Call of Duty 4: Modern combat trailer up

[Arwin]

http://ps3.gamezone.com/gamesell/p32387.htm 9.6 (or 9.5 on 360 for some weird reason)

5 hours is very short. Discuss:

- it's been an online game at hart
- they ran out of disc space
- they ran out of artists



(No I'd rather you didn't actually )

 

[AlphaWolf]

9.6 (or 9.5 on 360 for some weird reason)

Different reviewers.

 

[deepbrown]

PC IGN 9.4

GameTrailers 9.4

TeamXbox 9.7

On the 5 hours, Gametrailers I think said it well when they pointed out some of the additional SP options like Arcade mode and their advanced difficulties if you want to replay SP. Arcade mode is complete old school NES style scoring. Time limit, combo streak scoring, limited lives, etc.

While 5 hours is short, the game has a pretty robust MP. 16 maps and 6 modes (TDM, Search&Destroy, Domination, etc) as well as gameplay modifiers like "hardcore" (which takes away most of the HUD and makes the bullets far more deadly). On top of that you have all the classes, perks, and loadout customizations within a fairly quick "rank up" system (unlike BF2).

If you are a SP only gamer, then this is probably a rental unless you really like what CoD does (and CoD is definately one of the better SP FPS on the market in terms of quality). But if you are a MP gamer at all I don't think there is even a question.

I know I am picking it up this week.

Would you give 9.5 to a 5hour game? Surely these reviewers are letting them get away with it. Also leaves a bitter taste in my mouth after other games get slaughtered for it.

 

[Platon]

I was really looking forward to this but as mostly a single player gamer that 5 hour length is way too short. I will go for Naruto now, if nothing else change my gamming genre for a while and when the price drops for COD4 then I will most likely get it...

 

[deepbrown]

I was really looking forward to this but as mostly a single player gamer that 5 hour length is way too short. I will go for Naruto now, if nothing else change my gamming genre for a while and when the price drops for COD4 then I will most likely get it...

But the single-player does look incredible. We have far too many games to buy. Orange Box, GOD4, Uncharted, AC...I mean the list goes on. Has there been a year with so many good games?

 

[archangelmorph]

Not so much a fan of "realistic war simulator" titles (of any era) but this game peaked my interest right up until hearing that the game is only 5 hours long..

Sounds like FPS gaming nowadays seems to put so much of an emphasis on multiplayer that, if you don't have the ability to play online or just don't care about it, alot of developers don't only want to say "***k you" but also want to circumcise the single player experience in order to have the resources to puff up the multiplayer..

I really don't think i'll be buying this game now..

 

[Arwin]

Eurogramer 9/10
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=87019&page=2

I think they list Arcade mode, achievements and excellent online (or 4 player splitscreen) as one of the reasons why they think the game has excellent long term value.

 

[rekator]

Take care of Jeuxvideo.com tests… Their audience for Jeuxvideo.com is around 10-14 years kids and Japan fans…
So generally all the western production was under noted and Japan production, particularity JRPGs, always other noted…
So if Jeuxvideo.com give 5 hours of gameplay is probably in easy mode, by experience they always test game in easy mode due to they audience, remember 10-14 years kids
So when you know this you can adjust their tests
But actually they change their orientation, it a signe that french game market have change… In their Halo3 test they descend the game but give 17/20…
And the version of COD4 their test seem more the 360.

 

[Daozang]

Now I don't have to duel on it... 5 hours is too short for me. And since I'm not so much into realistic shooters, I'm not buying it. Do I see a trend though?
Many games have this problem this generation, and five hours is the new low...

 

[Platon]

But the single-player does look incredible. We have far too many games to buy. Orange Box, GOD4, Uncharted, AC...I mean the list goes on. Has there been a year with so many good games?

Yeah, I agree, there are lots and lots of games right now, and I do not doubt that even sort, the single player part of COD4 is exeptional, still, I would rather pay the full price for games that will last me a bit longer, and there are several of those as said right now and then at a later time go for COD4, next year the bargain bins should be full of goodies...

 

[Acert93]

Would you give 9.5 to a 5hour game? Surely these reviewers are letting them get away with it. Also leaves a bitter taste in my mouth after other games get slaughtered for it.

CoD4 isn't a 5 hour game.

CoD4 has a SP campaign that takes 5 hours for a single run through (+ replayability with arcade mode), and hundreds of hours in MP.

Seeing as TF2 got me to toss out $30 for a MP only game (loving it to death) and I was more than happy to slap down $50 for Battlefield 1942 and $50 for Battlefield 2 -- both MP only -- the fact such a killer MP game has an intense 5 hour SP campaign with a cool retro arcade mode, I don't see the problem with $50 for it or a high score if it is a great game.

I didn't mind when Bioshock got high reviews when it was SP only (not my cup of tea at all, though) and I don't mind high scores for a MP only (or heavy MP) game. And quite frankly, if given the following options

a) No SP campaign
b) 15 hour SP campaign with action spread throughout (i.e. slow, drawn out) with clear quality highs and lows
c) 5 hours of really intense, non-stop SP campaign with every minute full of extreme quality

I will take (c) every time. Of course I am not paying $50 for a 5 hour game, and I would find it VERY difficult to justify a 9, let alone a 9.5, for a 5 hour game. A game that is SP only is rightly crucified for 5-6 hours of gameplay--that is unacceptible.

