Call Of Duty Grabs Honor And Medals

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Call Of Duty Grabs Honor And Medals

Posted by simoniker on Thursday October 30, 2003 @12:38AM from the like-conker-but-serious dept.

Thanks to Telefragged for their review of Activision's World War II-themed PC FPS, Call Of Duty, which they seem to approve of, commenting that "the action and pacing... is done just right", though they point out your enjoyment depends on "whether you still enjoy WWII shooters" after so many predecessors, notably Medal Of Honor: Allied Assault, which Call Of Duty developers Infinity Ward also developed. GameSpy are extremely impressed, hailing Call Of Duty as "one of the best games of 2003", with "tons of amazing missions", alongside"solid [Quake 3-enhanced] tech and lots of white-knuckle combat." Finally, GameSpot are also effusive, hailing the shipping-now title as "an all-around excellent game that confidently challenges, head-on, all the other WWII-themed shooters out there and comes out on top."

27 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

a couple more reviews by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-30 00:47 · Score: 2, Informative

GameSpot
ign
Any online comparisons of WW2 FPS's? by MacBrave · 2003-10-30 01:07 · Score: 1

Are there any sites out there that have performed comparisons of all the WW2 FPS's that have been released in the last couple of years?

The only two I have actually played are BF1942 and Return to Castle Wolfenstein, so it would be interesting to see a comparison before buying another.
1. Re:Any online comparisons of WW2 FPS's? by eMartin · 2003-10-30 06:38 · Score: 1
  
  There are 2 Call of Duty demos that you can try for yourself.
Too bad no one can get the release date correct by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-30 01:39 · Score: 0

For the longest time Activision said it would be released the beginning of November (at least that is what I read on their call of duty website).

Meanwhile, all the websites claimed October 29. Then the press release came out and said it is in stores, on October 29.

But if you go into Best Buy, it's not in until the 31st. WTF?
Comparison by ArmenTanzarian · 2003-10-30 01:49 · Score: 0

It'd be really difficult to impress me after Allied Assault, that game was just ridiculously good (despite the lack of multiplayer). I guess if anyone could top that though, it'd be the people who created it. I'm more of a console guy since I don't have the money to upgrade my home pc, so I'm really excited about Medal of Honor: Rising Sun. Coming... out... so... soon....

Kinda seems like they're developing a History-channel-esque addiction to WWII, though.
grrr by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-30 02:57 · Score: 1, Funny

why cant game developers have more imagination?!

i'm sick and tired of axis vs allies battles on my computer.

why isnt anyone making an african war game? blood diamonds, cannibalism and bushmeat trade, genocide and tribal wars, ebola and other nasty diseases, planes that accidentally lose doors and decompress in flight, penis-stealing witches, angry mobs... it's got it all, i tell you!
1. Re:grrr by XenoBrain · 2003-10-30 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  For me, WWII has gotten old. Why yes, it *is* old! How about some more sci-fi? Maybe something based on david brin or another sci-fi author vs. the uncreative "dark" universe of Unreal, Aliens vs. Predator etc and hordes of others.
2. Re:grrr by mobby_6kl · 2003-10-30 07:49 · Score: 0
  
  There is Delta Force: Black Hawk Down
3. Re:grrr by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-31 02:48 · Score: 0
  
  Actually game makers started to do research on this but abandoned the idea years ago after inexplicably losing large sums of money durning investment related wire transfers.
I agree, but... by TheRoachMan · 2003-10-30 03:21 · Score: 4, Insightful
I agree that MoHaa was/is a great game. But I played the 2 Call of Duty demo's, and it just gives me an adrenaline rush. It's great to be in a team of privates, one commander who shouts commands, some really intense firefighting going on, it's just great. What I missed in MoHaa were the all-out full-throttle combat situations. Allright you had the landing on Omaha beach, and some other intense moments, but most of the time you were playing the one-man army like in Return to Castle Wolfenstein.
In Call of Duty you are there, together with 10 other soldiers, belly in the dirt, getting shelled and shot at, really good sound effects, people shouting, getting blown 10ft in the air, it's just so great. It's hard to put it into words...sorry.
And I can sum up alot of things that blow my mind:
- Soldiers climbing on top of a tank, throwing in a grenade and then running like hell.
- Taking over a mounted machine gun and then using it to blast away 15 or 20 enemies.
- Lobbing grenades into a foxhole, seeing the enemy try to crawl out, and then boom, he flies away.
- Crawling down a field full of dead cows, using them as cover
- Getting your vision blurred and you ears ringing from a nearby shell impact.
I could go on but you just have to see it for yourself. Although it's built in an old engine (Q3), the game's a great experience. You should try it.
1. Re:I agree, but... by MMaestro · 2003-10-30 13:34 · Score: 1
  
