I really agree on the authentic level. Wanted to play it thru one more time and tested it, but what`s the deal with no ironsight in "dig in" position. Not realistic, like playing paintball, aiming after your own bullets! I too missed the mp in the first one. What a potensial that type of playing had!

quote:

Originally posted by bkg2008:
the game itself is not bad, and fun to play. However, I have to say I expectd a lot more, like for instance a skirmish mode (which I personally thought was the best part about the last title). also the authentic mode was rather disapointing, since in dug in mode (which is not realistic in the first place) they would not let you use crosshairs nor iron sight. Therefore authentic mode was not more fun or more challengin but just more anoying. Also, over all the game is way too easy. It,s called HELL's highway not walk in the park highway. I will defenetly not buy the next title before I have rented it out somewhere.

alex if u would of paid attention in the first bia u would know that on every bia game that every level and sight u see is exactly how it was in 1944 and bia is based on the exact market garden operation. cod is too but the sights on the levels are not accurate read up bud....

Itdog-The storyline features levels that are depections of actual battles set in the actual places where they occured. BIA is a Holywood style story based on real events. (Im not saying that BIA didn't have the actual settings because they did, COD 5 had cities more accurate depicted.) And, mindless AI does not throw every grenade you throw back unless you accurately place it. Also, mindless AI does not pick the oppurtune moment to unleash a banzai charge on your squad. The AI of COD does all those things while when you lob a grenade at a German in BIA they just look at it.

alex i read all ur post and u keep sayin u never said call of duty 5 was accurate and u did heres ur post from nov. 12 u are sayin cod is based in real places which it is but the surroundings r not even close to accurate, and BIA the surroundings are more then accurrate. and also BIA is based on real soldiers not their real names but based on real soldiers as of COD 5 they arent!!!!!!! I have both games and BIA:HH is way way way better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and way more accurrate

I know, I never said it was more accurate in that post or any other one....read closer bud,

"(Im not saying that BIA didn't have the actual settings because they did, COD 5 had cities more accurately depicted.)"

I wasn't saying that COD 5 more accurately depicted the cities than BIA because, well heres one problem with that argument...the cities in BIA and COD 5 are on opposite sides of the world. What I was saying was that COD 5 had depicted the cities in that game more accurately than other COD games.

"And, mindless AI does not throw every grenade you throw back unless you accurately place it. Also, mindless AI does not pick the oppurtune moment to unleash a banzai charge on your squad. The AI of COD does all those things while when you lob a grenade at a German in BIA they just look at it."

What I said there is that I like the AI better in COD 5. In BIA I never had a Nazi throw a single grenade at me and I played it on every difficulty. In BIA the AI is too simple to defeat which is a factor I've often heard in these forums. Also, I'm pretty sure Germans wanted to avoid getting blown to pieces by grenades and didn't just stand there like in BIA.

And to your previous post, keep in mind. I'm not talking about the COD franchise, I'm talkin about Call of Duty: World at War. This game is a lot different for me than some of the others in the franchise. If your argument is based on the historical accuracy of each game than BIA will win hands down but my argument is based on the total package and COD 5 is so much better by far.

You talk about how the AI in BIA will just look at a grenade but in COD the AI is far worse soldiers on your side will just stand there when the enemy is shooting at them at point blank. There is also no real storyline in WAW. Say what you want about BIA but it looks like large battles are all COD has going for it.

Corrion, have you actually played the game now?

I also have both games. Love them both for different reasons. Single player goes to BIA easily, and yes I have played both. Also did u guys install your games correctly? Because when I toss a grenade at my german counterparts. they run like hades for protection. My Germans dont just stand there like idiots.maybe its a mattter of how much memory you have or power of your CPU. But honestly Ive seen My Germans run for cover and some just dont run because they cant without getting shot by me or one of my AI guys. In one instance I had one german blown out of his protected area and seen part of his leg come off, pretty gory stuff, but a grenade especialy an american one could do some major damage with all those small but lethal shreds of metal.
By the way speaking of grenades, in cod5 the Japanese are grenade crazy. Ive never seen so many grenades tossed in my years of gaming.

Ed

PS: Truthfully buy both games and you will be happy for a long time. The coed element in COD5 is great. except for the Zombie part. Nazi Zombies is realy kind of funny.

