Call of Duty 4 thread

Acert93

Inscrit depuis 6984 Jours

The C130 mission is like watching real cameras. So far the game is really great and looks pretty good on low settings.

En réponse à

My Blog: http://www.NextGenThinkTank.com

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

It goes up to 32 players.. but honestly none of these maps are really all that well suited for 32+ players at all. I hate 32 player servers. 24 should have been the cap with the current level size.. and even that is pushing it.

I would like to see some 8800GT benchmarks. It would sorta force my hand a little.

edit: nvm I'm an idiot, I forgot Lebato was playing it on the 360. The console version is 18 players now? Not bad.. hopefully the net code is better than Halo's. I guess if Bad Company can support up to 24 peer to peer 18 shouldn't be that hard to pull off. 18 isn't a bad player cap for this game at all. Hopefully they release some bigger maps more suited to 32 players for the PC.. if not, it's up to the mod community.

En réponse à

LEBATO

Inscrit depuis 7135 Jours

Posté par Acert93

The C130 mission is like watching real cameras. So far the game is really great and looks pretty good on low settings.

So I beat that mission and I guess I'm about to beat the next one, how long into the campaign am I?

Posté par GriftGFX

It goes up to 32 players..

No on the 360........

En réponse à

Mods, stop changing my SIG! I'm going to end up banning you!

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

Posté par LEBATO

No on the 360........

I edited my post a while before you posted this.......

En réponse à

LEBATO

Inscrit depuis 7135 Jours

Posté par GriftGFX

I edited my post a while before you posted this.......

So how into the campaign would you say I am Grift?

EDIT: NVM I was able to find an early walkthrough, I haven't finished ACT I yet. And that was about 2 hours or so. So yeah, pretty much 6-7 hours?

Meh. I should have played a higher difficulty.

En réponse à

Mods, stop changing my SIG! I'm going to end up banning you!

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

Posté par LEBATO

So how into the campaign would you say I am Grift?

I haven't played campaign yet.. and since I'm considering a pretty big upgrade within the next month or so, I think I might wait until I install my new hardware. I do want to see some 8800GT benchmarks though. I know I won't be seeing 60FPS @ 1920x1200.. that's what I really wanted out of my next upgrade.. but this game is making it too hard to wait until that's possible.

En réponse à

JeromeMorrow

Inscrit depuis 6882 Jours

Played it on hard, got about half way through way quicker then the first, and have now switched to veteran...this is going to take a while. Haha, though playing on normal, its crazy easy now, I can basically charge around a mission using mostly my knife. Always been a great learning curve in CoD games, except CoD 3...ugh. Well, once I'm done veteran, and Im estimating about a week or two, maybe I'll see some of you online.

I have only one complaint, and it has nothing to do with the length. I wish there were more unique missions, the sniper mission was fantastic, as were all the parts in the middle east, but I found the british missions more than a bit lackluster. If they'd spotted the game with a few more unique missions (sniper, mile high club after the credits) it would have been perfect. Still, a damn fine game.

En réponse à

www.signal360.net

anm8rjp

Inscrit depuis 7711 Jours

My biggest complaint with COD4 retail and beta, is there is no lean/peak in the 360 version. But I'm not missing it too much anymore, but it would be nice to have. similar to Ghost recon1/GRIT.

En réponse à

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

It is nice to have. I didn't think it was going to matter much, with people shooting through walls and what not, but it crunches your hit boxes (well--not crunching like going prone/dolphin diving.. but it reduces your visible hit boxes) and makes you a tougher target anyway.. especially when they're not using deep impact. If they are using deep impact, it doesn't matter nearly as much.. but I still find it more useful than I had expected.

The M21 is abusively good. I just played a snipers only FFA game and I was the only one using the M21.. and well.. it dominated everyone. It may be a bit weaker, but the rate of fire and small recoil compared to the SVD makes it worlds better.. and when you're playing in hardcore mode it hardly matter, since it seems bullets do more damage anyway.

I'm level 37 now.. going to see if I can't hit 40 before I quit for the night. I really want the M14 and P90.