  I played both Call of Duty demos as well, but I don't think you looked too carefully at the game. First, its not 'a team of privates' as there are plenty of Sgts. and Corporals running around with you; not to mention the fact that your Capt. can't be killed and always seems to know where to go.
  During the moment when the soldiers are climbing on top of the tank to take it out, you can actually take out the take with a panzerfaust from the magical box of unlimited ammo. Theres THREE Tiger tanks (the Capt. identified them so if their something else, blaim the developers) that you encounter, two of which you destroy SINGLE HANDEDLY with an attack on the FRONT armor.
  The enemy are not too bright when it comes to grenades, especially those who are scripted. (When you first try to get a panzerfaust to take out the first tank, if you quickly toss grenades to the wall and the doorway to your right, you can almost completely stop their first wave with two grenades)
  The mortar shots are either scripted or hit the same ground at the same area repeatedly. Not exactly the smartest thing to do when your position is being advanced on.
My only issue with Call of Duty. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-30 03:46 · Score: 0

If the AI see's you, it treats it as if you are the only Soldier and EVERY single German will shoot at you. I mean, I have walked out the door of the beginning of the second demo on the Veteran diffculty level, and died immediatly because 6 Germans were shooting me with 100% accuracy.

Sad that AI for games still is way below par.
1. Re:My only issue with Call of Duty. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-30 04:30 · Score: 0
  
  Umm.. if you're the only one that's dumb enough to walk out the front door in front of a bunch of Germans, I'd pretty much expect them to shoot at you. I found the game to be fairly challenging, and the AI was pretty decent. I don't think it really focuses on you more than the other members of your squad, unless you're the one that they have the best shot at.
2. Re:My only issue with Call of Duty. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-30 05:17 · Score: 0
  
  Considering all the rest of the my squad moved out as well and yet I am the only target once I get into line of site. I am was evemn crouched down with the rest of the squad. And I cant stay in the building because the Tiger tank will blow it up and it will kill you.
  
  Yes the game is challenging and I dont want it to be easy, but shouldnt the AI be programmed to take a more thoughtout or at least random choice of who to shoot at?
  
  Another example is at the last part of the 2nd demo. There are machine gun nests and you have a good snipe rifle. My whole squad is out in the field, while I am still up by where you get the rifle. The gunners are shooting at my squad, but the instant I lean topoke my head out to aim at the gun nest gunner, it targets me.
How is multiplayer? by antdude · 2003-10-30 04:04 · Score: 1

How is it compared to Day of Defeat, Battlefield 1942, etc.?

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Infinity Ward bought out.... by dstyle5 · 2003-10-30 04:31 · Score: 2, Informative

... by Activision today. Check it out here. I guess they liked Call of Duty too. ;)
WWII games by Zed2K · 2003-10-30 05:37 · Score: 1

Medal of Honor was really good. Its 2 expansion packs were really bad though, especially the latest one. The whole lack of blood really was annoying also. This is war, its supposed to be nasty. It was very hard at times to know when you were hitting the bad guys without any indicators.

The Call of Duty demo was great. I'm really looking forward to the full game.
1. Re:WWII games by Anonymous Coward · 2003-11-01 19:55 · Score: 0
  
  EA doesn't do Mature rated games, hence a Teen-rated war game like MoH.
  
  There are mods that add blood.
  
  I'm with you on this though. The lack of realism in that respect (blood, flying limbs when hit with a gernade, etc.) just makes the "war" in the game more arcade-like, pulling you out just a bit of the realism it's trying to create.
Not your Grandpa's war anymore! by filmchild · 2003-10-30 06:01 · Score: 2, Funny

