Cod2 To Cod3 Comparison
Posted 26 January 2007 - 05:21 AM
CoD2 multiplayer was great because it was simple. A few weapons, one class, that's it. It was great on teams and it was great on solo. But, with the changes they have made I think they have complicated online too much. It seems like an Enemy Territory to me. Classes and upgraded abilities? Artillery strikes? Seems like such... a copy, do you know what I mean? I've seen that before in so many games, why not stick to the multiplayer everyone LOVED (well, after the patch came out to fix the lag...)?
I think I see myself playing more CoD2 than CoD3 online. What do you guys think and why?
Posted 01 February 2007 - 02:50 AM
Although I didn't play as much MP on 2 as 3... and I DO agree that 2's MP is simpler (as a positive aspect!)... I think the MP on 3 is more complete, with a notable exception of the discrepancies between Allied and Axis weapon effectiveness. As well, the Maps are far better in 3, larger, better detail and design IMHO.
I still think 2 is a great game to play MP, but I prefer 3.
Posted 01 February 2007 - 03:39 PM
I think the maps are far superior (especially the 6 new ones), and I like the fact that strategy is really a key element in winning. COD3 is all about flanking and I'm good at flanking.
In short, thanks for COD2, but COD3 is here to stay! Did anyone really just want a carbon copy of COD2 with different maps? I sure didn't.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users