Barozi said:
and you have absolutely no idea about the CoD franchise. United Offensive had the big maps and vehicles. That was made by Treyarch and had nothing to do with the original. Besides that Halo had vehicles. Pretty laughable that you think CoD2 has no vehicles because of Halo. Furthermore many people already think that CoD2 is better than CoD. |
I have more of an idea about the CoD franchise than you think. For starters, UO was made by Gray Matter, not Treyarch (though it was later merged with Treyarch). I was there from day one on the PC. CoD was an amazing game but when the expansion came out, it grew by leaps and bounds.
UO had a lot more to do with the original than you think, it was an expansion after all. It took the same engine and added things to it. It was a step forward, while CoD 2 was a step back. I never said that CoD2 had no vehicles because of Halo. I meant that because of games like Halo, the face of PC FPS started to change and shift towards a more console desired specific (many being multiplat, console exclusive, poor PC support/patches and so on).
And by "many people" you might mean the critics because I remember a lot of CoD and UO clans and communities didn't like the path that CoD2 was going down. Like I said before, it was a big step back in terms of the direction they were taking. The PC CoD community was not happy with CoD2. And thus, CoD3 wasn't released on PC. When CoD4 came out, it was finally what everyone was looking for in CoD2. I firmly beleive that if CoD2 had kept the pace forward with UO, then we would have had a much better/higher selling game that would have paved the way for CoD3 on PC.