En réponse à

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

This is just among the Xfire community, but I'd say it's a good sign. The daily top 10 (Time is in minutes, I'm not sure this resets, keep in mind that it's very early in the AM in the US):

1. World of Warcraft 962,058
2. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare Multiplayer 325,101
3 .Counter-Strike: Source 217,510
4. Call of Duty 2 Multiplayer 205,689
5. Battlefield 2 131,355
6. Hellgate: London 96,094
7. Warcraft III - The Frozen Throne 82,450
8. Guild Wars 81,816
9. Silkroad Online 75,045
10. Eve Online 70,999

Woo! Of course it didn't unsettle WoW, but what can you expect. Topping CSS is a pretty big accomplishment. BF2 falls all the way down to fifth place. There's probably like 10 people playing Silkroad and Eve, but they're MMO nuts so that still accounts for massive amounts of hours ;)

It's really nice to see things mixed up a bit on xfire. This list often looks static, with things simply shifting places more than actually seeing new content on the list. When Starcraft 2 drops, I suspect we'll see Warcraft III get shoved off as well, as players migrate. It's actually really surprising to me that WCIII is the only RTS in the list, with all of the more recent releases out there. It's also surprising to see COD2 retain such a high ranking with a huge number of COD diehards switching to COD4.

On another note. Stats are stored client side for Call of Duty 4. Retarded. You better be able to back them up if you need to reinstall your client on another machine. And there's not really compelling stat tracking in game in the PC version either, it's very basic.

I'm glad that's one of the only negative comments I can make. But if I lost my progress, I'd be pretty damn pissed off.

En réponse à

This is just among the Xfire community, but I'd say it's a good sign.  The daily top 10 (Time is in minutes, I'm not sure this resets, keep in mind that it's very early in the AM in the US):

[quote] 1. World of Warcraft 962,058
2. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare Multiplayer 325,101
3 .Counter-Strike: Source 217,510
4. Call of Duty 2 Multiplayer 205,689
5. Battlefield 2 131,355
6. Hellgate: London 96,094
7. Warcraft III - The Frozen Throne 82,450
8. Guild Wars 81,816
9. Silkroad Online 75,045
10. Eve Online 70,999[/quote]

Woo! Of course it didn't unsettle WoW, but what can you expect.  Topping CSS is a pretty big accomplishment.  BF2 falls all the way down to fifth place.  There's probably like 10 people playing Silkroad and Eve, but they're MMO nuts so that still accounts for massive amounts of hours ;)

It's really nice to see things mixed up a bit on xfire.  This list often looks static, with things simply shifting places more than actually seeing new content on the list.  When Starcraft 2 drops, I suspect we'll see Warcraft III get shoved off as well, as players migrate.  It's actually really surprising to me that WCIII is the only RTS in the list, with all of the more recent releases out there.  It's also surprising to see COD2 retain such a high ranking with a huge number of COD diehards switching to COD4.

On another note.  Stats are stored client side for Call of Duty 4.  Retarded.  You better be able to back them up if you need to reinstall your client on another machine.  And there's not really compelling stat tracking in game in the PC version either, it's very basic.

I'm glad that's one of the only negative comments I can make.  But if I lost my progress, I'd be pretty damn pissed off.

Inflatable

Inscrit depuis 7651 Jours

I think the claims you finish the SP in 4-5 hours are BS.. I'm over 5 hours now already and haven't even finished Act II.. I play it on hardened though, maybe the people who rushed thru it so fast played a regular or even recruit, which is just way to easy.. On hardened and verteran you die a lot faster so rushing is not really an option..

P.s. GriftGFX, don't get the E6850, but the E6750 instead.. It offers better value for money imho.. The E6850 is still a bit to expensive..

En réponse à

http://www.cyberwarriors.nl
http://home.xmsnet.nl/bigbear/fiat124.jpg

Phaethon360

Inscrit depuis 6859 Jours

Pssh. I've got an E6600 and I'm fine. Don't need fancy things.

I just got COD4 this morning. Hated the prologue. Hated it. So confined. Kept bumping into things, like I was walking on ice. I'll probably finish the campaign before going into MP, shouldn't take long.

En réponse à

"For seven hours, all we could do was sit still and listen to them hunting us. All we could do is sit, and wait for Phaethon."

