I wanted to only compare MW2 and Black Ops because I think we are all in an agreement when it comes to COD 4. That it is the best game of the series. Be a bit unfair because of COD 4 legend/Classic status.
I haven't even played Black Ops, and I can tell you that it's better than MW2. That game's story made no sense. Heck, even CoD2 has a better story than MW2 (and CoD2 has no story aside from guys fighting in WWII (though there was some funny banter between Price and MacGregor).
CoD4 is the one with a decent story. And it let you play as Price in one level.
Black Ops. It told a cohesive story that followed one person. Not this ok this mission your this guy and the next your another. Plus in terms of gameplay, it had much more variety then any COD title thus far.
Black Ops was contrived in a "This Russian dude is a communist and he hates the west and all Russians hate the west and they have a secret weapon that will kill everybody" type of way. But it was still better than playing World at War in Vietnam. It was executed fantastically, and there are some great moments. MW2 had a crazy American who tricked everybody and almost started world war 3, that's really hard to beat story-wise.
So far I am just sorta bored by the Black Ops campaign. The World at War campaign was straight up snoozeville, and this seems a little better. It just seems like they tried to make it a little crazy like MW2 but didnt make it crazy enough. In other words, I want the world to like explode or something.
I have to go with Black Ops. There's far more variety in the campaign's pacing. Where Modern Warfare 2 was pretty much one note, with an over-reliant on Michael Bayesque explosions. The story actually makes a bit of sense in Black Ops, where Modern Warfare 2's story would have made Hideo Kojima blush. Black Ops is also much longer than Modern Warfare 2. It took me possibly 7 or 8 hours to beat Black Ops, where it only took about 4 for me to beat Modern Warfare 2. I'm not saying Modern Warfare 2's single-player is bad, in fact it's good. Modern Warfare 2 has better set-pieces. However, Black Ops wins overall.
Which is saying something, because I found Infinity Ward's Call of Duty titles to have far better single-players than Treyarch's Call of Duty games, prior to Black Ops.
MW2's single player is best in the series to me even when it's as short as it was. But Black Ops is decent, though I don't like the way some of the story stuff is represented; going back to Mason as he sits in the chair talking. A lot of what sold me on the experience wasn't the story. It was the voice actors, the music, and some other stuff. That's why I'm surprised to find I'm not liking Sam Worthington or Ed Harris' voice work as much as Kevin McKidd and Billy Murray, etc. Nor Sean Murray's music. It's great! But it doesn't reach the limits as Hans Zimmer's score. I also have 5.1 surround sound in yet, I'd have to risk turning down the sound to hear the music for some reason in certain areas as if the music didn't matter. It's a big turn off.
" MW2's single player is best in the series to me even when it's as short as it was. But Black Ops is decent, though I don't like the way some of the story stuff is represented; going back to Mason as he sits in the chair talking. A lot of what sold me on the experience wasn't the story. It was the voice actors, the music, and some other stuff. That's why I'm surprised to find I'm not liking Sam Worthington or Ed Harris' voice work as much as Kevin McKidd and Billy Murray, etc. Nor Sean Murray's music. It's great! But it doesn't reach the limits as Hans Zimmer's score. I also have 5.1 surround sound in yet, I'd have to risk turning down the sound to hear the music for some reason in certain areas as if the music didn't matter. It's a big turn off. "
I have to strongly disagree here. Call of Duty 4 had the best single-player in the series, partly due to the subtle pacing and carrying out the true essence of the Call of Duty formula. What made the Call of Duty series great from the start, that it truly made me feel that I was part of a large scale war with my allies. Opposed to the Medal of Honor's "One Man Army" take on war. Modern Warfare 2 seemed to head to the "One Man Army" direction, where I was surviving absolutely impossible odds by myself. Even Black Ops wasn't as nearly as ridiculously over-the-top as Modern Warfare 2.
This was definitely apparent in Takedown, where I was able to mow down groups of militia platoons all by myself. Where Call of Duty felt like a Steven Spielberg or a Oliver Stone (Pre-Alexander) war movie, Modern Warfare 2 felt I was in a Michael Bay flick. Call of Duty 4's pacing was also a lot better than Modern Warfare 2. There was far more variety, and the set-pieces were far more visceral than Modern Warfare 2's. The "shock and awe" moments were handled naturally and professionally. Modern Warfare 2 felt force and sometimes amateurish in comparison.
