Call of Duty: Big Red One trailer

Commented on 2005-10-31 18:56:51

what's even sadder is that there will probably be someone commenting "Omg that looks teh ugly for tehn 360" not even reading what you stated. But I don't think people are that dumb.

In reply to

Manager

Commented on 2005-10-31 19:00:59 In reply to nilam0

Posted by nilam0

what's even sadder is that there will probably be someone commenting "Omg that looks teh ugly for tehn 360" not even reading what you stated. But I don't think people are that dumb.

Well, some people kind of made a perfect example for that in the last news about the game.

I think it's stupid. The games have NOTHING in common, COD2 and COD2: BRO. They could have named it "War game: A new war game" or "The maginificant story of Peter Berg" or whatever. Seriously, Call of Duty 2?
COD is about doing different campaigns the same time, following different stories. BRO is about one character. Just another World War 2 game.

In reply to

Dukemaster

Commented on 2005-10-31 19:20:24

It's all about the name offcourse. Call of Duty is a well known title and a big franchise, so that will boost the sales of this ''new war game''. ;)

In reply to

Slabs

Commented on 2005-10-31 19:22:40

They should have just called it "The Big Red One" and used the movie characters, and then bundled the DVD movie with a "Special Edition".

In reply to

Scarface

Commented on 2005-10-31 19:27:15

If it plays like the first xbox COD then stay well away. These console versions are just like the medal of honours, great on PC and crap on consoles.
The 360 looks to change this trend in about 3 weeks.

In reply to

SimonM7

Commented on 2005-10-31 22:24:29

*Takes 3 weeks and slaps Scarface across the face, ironically leaving a scar.* You americans and your bloody 360 launch two weeks early! :)

In reply to

amerakindesi

Commented on 2005-11-01 00:45:57

Dudes, Call of Duty for the xbox sucks so bad. I can't get past the game, not because I suck, because I am awsome at FPS, but because I have to play for 1 hour on a mission, and I lose because I am not able to protect some object they never even reveal to me. There is no save option in the game! So I have to start that 1 hour of pointless waiting for the computer AI to advance and keep up with me again and again. And the game is so glitchy that I might die out of nowhere, and not the even realise the reason behind it.

If this is 10X better than the 1st Call Of Duty for the xbox, then this will suck.

In reply to

LEBATO

Commented on 2005-11-01 01:17:27

^^^^Yes we know. The game is really bad, but who cares about that when the 360 is so close to release and you can get the better version. You can also buy Brothers in Arms which is not a bad alternative at all for some WWII acion on Xbox.

In reply to

munkieNS

Commented on 2005-11-01 05:39:40 In reply to LEBATO

3 weeks? This is due out tomorrow guys...

In reply to

Slabs

Commented on 2005-11-01 09:22:43 In reply to munkieNS

I completed the PC version of the REAL Call of Duty 2 last night, and my GOD is it tiring! Not because it's a chore but because the intensity is there from start to finish! I can't wait to see how the 360 handles some of the missions (Hill 400 for example) because I don't think my PC gave me the full experience as I had options turned down or off.

Posted by munkieNS

3 weeks? This is due out tomorrow guys...

3 weeks refers to the 360 version.

In reply to

devilsgrin_6

Commented on 2005-11-01 09:28:07

It's not the same as the first Call of Duty on Xbox, it's made by a different development house totally and the control/game is much more like the PC version.

In reply to

GriftGFX

Commented on 2005-11-01 10:33:45

Slabs: I'm about half way through, and It is pretty intense..on both me and my PC hardware. I love it so far though, I'm on the Tanker missions in Africa at the moment..very fun game. If the 360 version is indeed locked @ 60 FPS, that's a treat.

devilsgrin: Well, the game really isn't much more like the PC version than the first one--In some regards they're actually even furthar apart. Big Red One is played from the perspective of all US troops, through one particular campaign, right? The actual Call of Duty puts you into the roll of several different soldiers through out the war, in different armies and in different parts of the war and world...

To me, Activision calling this Call of Duty 2 is no different than EA calling their new Sims title "Sims 2" on Xbox, or that average pile that is "Modern Combat" BF2--it's a damn shame--and I think it makes the lesser product suffer.