TheBeagle

Inscrit depuis 6619 Jours

Why do games not have custom game searches anymore ? Like player matches basically. Yes having partys is great, but not if you cant choose what maps you wanna play. As much as I like matchmaking I would still rather have a server list like on PC games.

About the actual game. I feel that this is the best quality COD yet. Its super polished with awesome gameplay. The multiplayer leveling gives it depth unlike most shooters on 360. SP so far has been better than I expected.

En réponse à

Sheps

Inscrit depuis 6955 Jours

Posté par Inflatable

I think the claims you finish the SP in 4-5 hours are BS.. I'm over 5 hours now already and haven't even finished Act II.. I play it on hardened though, maybe the people who rushed thru it so fast played a regular or even recruit, which is just way to easy.. On hardened and verteran you die a lot faster so rushing is not really an option..

Not really at all, i played it on regular my first time, didnt rush it at all, and i wasn't playing it for mroe then 4 hours, hell i played the Herc mission twice at that.

En réponse à

TheBeagle

Inscrit depuis 6619 Jours

Yeah, but regular is really damn easy.

En réponse à

Acert93

Inscrit depuis 6984 Jours

Posté par GriftGFX

I haven't played campaign yet.. and since I'm considering a pretty big upgrade within the next month or so, I think I might wait until I install my new hardware. I do want to see some 8800GT benchmarks though. I know I won't be seeing 60FPS @ 1920x1200.. that's what I really wanted out of my next upgrade.. but this game is making it too hard to wait until that's possible.

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/0_gaming_pc_upg...

Fairly CPU limited game.

Posté par Inflatable

P.s. GriftGFX, don't get the E6850, but the E6750 instead.. It offers better value for money imho.. The E6850 is still a bit to expensive..

How much faster is that than an X2 6000+ ($160)?

Btw, I noticed Walmart was sold out of CoD4 locally. It seems CoD4 is sold out in a lot of places:

http://firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?search...

En réponse à

My Blog: http://www.NextGenThinkTank.com

JeromeMorrow

Inscrit depuis 6882 Jours

Posté par anm8rjp

My biggest complaint with COD4 retail and beta, is there is no lean/peak in the 360 version. But I'm not missing it too much anymore, but it would be nice to have. similar to Ghost recon1/GRIT.

I seem to remeber there being a lean/peak mechanic in COD, the first one. Am I thinking of another game, or did they just choose to leave this good mechanic for some strange reason? Anyways, I'm not really to bummed, game doesn't really need it, it is way to fast paced for a lean mechanic to really be useful.

En réponse à

www.signal360.net

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

Posté par Inflatable

P.s. GriftGFX, don't get the E6850, but the E6750 instead.. It offers better value for money imho.. The E6850 is still a bit to expensive..

@ $279 it's still fairly tempting for a 3.0GHz C2D.

Posté par Acert93

Fairly CPU limited game.

I wish people would do some more in depth testing. I'd like to know how close to 60fps I could get w/ the E6850 + 8800GT at high resolutions. Everyone uses 4XAA/16XAF, when at that resolution I could honestly live without anti-aliasing at all if the performance increase was significant. No one talks about adjusting settings to reach peak performance at high resolution, it's always about maximum settings. I could live with 1600x1200 + 4XAA/16XAF on max, if that's close to 60fps, but I'd like to know if I could max out my monitor and still see that sort of framerate performance (1920x1200).

I'm a little concerned by FiringSquads results. With the X6800 (which I imagine produces somewhat simular results to the E6850) they're seeing an average framerate of 45 FPS @ 16x12. That's shit with the 8800GT. Anandtech seemed to have much different results, but he doesn't even mention the settings he uses at all (in regards to AF/AA).. yet he comes up w/ 60fps in the same configuration.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3140...

Maybe Anand just doesn't use AA at all in his tests. His numbers are WAY off of FiringSquads results. His UT3 performance indicates that this hardware is MUCH more capable at 1920x1200 than FS. Anand gets 80fps with the 8800GT + X6800 at 1920x1200 and FiringSquad is getting 40. WTF.

En réponse à

[quote=Inflatable]P.s. GriftGFX, don't get the E6850, but the E6750 instead.. It offers better value for money imho.. The E6850 is still a bit to expensive..[/quote]

@ $279 it's still fairly tempting for a 3.0GHz C2D.