Oh please Lord, someone tell the developers the war ended 60 years ago.... They are great games to be sure, but honestly, they've beat the life out of this showboat...
1. Re:Not your Grandpa's war anymore! by Acidic_Diarrhea · 2003-10-30 06:47 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You want to inform the authors and the producers who are also continuing to churn out books and movies based on WW II? Let's face it - World War II was on such a grand scale and had such drama and subtexts throughout it that the subject is fascinating for many people and will continue to be for quite awhile.
  I think sales of Battlefield 1942 show that they haven't "beat the life out of this showboat" and that most people still find the Great War engaging and exciting, unlike you obviously. And what do you care anyway? No one is forcing you to buy games revolving around WWII. The developers will move on when sales are no longer strong and they can't make a profit. People are still buying the products. You sound quite close to one of the people who say, "People shouldn't be allowed to make GTA." Let everyone making games decide what type of games they want to make ON THEIR OWN. You don't have the right to tell people what subject matter they should and should not use. Leave people alone and just buy the games that appeal to you.
  
  --
  I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
2. Re:Not your Grandpa's war anymore! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-30 09:23 · Score: 0
  
  WWII was a lot more than just a war. This was a global scale conflict. A conflict that brought out both the best in man to work together and also the worst in man to commit such evil acts.
  
  There were true heros and true villians. Many triamphs and many tragedies. New technology was introduced during the years of war. WWII introduced us to the nuclear age that we live in now.
  
  You can create a fictional piece of action and adventure or you can relive a truely amazing era that happened a mere 60 years ago.
  
  It's actually good to see some high quality games like MOHAA and Call of Duty coming out that are not only great to play, but also historically accurate. RTCW was a lot of fun but were the nazi's really waging a war with an army of zombies in their ranks?
  
  Don't have to have zombies and aliens to make a great game or movie.
  
  Sometimes the truth can be much stranger than fiction...
3. Re:Not your Grandpa's war anymore! by sahala · 2003-10-31 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  I think sales of Battlefield 1942 show that they haven't "beat the life out of this showboat" and that most people still find the Great War engaging and exciting, unlike you obviously.
  I hope we haven't stopped printing history textbooks. The "Great War" was World War I.
4. Re:Not your Grandpa's war anymore! by Acidic_Diarrhea · 2003-10-31 04:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I realize that that was the name of that war originally, since obviously one wouldn't call the first instance of something I, unless you were sure a second was coming. But, and I have been doing this for quite some time, WW I was a war that did not have the moral undertones that WW II had. It was not a great battle of good versus evil but more of a war of attrition. So long ago I hijacked the phrase and, while I believe it is rather fitting, your comment shows the type of queries I have to constantly answer. Do you disagree with my assessment and my reasons for referring to WW II as the Great War? If so I would like to hear why.
  But you may have informed others, so kudos to you. I already knew the information you posted.
  
  --
  I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
5. Re:Not your Grandpa's war anymore! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-31 10:16 · Score: 0
  
  But you may have informed others, so kudos to you. I already knew the information you posted.
  Jesus god you're a faggot.
6. Re:Not your Grandpa's war anymore! by sahala · 2003-11-01 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  So long ago I hijacked the phrase and, while I believe it is rather fitting, your comment shows the type of queries I have to constantly answer. Do you disagree with my assessment and my reasons for referring to WW II as the Great War? If so I would like to hear why.
  I agree with your assessment in the sense that WWII did have greater moral undertones than WWI. Fine.
  I disagree with the hijacking of the term Great War. The Great War is and always will be World War I. It may not be a complete fit, but as a historical term it is the truth. By your logic if we have another world war that has even more moral significance, do we call that the Great War instead? When the US has a depression worse than the original Great Depression, do we call the new one the REAL Great Depression? Do you change your first name or surname to something different when you find something more fitting? Unlike programming, odd historical terms can't really be refactored.
  If you want a fancier name for WWII you're free to choose from a multitude of other words besides Great.
Telefragged's Scores by borg1238 · 2003-10-30 07:47 · Score: 1

From Telefragged:
Technology: 90%
Interface: 89%
Graphics: 90%
Single Player: 89%
Multiplayer: 90%
Sound and Music: 92%
Overall: 90%
So what kept "Single Player" and "Interface" from reaching the coveted 90% score? What factors pushed it down to 89%?!
Looks like a pretty anal scoring system. I think it's going a little to far ranking games on a scale from 1-100. A "1-10 scale" would seem more than adequate.
Tried the DEMO? by JesusHelper · 2003-10-31 06:11 · Score: 0

I tried the DEMO of this last night and was positively blown away. If the rest of the game is this good I will be very happy. Can anybody suggest a WW2 game that is as good or beter than this?