Am i the only one who think that Cod4 is damn overrated. I didn't see anything new and shocking in singleplayer or multiplayer. What the shit in Cod4 makes it one of the best games 2007? The Multiplayer was the same DM shiat what iv'e seen in previous cods and the singleplayer too. Friendly soldiers were idiots and so on. What do you think? Is it overrated?
(I dont know if theres a thread about this already.)

no. this game was amazing in the storyline and the mulitplayer, because there is more than just deathmatch. and the ability to make your own custom classes with different abilities for what role you want to play.

outsiderjc:
no. this game was amazing in the storyline and the mulitplayer, because there is more than just deathmatch. and the ability to make your own custom classes with different abilities for what role you want to play.

yeah, and all the "other" modes are, AT BEST, crappy knockoffs of battlefield and css modes but with no more depth than the average ctf. sp was criminally short with little replay value, linear corridors 5-6 feet wide and it holds you hand so much the damn thing might as well be a rail shooter, seriously,halo 3 deserves more praise than cod4.

oh, and custom classes arent anywhere NEAR anything new, battlefield has had them for years and that series wasant even the first to do it either. same is true with the bullet penetration, anyone that thinks its such a big deal is stupid. first off, that features not even new, and second since when the hell does a 9mm handgun have the capability to fire through a foot of solid concrete, yet it cant pierce a 2mm thick barrell? the bullet penetration is buggered up the arse to say the least.

and finally the storyline is the same thing we've seen before, middle east, nuclear missles stolen, communists, etc.. its been done before.

EXTREMELY over rated.

outsiderjc:
no. this game was amazing in the storyline and the mulitplayer, because there is more than just deathmatch. and the ability to make your own custom classes with different abilities for what role you want to play.

The custom classes are fine, but then servers are full of mega-customedcybergun owners and they are impossible to beat. The story wasn't any special. If you think that so i think that you haven't seen a game with a good story. Its true that theres more than just a deathmatch, but if you want any XP so you have to go on dm servers cause in HQ and other gamemodes you just get pwnt if you arent good. This game isn't a piece of shit but it's not good either. There's a li'l propaganda and some fight's are annoying cause you have to play it all over again, and again.
Role's, right. There arent enough big maps for sniping for example. IMO.

It's a little overrated to me. I still think Halo 3 is wayyy better.

Oh but wait yayyyyyy I customize the look and features of my gun! Oh wait... I can only have one add-on at a time? Explain to me why can't a gun have a red dot sight and a silencer?
One thing I do like though is the different camo looks for guns... that's it.

And yes the Single Player was amazing but INCREDIBLY short. Not much depth in there at all... just some rushed storyline. But for some credit to the game, the story was good... for what it was. The only thing that saved its ass was the multiplayer and they even fucked that up. Constant party closings, host ended game situation, and the laggy shit also.

The multiplayer gameplay gets repetitive and boring. The only playlist I play on now is Search and Destroy and that's the only thing keeping me playing the game.

In the Campaign, there's only one level worth replaying and that's the "All Ghillied Up" one.

Oh and least I forget the thing I hate most of all about the multiplayer. The queers who overuse the "Juggernaught" perk and "Martyrdom" perk. If you use it, die.

My verdict: OVERRATED

COD4 is just holding me over till Battlefield: Bad Company comes out in March! :D

Yes it is overratted , the perks system is not balanced, the weapon customization is lacking. But I do think it is orders of magnitude better than anything currently out in terms of fun save perhaps UT3.

Sure it's overrated but it's great. The storyline wasn't terrible and some of the missions were quite good and moderately unique such as the Chernobyl one where you are sneaking around at foot level or gunning the big airplane whichamacallity. I wish they had invested in an AI that was worth shooting instead of more infinitely respawning buildings, squad commands, real bullet penetration instead of the gimmicky PoS it has, and realistic add-on configurations so, as OP pointed out, you could have a sight and a silencer on a gun but that is quite a wish list for a series which has almost no imagination. Of course, once you get through all my requests what you are left with is R6: Ravenshield but playing a character who has better aim so...whatever, I agree it's overrated.