Also, applet0n is being pretty damn stupid, poor old Germans, Russians, etc have to kill their own countrymen all the time in shooters. And saying it's justified because their country started a war a very long time ago is completely ridiculous.
We killed Americans in MW2, and kill some Brits in Black Ops, it's about time someone other than the typical nazis and soviets were the enemy. It is no way 'stupid', if anything I find it pretty interesting to finally get to see things from the other side in a game, it should help some idiots to realise that not every soviet or nazi was evil incarnate.
@Raymayne: You're right about fighting Yanks in MW2, but those were made out to be larger-than-life (essentially) mercenaries that were on Shepherd's pay-roll. I could not take that mission seriously whatsoever. You had the enemies using "Butcher" instead of "Bravo" just to show how evil they were, it was borderline childish. The mission in Black Ops on the other hand takes itself very seriously, and Reznov even uses the terms "Vultures" to describe the Allied Powers. I think that the tone in Black Ops during that mission and the portrayal of the Brits that you fight was stupid, not so much the fact that you were fighting them.
And I don't support how the Russians are used as enemies for just about everything these days. It's stupid. Western media in general only uses them as an excuse for you to fight foreign-sounding White enemies, so as not to offend anyone. If they were any other nationality people would get very mad, very quickly. It's really stupid.
black ops is just like modern warfare 2 campaign. black ops story is different. so far, from what i have played it just seems like a guy having flash backs in a torture chair with a guy talking to him about it.
" Black Ops by far. Also, applet0n is being pretty damn stupid, poor old Germans, Russians, etc have to kill their own countrymen all the time in shooters. And saying it's justified because their country started a war a very long time ago is completely ridiculous. We killed Americans in MW2, and kill some Brits in Black Ops, it's about time someone other than the typical nazis and soviets were the enemy. It is no way 'stupid', if anything I find it pretty interesting to finally get to see things from the other side in a game, it should help some idiots to realise that not every soviet or nazi was evil incarnate. "
@applet0n: But you're ok with shooting Asian and Middle Eastern people because they're different from you? your whole argument is bullshit, and I think it's about time they stopped being afraid of shooting americans in a damn videogame. In fact, I hope Homefront will have you play a few missions as north koreans just to prove a point and so they'll be more than the other shooters out there which have white people killing minorities.
To answer the OP, I actually saw the Reznov thing coming by the 3rd or so mission with him, when you were the only one who talked to or acknowledge him. I was basically sure in the tunnels of nam when Sharp tells you to get ahold of yourself. Still wasn't a bad plotline though. Neither campaign was particularly good, I still think that CoD4's campaign was the best in the series.
Black Ops was surprisingly good. I expected just a regular military shooter with zero story. I was surprised at how rich the story was with a few twists. Definitely better than MW2 IMO.
Call of Duty: Black Ops. While I like Modern Warfare 2's Michael Bay-esque batshit crazy story, Black Ops' felt tighter and more cohesive with better characters as well as better scenery.
MW2 for me. Seeing DC getting destroyed was really impact-full and Im not even from the US! Plus that betrayal scene was fucking amazing. In Black Ops I didn't really know what was going on and I believe they also returned to the "push up to stop enemies respawning" mechanic at some parts which was not exactly pleasing to me.
MW2 campaign for sure. Maybe would have liked Black Ops more, but I agree with Jeff, there were several problems with it and some of it was hokey. Infinite respawning enemies was a step backwards as well.
" To answer the OP, I actually saw the Reznov thing coming by the 3rd or so mission with him, when you were the only one who talked to or acknowledge him. I was basically sure in the tunnels of nam when Sharp tells you to get ahold of yourself. Still wasn't a bad plotline though. Neither campaign was particularly good, I still think that CoD4's campaign was the best in the series. "
And yes, I saw this coming a mile away. And then *SPOILERS* *SPOILERS* at the end, Hudson is explaining everything and going "IN THOSE RAT TUNNELS, YOU WERE ALONE. AT THE ISLAND, IT WAS JUST YOU!!" and you're kind of like "...yeah dude, no need to sit there and beat a dead horse, I knew this less than halfway through the game."
Despite all the flaws and spots which pissed me off (mostly just infinite respawning enemies/bad grenade spam), it was still a fun campaign. Just that MW2 is much more fun with far less gameplay flaws.
Log in to comment