Customer
Reviews
Enjoyable, but the formula is
getting a little stale.
Way back in the day, I was a
fan of the Medal of Honour series of games, particularly the Allied
Assault series. Back in 2002 this was cutting-edge stuff, with its
depiction of the D-Day landings and its mix of realism with solid
gameplay. There were limits to what the game could do, however. Due to
engine and technical limitations, it wasn't possible to create 'open'
levels, so the player was carefully herded where the designers wanted
him to go, giving rise to an odd situation where American soldiers
fighting across an open field would find their route determined by
impassable wire fences. But this was a minor complaint in 2002 given the
quality of the visuals and the intensity of the action.
Some of the
Allied Assault team broke off in 2002 to form a new company, Infinity
Ward, specifically to address issues like this and ramp up the intensity
of the war simulation experience. In late 2003 they launched their own
take on the concept, Call of Duty, which went on to eclipse its forebear
in critical acclaim. Call of Duty 2 carried on this fine tradition.
However, both games still felt limited. CoD2 improved things by
sometimes allowing a choice of several different paths to an objective,
but there was still none of the freedom being offered that would really
benefit the game, and the ingredients were feeling a little stale.
Call
of Duty 4: Modern Warfare seeks to update the experience by switching
to a near-future setting depicting a Middle-Eastern warlord and a mental
Russian agent teaming up to launch a nuclear attack on the United
States and 'reclaim' both their countries for Team Crazy. The typically
intense CoD combat experience is once again on offer here, and it has to
be said that when they are on form, Infinity Ward can't be beaten for
offering combat experiences which offer a solid approximation of the
chaos of real combat (or so I'm informed by people I know in the army).
The problem is that Infinity Ward are so focused on recreating that
feeling of insane carnage that they sacrifice a lot of other elements,
leading to frustrating gameplay.
I mentioned earlier that in 2002
it simply wasn't possible to have an open gameworld with multiple paths
to an objective and also maintain a high visual quality. These days
this isn't even remotely an issue any more, as Ghost Recon Advanced
Warfighter, a game with superior graphics to CoD4, demonstrated, giving
you the run of the streets of Mexico City and allowing you your own
choice of tactics, approaches, use of cover and weapons and the calling
in of support as needed. In CoD4 suddenly being stuck in a
closely-regulated 'on a rails' shooter is annoying and frustrating.
Engaged in a close-quarters alley gun battle, I hit upon the idea of
using a side-alley to flank the enemy, only to be met by a wall of
impassable tyres. Great.
Worse was to come, however. The game
encourages you to keep up the advance whenever possible, presumably
because of the creators' desire to focus on intense combat. This results
in slightly ridiculous situations where your entire team is exchanging
fire with enemy forces on the other side of a courtyard. In any sane
military in the world, you would clear the area of all visible opponents
and then move in and mop up the survivors. You can't do that in CoD4 as
the enemy's ranks are constantly replenished. You can't actually make a
dent in the enemy numbers until you move forward to the next objective.
Yup, this military simulator game basically demands that you charge
into enemy gunfire and engage them at pointblank range. The uses of
cover and making the most of range and numbers, among the most basic
concepts of modern warfare, are actually discouraged.
On the plus
side, this is a slickly-produced game, with great music, impressive
graphics and instinctive controls. Mission briefings are nicely-realised
and make full use of satellite maps. The in-game banter is sometimes
funny, although it doesn't stray far from the usual macho cliches. The
designers are also clearly enormous fans of Aliens, employing music that
is very similar to Horner's score for that movie, naming at least one
character after an Aliens one and quoting dialogue from the movie
several times. It's also good to see the Brits and Russians get a
look-in as well as the Americans (although you only get to control the
British SAS platoon and an American Marine Corps contingent, not the
Russian loyalist forces). There's also a great but all-too-brief level
where you get to play the gunner on a Lockheed AC-130 gunship.
The
game's highlight is an unexpected flashback mission which takes place
in Chernobyl, with just you and another sniper having to sneak past the
heavily fortified perimeter in order to assassinate an enemy dignitary.
This a very tense, well-designed mission depicting the ruined city in a
very atmospheric manner, culminating in an absolutely insane stand-off
with half the Russian army where, for once, the enemy's vast numbers
actually made sense. And whilst I normally don't rate multiplayer as
part of a single-player game (since, as studies continuously show,
three-quarters or more of gamers usually never take their games online,
unless it's an online-only game, of course), the multiplayer action in
CoD4 is solid, since it generally does feature more open levels and of
course doesn't have infinite waves of enemy forces.
Call of Duty 4
(***) is a decent, if extremely short (which cost it half a star)
action FPS, but I think Infinity Ward really need to reassess what they
are trying to do with this series. Continuing to sell it as a warfare
simulator when they won't encourage or even allow the use of real
military tactics is disingenuous, and the series is now being overtaken
and leap-frogged by other games that work much better. As it stands, the
series is in danger of becoming stale and predictable.
A GUTSY MOVE BY Activision!
If truth be told, WWII had
been done to death. Ever since the original CASTLE WOLFENSTEIN-3D, every
war theater, every front, every battle has been done again and again.
True, some more than others and, yes, a number of great games was
produced. Yet, some game developers seem unable to stop whipping a very
tired horse..
ACTIVISION proved it had the guts to break with the
mold it had made its CALL OF DUTY franchise a huge success. CoD4 is set
in a (fictional) present in which American and British agents are
called upon to stop a Russian plutocrat with Soviet-nostalgia and
terrorist aspirations.
The weapons are new, the gameplay is
inventive, the graphics are realistic, the settings are beautiful - a
great game all together! And the GOTY edition comes prepatched and runs
like a dream.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
Will
Work on Windows Vista Too!
Hi,
Call of Duty 4 is a
fantastic game, from the single player to the multiplayer. I am mainly
writing this review to clear up the misconception that Amazon is
perpetrating that this game is only for Windows XP in order for you to
buy the more expensive $59.99 version of this game. The back cover of
the DVD case clearly says that this game is for Windows XP and Vista.
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment