features. The reviewer is absolutely right, though, about this game teaching other developers how to do things right, and I'm actually excited to play more shooters that feel as tactile as CoD4.

wangdiddy823722d ago

The support ps3 users get from IW sucks too.. Its one of the top played games online so they should fix all the problems..

Other than that i still love playing the game online..

Viehfutter3722d ago

Yeah, as the article mentioned, the lack of coop is pretty frustrating, especially since I really appreciate the way coop can elevate a mediocre single player game into a phenomenal social experience, but it honestly wasn't designed as a coop game. Complaining about a lack of coop in it is like playing a game of Risk and wondering why there's no single player mode. It'd be nice and relevant to my interests, but it has little to do with the game itself. I wish they had designed it for at least two player coop and included that as a feature, but the article really focuses on evaluating the game that was released rather than the one we dreamed about.

As for matchmaking, it DOES have it, but whether or not it works perfectly is another matter. Honestly though, that's been an issue in online games forever and continues to be. Halo 3 probably has the best matchmaking on the market right now, and I still find myself staring down the battle rifle of a level 46 12-year-old poop-socker, more often than not. I've just resigned myself to the fact that I will play against people who are better than me in online games. The best solution is to party up with friends or people you enjoying playing with. Even if you lose, as I did (a lot), you can still have plenty of fun.

Seriously though, there's a rich single player experience with an arcade mode thrown in to please score whores, a multiplayer mode with laundry list of game types and unlockables from hell to breakfast, making for remarkably customizable gameplay. Basically, you can play by yourself, or you can play with other people, but the geometry for the two is not interchangeable. Many of the same moments that define coop gameplay can be adequately recreated in multiplayer by partying up with a friend.

If a game with this many modes of play and details to customize can't be called "feature complete," then maybe we're just asking for too many features.