[quote=Acert93]Fairly CPU limited game.[/quote]

I wish people would do some more in depth testing.  I'd like to know how close to 60fps I could get w/ the E6850 + 8800GT at high resolutions.  Everyone uses 4XAA/16XAF, when at that resolution I could honestly live without anti-aliasing at all if the performance increase was significant.  No one talks about adjusting settings to reach peak performance at high resolution, it's always about maximum settings.  I could live with 1600x1200 + 4XAA/16XAF on max, if that's close to 60fps, but I'd like to know if I could max out my monitor and still see that sort of framerate performance (1920x1200).

I'm a little concerned by FiringSquads results.  With the X6800 (which I imagine produces somewhat simular results to the E6850) they're seeing an average framerate of 45 FPS @ 16x12.  That's shit with the 8800GT.  Anandtech seemed to have much different results, but he doesn't even mention the settings he uses at all (in regards to AF/AA).. yet he comes up w/ 60fps in the same configuration.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3140&p=9

Maybe Anand just doesn't use AA at all in his tests.  His numbers are WAY off of FiringSquads results.  His UT3 performance indicates that this hardware is MUCH more capable at 1920x1200 than FS.  Anand gets 80fps with the 8800GT + X6800 at 1920x1200 and FiringSquad is getting 40.  WTF.

Acert93

Inscrit depuis 6984 Jours

CoD titles have lean on the PC side. I don't know about the consoles. Did CoD2 on the 360 have lean?

En réponse à

My Blog: http://www.NextGenThinkTank.com

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

No lean on the consoles.. and Jerome is wrong, it's not way too fast paced for it to be really useful. Surprised me too, but I find myself using it quite a bit and it will save your ass, especially at long range.

En réponse à

UrukHaiPT

Inscrit depuis 6541 Jours

Got my copy today! Awsome game!!

Didnt even touch SP yet, MP all the way :D
Currently lvl 20...

To PC owners, that have xfire, add me so we can play some games together :)
My xfire name: uruk1986

En réponse à

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

Sent you a friend req.

En réponse à

JeromeMorrow

Inscrit depuis 6882 Jours

Posté par GriftGFX

No lean on the consoles.. and Jerome is wrong, it's not way too fast paced for it to be really useful. Surprised me too, but I find myself using it quite a bit and it will save your ass, especially at long range.

Well, I do remember back when I had a pc capable of running games, such as the first CoD, lean/peak was useful. And damn, 64 player battles, that was awesome, admittedly 32 players was the sweet spot for big battles, but 360 doesn't even come close to that. I really hope they release an update which will allow 24 players.

/sigh, I miss pc gaming.

En réponse à

www.signal360.net

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

This games maps aren't suitable for 32 players anyway. In that department you're not missing much.. 32 player servers suck. It's just too chaotic for its own good. I hope they release some bigger maps.. it's almost as bad as 64 players was in COD2 (which wasn't officially supported).

En réponse à

GriftGFX

Inscrit depuis 7014 Jours

So what's everyones favorite guns + perks so far? Here's a rundown of my current loadouts:

Assault RevA: M16 + M203, Stopping Power, Steady Aim, Stun Grenades
Assault RevB: M4 + M203, Stopping Power, Steady Aim, Stun Grenades
Assault RevC: M16 + Red dot, 3x Frags, Stopping Power, Steady Aim, Stun Grenades
SMG RevA: P90 + Red dot, 3x Frags, Stopping Power, Steady Aim, Stun Grenades
Final Slot: AK47 + M203, M16 + Red dot, Overkill, Steady Aim, Stun Grenades

I change them around quite a bit.. and I wish there were more slots. I'd like to have an M21 loadout as well, for example, and I plan on messing around with the M14 later tonight once I unlock it. I still haven't even tried the G36C, which I got last night. Maybe I'll throw that into the mix in the final slot loadout.

I hope 1.1 comes with more slots!

En réponse à

Indiana Jones et le Cercle Ancien

Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver 1-2 Remastered

Assassin's Creed Shadows

GSY Review : Life is Strange: Double Exposure

On sort du train-train quotidien avec Loco Motive

Notre vidéo Switch de Ys X: Nordics