But CoD4 isn't a 5 hour game. SP is half the product. The other half, MP, will last many of us *months*. I already have 18 hours into TF2. I expect to have over 100 into CoD4 by Spring time.

Now if you don't like MP -- your problem, not the products problem -- then that means you are probably best off getting an FPS with more SP legs like Bioshock. But I wouldn't knock a game down in a review because, "I only like SP games" because you aren't reviewing the product, just the part you like. That is akin to giving a JRPG (which I loath) a 2.5 because you hate the genre with a passion. That says something about your tastes, not the quality of the game.

 

[archangelmorph]

Of course I am not paying $50 for a 5 hour game, and I would find it VERY difficult to justify a 9, let alone a 9.5, for a 5 hour game. A game that is SP only is rightly crucified for 5-6 hours of gameplay--that is unacceptible.

But CoD4 isn't a 5 hour game. SP is half the product...

Which is exactly why a non-online-enabled xbox user like myself objects to paying full price for a game I can only get half the value of..

But I guess it's really not meant to be for everyone is it?

That's fine..

I just have a problem with the fact that the vast majority of xbox games seem to be heading in this direction.. (i.e. "more multi-player, bollocks to everything else.." syndrome..)

 

[Acert93]

Majority? Looking at their big releases from MGS since Summer you have Forza Motorsport 2, Shadowrun, Bioshock, Halo 3, PGR4, and Mass Effect. All of those titles, minus Shadowrun which is MP to begin with, have a fair share of SP/Campaign gameplay for their genre.

So if you want to include non-exclusive content you would be better off saying, "the vast majority of next gen games" and not pin this solely on MS who themselves is investing a bit into SP gaming.

 

[betan]

Well, I think MP and SP components should be reviewed separately to make everyone happy.

 

[Rangers]

I'm kinda not believing some of these qouted game times anyway, ever since Halo 3 was supposed to be ten hours and I believe it took me about 20. And I think Half Life 2 has got to be taking me 40. And I'm really not even dying that much.

Anyways, 5 hours works out since COD4 will probably be a rental for me anyway due to budget constraints

 

[archangelmorph]

Majority? Looking at their big releases from MGS since Summer you have Forza Motorsport 2, Shadowrun, Bioshock, Halo 3, PGR4, and Mass Effect. All of those titles, minus Shadowrun which is MP to begin with, have a fair share of SP/Campaign gameplay for their genre.

So if you want to include non-exclusive content you would be better off saying, "the vast majority of next gen games" and not pin this solely on MS who themselves is investing a bit into SP gaming.

I didn't pin the blame on MS..

They aren't the only developers for the xbox platform..

It just seems to be a staple for most games on the system.. Possibly due to the fact that most games on the system tend to be FPSs..

 

[Acert93]

I didn't pin the blame on MS..

They aren't the only developers for the xbox platform..

It just seems to be a staple for most games on the system..

The major difference between the two platforms is the exclusives, with multiplatform making up the bulk of both on each. I pointed out MGS for the very reason that the games that make the Xbox unique don't make it anymore so "online centric" than the competitor.

i.e. The issue you are complaining about is an industry trend, not a trend of the "vast majority of xbox games ".

Possibly due to the fact that most games on the system tend to be FPSs..

I should probably toss your "most games on the system" comment (which is wrong) in the same bin along with the "vast majority" hyberbole from earlier.

Some old canards die hard.

 

[pipo]

Possibly due to the fact that most games on the system tend to be FPSs..

Riiiiiite.

 

[archangelmorph]

Alright I concede.. the FPS comment was an overstatement on my part..

The major difference between the two platforms is the exclusives, with multiplatform making up the bulk of both on each. I pointed out MGS for the very reason that the games that make the Xbox unique don't make it anymore so "online centric" than the competitor.

I would accept this had it not been for the glut of Xbox titles equipped with highly fleshed out and established online components as opposed to Wii & PS3 titles which have either none or severely crippled attempts..

A perfect example of this would be VF5 for instance..

It's pretty obvious to me that due to the premium nature of a service like XBL when compare to Sony's & Nintendo's offerings (which are free), it's in MS's best interests to encourage online across all of there platform releases whether first party or not..

& for that reason I think it's pretty clear that there are trends towards xbox titles (whether ports or exclusives) having stronger/existent online components than their counter-parts..

Lastly I think you should try and lower that chip off your shoulder when stating your oppinion on a matter Joshua.. It's doesn't do well towards keeping discussion civil and often down-right pisses people off with an "I am greater than thou" attitude it so prominently resembles..

 

[scooby_dooby]

I just have a problem with the fact that the vast majority of xbox games seem to be heading in this direction.. (i.e. "more multi-player, bollocks to everything else.." syndrome..)

Bioshock - 15 hours, no MP
Mass Effect - 40 hours no MP
Lost Odyssey - 50+ hours no MP
Assassin's Creed - 20+ hours no MP

...you were saying??

In all seriousness, I'm mainly a SP gamer and I've been more than satisfied with game length this year. The last great game that dissapointed me with it's short length was probably Gears of War. Bioshock was excellent, Halo was just right, Blue Dragon was pretty huge, Mass Effect and Assassin's Creed look very long.

This year the 360 is offering better SP experiences than it ever has before.