Any game calling itself "Battlefield 2", or "Sims 2", or "Call of Duty 2", should atleast be a good representation of what they're trying to fool you into thinking that you're getting--if they're not, it's an insult to the consumers intelligence.

Calling "Modern Combat" BF2 is a joke..I hope that reviewers take that into consideration when handing out scores for these games. </rant>

Activision is doing the right thing with COD2 on X360--They wanted a game that could take on Medal of Honor--and they're finally going to get a game that basically destroys it.

In reply to

Slabs:  I'm about half way through, and It is pretty intense..on both me and my PC hardware.  I love it so far though, I'm on the Tanker missions in Africa at the moment..very fun game.  If the 360 version is indeed locked @ 60 FPS, that's a treat.

devilsgrin:  Well, the game really isn't much more like the PC version than the first one--In some regards they're actually even furthar apart.  Big Red One is played from the perspective of all US troops, through one particular campaign, right?  The actual Call of Duty puts you into the roll of several different soldiers through out the war, in different armies and in different parts of the war and world...

To me, Activision calling this Call of Duty 2 is no different than EA calling their new Sims title "Sims 2" on Xbox, or that average pile that is "Modern Combat" BF2--it's a damn shame--and I think it makes the lesser product suffer.

Any game calling itself "Battlefield 2", or "Sims 2", or "Call of Duty 2", should atleast be a good representation of what they're trying to fool you into thinking that you're getting--if they're not, it's an insult to the consumers intelligence.

Calling "Modern Combat" BF2 is a joke..I hope that reviewers take that into consideration when handing out scores for these games. </rant>

Activision is doing the right thing with COD2 on X360--They wanted a game that could take on Medal of Honor--and they're finally going to get a game that basically destroys it.

Slabs

Commented on 2005-11-01 14:53:14

I had to turn DirectX 9 effects off toward the end of the game because it just gets so damn crazy! :) I'm gonna give it a rent so I can get the full harrowing experience!

In reply to

GriftGFX

Commented on 2005-11-01 15:26:36 In reply to Slabs

Posted by Slabs

I had to turn DirectX 9 effects off toward the end of the game because it just gets so damn crazy! :) I'm gonna give it a rent so I can get the full harrowing experience!

I think I'm starting to experience a bit of that "so damn crazy". I'm nearing the end of the campaign in Africa, and the last few stages have been framerate hell--There have been times where I had to adjust settings for certain tasks because the framerate was seriously effecting my ability to aim :(

It's sort of ashame, most games I can get away with playing the campaign on relatively high settings--Even if I'm sacraficing some frames in SP I don't mind much--I want to see the game in it's full glory. This game though, I can see myself dropping it down, perhaps even dropping it out of widescreen (I don't want to, it looks so cool @ 1600x900!) to complete the game..

Beautiful game..and a very good WWII experience. There are a few portions of the game that have questionable map / mission design imo--but they're relatively few and far between eachother so I consider that quite forgivable.

I've been on something on an FPS kick lately, and can ya blame me? So many good solid shooters this year, it's been nice :)

In reply to

[quote=Slabs]I had to turn DirectX 9 effects off toward the end of the game because it just gets so damn crazy! :) I'm gonna give it a rent so I can get the full harrowing experience![/quote]

I think I'm starting to experience a bit of that "so damn crazy".  I'm nearing the end of the campaign in Africa, and the last few stages have been framerate hell--There have been times where I had to adjust settings for certain tasks because the framerate was seriously effecting my ability to aim :(

It's sort of ashame, most games I can get away with playing the campaign on relatively high settings--Even if I'm sacraficing some frames in SP I don't mind much--I want to see the game in it's full glory.  This game though, I can see myself dropping it down, perhaps even dropping it out of widescreen (I don't want to, it looks so cool @ 1600x900!) to complete the game..

Beautiful game..and a very good WWII experience.  There are a few portions of the game that have questionable map / mission design imo--but they're relatively few and far between eachother so I consider that quite forgivable.

I've been on something on an FPS kick lately, and can ya blame me?  So many good solid shooters this year, it's been nice :)

JWheezy

Commented on 2005-11-01 18:02:07

I played the demo for this game at walmart I must say wow its fun and graphics are great

In reply to