The only thing that kept me playing the multiplayer was levelling up and since I put it down to play Psychonauts I have only picked it up once. I had a similar reaction to BF2142 and BF2 where I would get a few upgrades, put it down for one reason or another, then come back and realize how boring the game was without that draw...

I think it's over-rated, but it's still a damn good game. The multiplayer can be frustrating as hell sometimes, but it's still one of the best out there and the singleplayer, while short and occasionally aggravating, is still fun. I think it deserves all the perfect scores it gets, but it is by no means as good as people are saying it is.

genebeef:
same here, there's something about extremely linear levels that doesn't make a game revoluntionary. at least SOME multiple paths would be nice.

Holy cow, have you people even played the game?

DownOnTheUpside:
Explain to me why can't a gun have a red dot sight and a silencer?

Balance.

All-in-all, I would say that this game is overrated. Even the hardcore complainers like Yahtzee skip over such glaring flaws as the checkpoint system or the dogs. Overall, though, it still is a great game. Just not as good as other games that AREN'T getting game of the year awards, like the Orange Box.

REDPill357:
All-in-all, I would say that this game is overrated. Even the hardcore complainers like Yahtzee skip over such glaring flaws as the checkpoint system or the dogs. Overall, though, it still is a great game. Just not as good as other games that AREN'T getting game of the year awards, like the Orange Box.

They released the Orange Box as a whole package for a reason: no one in their right mind would pay $50 for any single part of the whole package. Portal and TF2 are great games but they aren't well rounded (Portal is low on content and all offline while TF2 is all online without a campaign), Ep. 1 sucked patootie and should even have been part of the package, and Ep. 2 is, once again, short, all offline, and nothing special.

The whole box, taken as a single achievement, is better than CoD4. Portal is more innovative than CoD4, Ep. 2 is more polished, TF2's online play is as good or better than CoD4's but as a single game mediocrity with the minimal amount of innovation to keep a series alive wins this year...

Oh, and I'm not trying to be an ass just venting.

How can you call a game overrated for being linear? A game should be judged on the quality of the levels, not whether you can open a door or not.

People have been critisizing the online mose aswell. I didn't find anything wrong with it, the match types are extensive, the maps are decent, the class system is a nice touch and it's all relatively lag free. If you are pissed off that hosts frequently disconnect and parties end unexpectedly then you are probably playing with americans and so it's your fault for doing so.

all these things are minor nitpicks and do not determine whether a game's good or bad.

If you asked me to name a game which I think is overrated then I would choose halo 3.
All it is is an average first person shooter with the brightness scaled up to 1001.
Alot of xbox 360 gamers would disagree with me they can just explain what's so good about it,

If the level design is linear it might end up boring the player, I do not consider that a minor complaint. It has everything to do with whether the game is good or not.

ghost568:
How can you call a game overrated for being linear? A game should be judged on the quality of the levels, not whether you can open a door or not.

People have been critisizing the online mose aswell. I didn't find anything wrong with it, the match types are extensive, the maps are decent, the class system is a nice touch and it's all relatively lag free. If you are pissed off that hosts frequently disconnect and parties end unexpectedly then you are probably playing with americans and so it's your fault for doing so.

all these things are minor nitpicks and do not determine whether a game's good or bad.

If you asked me to name a game which I think is overrated then I would choose halo 3.
All it is is an average first person shooter with the brightness scaled up to 1001.
Alot of xbox 360 gamers would disagree with me they can just explain what's so good about it,

Agreed

CoD4 is the best FPS out atm. I've played Halo 3 and thought, meh. But I played CoD4 and fell in love with it and play it constantly. Over-rated? Nah. You see all of the other shooters out there right now and think "Hmm... this is really good". Its like being a fat person in a room full of obese tanks. At least you can say that you're the skinniest in the room, even though your not thin.

If another shooter came out that was of high quality, then CoD4 may not have gotten so many accolades, but there was nothing out there to challenge it. CoD4 is great, it may have what alot of people call "CSS gameplay" but thats how the CoD series has always been, just that there weren't that many automatic weapons. (Also, CoD4 doesn't have the uber-1-hit weapon that CSS does.)

CoD4 is amazing. Over-rated? I dont think so. The game is still being the top sold game for the PC and Xbox 360 here in Australia, so for it to still be popular after about a month really tells me something.

Yes there are a few bugs (Even Yahtzee complained about some clunky controls in his Phsyconauts review) but that doesn't stop the game being fun. CoD4 is great, and alot of us love it.

Hey, Yahtzee liked it. If Yahtzee, hard-arse that he is, thinks a game is good, then that must mean that a game is great.

Bocca:
Am i the only one who think that Cod4 is damn overrated. I didn't see anything new and shocking in singleplayer or multiplayer. What the shit in Cod4 makes it one of the best games 2007? The Multiplayer was the same DM shiat what iv'e seen in previous cods and the singleplayer too. Friendly soldiers were idiots and so on. What do you think? Is it overrated?
(I dont know if theres a thread about this already.)

No.
CoD4 is one of the best games of 2007. If i can play the game and never shoot anybody, the AI is doing pretty well. (i do die over and over to be fair, and its only the first fev parts)

I have some things to say about COD4...

the online is great but the real thing i dont like about COD (and this is purely opinionated) is the feel of the game; the way you run, jump and shoot just feels wrong.

Another thing is the fact that you die and kill others too fast. While this is fine in the Campaign, this can get a little frustrating in multiplayer, you get shot in the back and have no time to react. Also, personally i feel when you kill someone it isn't as satisfying as lets say, TF2.

I realize they try to make this game feel realistic as possible, but that can only go too far, i mean playing this game, you still realize that you are playing a videogame... its not as immersive as i think the developers wanted it to be.

There are some things wrong with the online servers... that can be overlooked, i guess

I do not dislike COD4, the campaign was great but i think one thing about this game is the fact that it is part of an extremely long series and in two years from now there will be another Call of Duty and nobody will remember this one.

I did not find myself getting into Cod 4 much at all...In a similar sense to Yahtzee, I'm just not a fan of these kind of war games. Sure it mixes things up, adds nice touches. But its still not my kind of game.

I've found myself being more immersed in Halo 3's multiplayer and singleplayer over Cod4's...However I've been a long time fan of the game as opposed to cod4 being the first cod in the series I've played.

*Unfortunately* I don't see what people rant and rave about with this game. If only I could because the way people describe it it should be a really really compelling game.

i just play cod4 till i buy tf2.
one more point , there was this level in cod4 in some farm. theres a fence and the screenj flashes press spacebar to climb over , so i press it ....... then another fence comes but i cant climb it ITS A FENCE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.IW if u want to make a game linear make some sensible blockages and not some stones and pebbles OR FENCES. learn sumthing from valve or crytek or even id

Linearity isn't something that can just be overlooked anymore because there are so many games, some not so young anymore, which have allowed the player greater freedom of choice. CoD doesn't even manage to be creative with the linear style like Half-Life 1 or 2, it just puts you in a corridor, throws a few things in your way, and unleashes an infinite horde onto you.

The campaign is interesting, the settings are well done, the missions are fun and the gameplay is good. I have no problem admitting these things, CoD is a great Call of Duty game, it is even a good FPS, however, true to CoD style it falls short of anything resembling independent innovation and only half-asses blatant theft from it's competitors.

What is the point of judging a game if you aren't going to hold it up to whatever you consider to be the pinnacle of it's genre? Call of Duty is the king of the Call of Duty games, it's better than the Medal of Honor games, it's (in my opinion) better than Halo and I might even be talked into saying it is better than CS: Source but you would have to be extremely persuasive because I'm still playing Source and I haven't picked up CoD4 in a month... But these are all mediocre games that I'm comparing CoD4 to, they are either series which have shown no drive to innovate or, in the case of CS:S, a blatant copy. I wouldn't put it above any of the Battlefield games, I wouldn't say it's near Half-Life, I probably wouldn't even put it near Crysis because even though I have plenty of problems with Crysis I respect the fact that it tried very hard to be something different.