Once again this is the console forums so we wouldn't have any problem regarding hardware for that, and without a doubt, on veteran those Japanese throw a ridiculous amount of grenades.

When are we all going to get over this zombie mode thing? You guys stress that so much but it's so unimportant to the game.

i hear you man, zombie mode is not at all part of the campaign. i was skeptical at first but than i actually played it and it was really fun. i think we all know that its gonna be unrealistic but if i had to counter wih something agaisnt bia, why would they put legget's ghost in the game? someone said that all the characters are based on real soldiers, how do you think that soldier that legget is based on would feel to know that he is portayed as a ghost in a game after he dies? id be ****ed personally if someone did something like that with me

quote:

Originally posted by alextlaoe:
If you don't like run and gun games than, wait a sec, I got a crazy idea....don't play them!!!! Just don't sit here and bash a new COD game you've never even played. I've said since my first post that BIA and COD are two different game types so if you like BIA style games better than COD style games, hold up I just thought of another brilliant idea.....play the BIA style ones!!! Have a wonderful evening.

Oh, but it's ok for you to do that to others when they try and state their preference in which game they want or why they bought it? If I were you, I would quit while you were ahead before the drivel you are spouting ends up drowning you.

And yes, the CoD game does do a huge injustice to the marines that fought in the Pacific campaign. In addition to omitting THE most important battle in the Pacific, the game portrayed them as super-soldiers able to face 10,000 Japanese each when in reality, they were scared ****less. I could see it in my grandfather's eyes until the day he passed - he'd seen some of the most horrific things anyone could have ever seen and it always haunted him.

As for the Russian portion of the game that showed the encirclement of Berlin - horse****. By the time that the Russians circled Berlin, the Germans were done. Hitler had stretched his lines too thin and was losing troops by the tonne. Aside from whomever was forced to fight in a German uniform at that time, his main troops were so depleted that he himself was issuing orders to troops that didn't even exist.

Ah, but enough with you.

First off the reason I was "stating there preference in games" is because that person was being all smart and hating on a game that he hadn't even played. Also you're saying that COD made the soldiers seem like super soldiers?.....really? In BIA HH it's one squad vs. EVERYONE and when someone gets shot they just lie there on the ground until the next checkpoint where they magically get healed. And I don't know what you believe the most important battle so fill me in on that one. About the Russian campaign, the game makes it pretty clear in a the gameplay and in a few cutscenes about how the Germans were pretty much screwed and down to their last men.

Also, you said in another thread that you weren't here to flame or anything like that but in this thread you're cussing at us and just being a jerk. I offer my argument to support my opinions and the things I've understood to be correct, if you don't like it tell me why with actual evidence.

quote:

Originally posted by alextlaoe:
First off the reason I was "stating there preference in games" is because that person was being all smart and hating on a game that he hadn't even played. Also you're saying that COD made the soldiers seem like super soldiers?.....really? In BIA HH it's one squad vs. EVERYONE and when someone gets shot they just lie there on the ground until the next checkpoint where they magically get healed. And I don't know what you believe the most important battle so fill me in on that one. About the Russian campaign, the game makes it pretty clear in a the gameplay and in a few cutscenes about how the Germans were pretty much screwed and down to their last men.

Also, you said in another thread that you weren't here to flame or anything like that but in this thread you're cussing at us and just being a jerk. I offer my argument to support my opinions and the things I've understood to be correct, if you don't like it tell me why with actual evidence.

Cussing at you and being a jerk. You know, I have the ability to hit the * button myself, which is what I did. No, I'm not here to start trouble, but you seem to have too much time and too big a mouth to have anything useful to say. Does giving me a snide remark because I enjoyed the art direction and story of the game ring a bell, junior? No, World at War does not portray the last and final defense of Berlin accurately. While it is true the Germans did defend it with their lives as stated by the nicely done partial history lesson in between missions, they had no choice. Neither did the conscripted soldiers that were forced to act as Germany's final defense.

You state that the soldiers in World at War act as though they are not super soldiers? Sadly, your view is skewed as I had seen several of my own fellow soldiers get shot and get up again. The ones who didn't were just replaced by other randomly generated soldiers - where's the realism there?

As for one of the most important battles during the war, look it up - they've made plenty of movies about it. Two of which Clint Eastwood directed. If you still can't figure that out, it was thought of by the Japanese as sacred land.