Just because I'm in the mood to nitpick:

ghost568:
People have been critisizing the online mose aswell. I didn't find anything wrong with it, the match types are extensive, the maps are decent, the class system is a nice touch and it's all relatively lag free. If you are pissed off that hosts frequently disconnect and parties end unexpectedly then you are probably playing with americans and so it's your fault for doing so.

The online mode is less than inspired. Even the developers freely admit that every single map was designed around Team Deathmatch and it is quite easy to tell when playing any other game mode. The class system is a blatant tool for stringing players along whose only job is to give you some sense of satisfaction in doing the same crap over and over again so you don't stop playing. I guarantee that without prestige mode the game would die out in half as much time.

Another thing is the fact that you die and kill others too fast. While this is fine in the Campaign, this can get a little frustrating in multiplayer, you get shot in the back and have no time to react. Also, personally i feel when you kill someone it isn't as satisfying as lets say, TF2.

I feel that is one of the most compelling features of the online play. Playing CoD4 online really forces you to pay an extra bit of attention to your surroundings because you can be killed at any time from any direction without being given a chance to fight back. The biggest thing I had to adjust to was keeping myself under cover because in CS:S you can strafe all over the place with no cover and still not die. It's a pain, sure, but it also forces you to pay more attention and rewards people who use the map to their advantage instead of relying on reaction time (which is good for me because I have piss poor reaction time).

As a footnote I have to say the most disappointing part of CoD4 for me were the abilities (radar, airstrike and helicopter). They aren't as annoying on the console but I play on a PC and when you get more than a 16 or 18 person server going and the airstrike and helicopter are going constantly from the first minute or two it really screws with the whole experience.

REDPill357:
All-in-all, I would say that this game is overrated. Even the hardcore complainers like Yahtzee skip over such glaring flaws as the checkpoint system or the dogs.

The dogs were great! The whole thing was just brilliantly brought together. That's what made it so great. It's very similar to all the other CoD's (aside from CoD3 but we don't talk about that) in the fighting sence, and the story is also similar to nearly every modern combat book/film/game but it was given a good buff and proded in the right direction. Come on, you can't complain about the presedents finally moments in the opening credits, or the nuclear fallout, or the amazing ending. It all works together so well.

Blah, I hate CoD4 in the same way PC elitists hate Halo 3.

While CoD4 is a very good game with excellent scripted sequences and solid gameplay, it really isn't anything new. The campaign has no replay value either. What frustrates me is that other games such as Halo 3 aren't getting the praise they deserve. Halo 3 had excellent community tools that serve to strengthen the Halo fan base. Bioshock had a narrative that outshined many of the FPS of 2007. Hell, even Crysis should have received more praise than CoD4.

CoD4 was released on the 360, the PS3, and the PC, and so Halo 3 is getting bashed by people who have really NEVER played Halo 3 (PS3 fanboys, PC elitists.)

To me, CoD4 exemplifies instant-gratification. Every kill grants you exp, and that makes people feel good. Getting rank ups is ridiculously easy and in turn gives the player an incentive to play more. Also, the matchmaking of CoD4 isn't exactly balanced. Where as in Halo 3, you usually get paired with players of somewhat similar skill, CoD4 puts you against level 55s when you're level 1. The level 55s then proceed in kicking ass with all their perks and weapons. As we all know, when we dominate, we have fun. When we don't, we sulk. Add that factor to the people who have never played a Xbox360 game in their life, and you have a big reason for why people love CoD4 (and hate Halo 3).

Count_de_Monet:

Portal and TF2 are great games but they aren't well rounded (Portal is low on content and all offline while TF2 is all online without a campaign)

I know this is off topic, but I gotta say i disagree here, Portal has to be one of the best games i have played in years. ok, so it's short, but the gameplay more than makes up for it. I wont talk about gameplay, cos it's been done to death, but i honestly think if portal was any longer, it would quickly lose it's charm. as for the issue of online play, if someone could come up with a decent concept involving a complete lack of weapons and the portal gun that would actually be fun, then i'd be well up for it.
As for TF2, of course there's no campaign, it's a purely online game. that's the point of it, that's waht it was designed for. it was never marketed as anything else, so why bitch about it?

Why the fuck does it always come down to COD4 vs Halo 3? I own both games, I've played Halo 3 obsessively since launch and only just got around to buying COD4 this week. I thought both have well-planned campaigns, and I'm sure I'll enjoy the multiplayer for COD4 too when I get around to it.

But what I realise now is that you shouldn't compare these games. If you like one more than the other, that's great. But Halo 3 is about being the hero, and giving you all the tools to make that possible. COD4 is not about that at all. You get given the tools to survive against people who are evenly matched, and every encounter is a struggle to make it out alive.
Just because you appreciate one more than the other doesn't make the other one bad. I like to think I like both equally.

Back to the issue at hand: yes, COD4 is overrated and overhyped. It's rampant fanboyism. Pretty much anything with a fanbase is overrated because as soon as something is criticsed, people defend it. Things escalate out of control and we wind up with that mindless wankery that ultimately ruins everything.
This doesn't actually make the game bad, though. It's really quite good, as long as you see it for what it actually is.

I say, cod4 is just cod1 and 2 with a few new spices. Cod2 was great because there were a great atmosphere. Cod4 didnt.

Cod2 pretty much sucked, any ww2 game depicting panzerII's as the main axis tankforce should be dragged out of their office and shot. It looked nice, but the gameplay was a step down compared to cod1 actually.

Cod4 is popular because: it's better then most goodlooking fps atm storywise, it's polished properly, there aren't that many polished modernday shooters atm to compete it with. Yes the mp features are nothing new, the sp is still bugged by insane ai decisions and crappy liniear leveldesign. It's still fun though, something alot of games lack these days. I'm still going with cod1:united offensive as having the best mp in the series. Anybody who played it knows what I'm talking about. It's like bf42, the cod way. So is it overrated? Yes, my guess is people just never played anything yet that came close to the experience yet. I'm sure I'm not alone when I say there are ALOT of people these days that only play games that are new in the store and barely know any slightly older but better game experiences, favoring graphics over gameplay. Perhaps the online servers of older games are emptying more or people are just spoiled with wowing at graphics?

EittilDratsab:
Also, the matchmaking of CoD4 isn't exactly balanced. Where as in Halo 3, you usually get paired with players of somewhat similar skill, CoD4 puts you against level 55s when you're level 1. The level 55s then proceed in kicking ass with all their perks and weapons.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there, mostly because having a high rank does not mean you are good, it only means that you've put a whole lot of time into the game. You could just sit in ever game, not fire your gun once and still get to rank 55. I know I've been paired with level 50+ when I was level 10 and I pretty well wasted them.

The matchmaking skill probably has more to do with their kills to deaths ratio than their rank.

DownOnTheUpside:
It's a little overrated to me. I still think Halo 3 is wayyy better.

I stopped reading.

Yes it is very overrated indeed. halo 3 is WAYYYYYY BETTER. It has the better storyline and the better action.

COD4 is a great game....but i would rate it the SECOND BEST game of 2007....not the first. That honor definately goes to Halo 3.

I'd have to agree with CoD4 being overrated. I didn't play much of the multiplayer, i'll admit to that, but the singleplayer gave me little to no desire to push any further. The checkpoints were poorly spaced, enough bullets flew through walls to reduce most buildings to rubble, the helping ai were as useless as trying to stop bullets with paper. Despite not being the unit leader, the ai units were constantly waiting for the player to lead the way. And when the morons got in the way getting shot in the back i had tom redo from the last checkppoint as punishment for friendly fire. For a game based on realism there were endless respawns till the player progressed, and then when the player did progress it was entirely possible to get swamped, lets add to the fact that the enemy almoast always constantly know where you are hiding around a corner or whatever without ever possibly having seen you, and they also seem to have endless supplies of grenades. Both unrealistic and highly irritating. One final gripe I have was with a few of the scenes, personally i found the survival of a nuke only to die of radiation poisoning or wounds shortly after, while having to spend the time clawing the character along, hugely irritating, same with kidnapping scenes. They could have been done better graphically without player involvement.

On the whole I believe I'd have had more fun being skewered by 200 spoons than playing this game, but thats just my opinion.