In Hell's Highway it is a tale about one squad, I'll give you that, but it isn't the one squad versus Germany ordeal you are making it out to be. During that operation, the Germans had amassed quite a large force to protect that stretch of road - and they did so with nothing short of brute force. Did you excpect Baker and his squad to have absolutely no resistance while they just waltzed through the entire operation?

As for actual evidence, have you ever read a history book? Seriously. Read up on your history and leave your feelings of inadequecy somewhere else.

"As for one of the most important battles during the war, look it up - they've made plenty of movies about it. Two of which Clint Eastwood directed. If you still can't figure that out, it was thought of by the Japanese as sacred land."

The reason I couldn't figure out what battle it was is because Okinawa is in the game junior, you just aren't a part of the main landings and central land battles. You are a part of an assault at Shuri Castle. It was Japan's HQ but I'm sure you already knew that.

Of course I expected Baker to run into a lot of resistance but I also expected a bigger force than just a squad taking that whole road.

quote:

Originally posted by alextlaoe:
"As for one of the most important battles during the war, look it up - they've made plenty of movies about it. Two of which Clint Eastwood directed. If you still can't figure that out, it was thought of by the Japanese as sacred land."

The reason I couldn't figure out what battle it was is because Okinawa is in the game junior, you just aren't a part of the main landings and central land battles. You are a part of an assault at Shuri Castle. It was Japan's HQ but I'm sure you already knew that.

I think the battle you were referring to about the Japanese Sacred land is Operation Detachment or otherwise known as The Battle of Iwo Jima...... Why its a Sacred Land? Its part of the mythical origin of Japan and the Shinto Culture..... Oh and its the first Japanese Island to be invaded during World War 2....


P.S. Iwo Jima is part of the Tokyo Prefecture.... That my friend can be called the invasion of Japan....

quote:

Originally posted by ltdog:

I think the battle you were referring to about the Japanese Sacred land is Operation Detachment or otherwise known as The Battle of Iwo Jima...... Why its a Sacred Land? Its part of the mythical origin of Japan and the Shinto Culture..... Oh and its the first Japanese Island to be invaded during World War 2....


P.S. Iwo Jima is part of the Tokyo Prefecture.... That my friend can be called the invasion of Japan....

And someone answered it correctly

I have both games, I prefer Brothers in Arms single-player over CoD:WaW.

I am mostly dissapointed in BIA: HH because of its lack of realism. I was a large fan of BIA:EIB, which took me quite a long time to finish on medium difficulty. yet i played BIA HH on veteran and finished it in less than 2 days. Its just too dam easy to finish now with grenade indicators and no breathing effects. I used to panic whenever i heard a tank or MG nest fire, but now i can just simply pick off the MG guy with my M1 and slap a satchel charge on the tank before easely sprinting back to my cover and seeing the shrapnel fly. Although i do really love the several cut scenes and cinematics that give the game a feel of character aswell at the reduced lag, done by loading portions of the game at a time. But overall i really think they should reconsider trying to turn this back into the BIA I knew, before it turns into another COD game.

I think people are getting a little carried away here. first of all I'm a big fan of cod series and a huge fan of the graphics/tactial team play of bfbc.

I bought this game only 2days ago, and while the offline is ok, yes it does tell the true story of the war..but who gives a s**t, i wanna kill people and enjoy doing so, sadly this game doesnt give me this.. I am very dissapointed with ubisoft quotes on how good the game was going 2 be. the graphics are nowhere near the quality of cod-waw and are miles off other fps like battlefield bc, which is awesome (yes its not a ww2 game) who cares, you shoot you get points or you die, same overall.

the online experience was nothing short of horrific (being kind!) tanks are easy to detonate, and the lags is v poor. I hit someone in the head 3 times and they still didnt die! lol.

total waste of money, ok to borrow but you end up feeling sorry for the person you borrowed it from 4 paying £39.

I will never buy a ubisoft game again.. wheres the respawn online...?

I did like the game, but I found it short and too easy with very linear approaches and not enough room for proper tactics, AI definately needs improvement and the graphics could've been better in comparison to other shooters on the market

addition to previous comment, there's a lack of variety in missions with them being ambush, reach the goal or assault 88, also I was dissapointed that tanks weren't being combined with infantry