Objectively best multiplayer Call of Duty game

I'm more curious about the ufos he killed

Black Ops 2

Great weapon variety and balance. The scorestreak system is what killstreaks should have been in the first place. And the Pick 10 system greatly expanded upon the create-a-class system.

Maybe an original image has been artificially manipulated and he never shot down any ufos at all.

That's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one.
CoD3 was the last good CoD game.

POOR!

OFF BY ONE

isnt cod 3 where they started shitting grenades all over you in the campaign?
Still pretty shit user.

No and grenades didn't insta-kill in the campaign anyway.

Nah, that was CoD2 and it didn't get fixed until MW2

Literally cuckchan at this point

Oh wait, nevermind
This thread is garbagr from the get go
Thats UO for obvious reasons and anyone who says otherwise is a redditor/cuckchanner.

...

I find this reasonable and agreeable. The only bad thing going for BOII was the futuristic setting being poorly received. I remember a lot of people chimping out about it.

I feel like the series went to shit real hard after Black Ops. I bought a bunch of them during the last Steam sale, I figured I should give CoD style FPS a try instead of shitting on them for not being like DOOM and I could refund them if they were shit anyway. CoD seems to be the only game series to get that style right, Homefront and the Medal of Honor reboot for example both bored me to fucking tears, they were so bad, so incredibly dull, goddamn. No interesting encounters, horizontal as fuck, nothing memorable, no decent characters, uninteresting plot, guns handled and sounded like shit. Whereas games like MW2 shocked me with levels like Favela which had more vertical aiming required than most PC centric FPS and had great encounter design, it felt like I was playing an FPS version of Virtua Cop.

So I went into it wanting to hate them and found them suprisingly fun up to Black Ops, Infinity Ward went to shit after MW2 and Sledgehammer has no fucking clue what they are doing.

You gonna explain what that is.

I never played anything earlier than 4, but multiplayer wise it is pretty fucking shitty. It is nothing but "I see u ur Dead" non-fights back by the cancerous leveling system.

If you're shit at positiong / get spotted first in a firefight what should happen? You should win when you run into an enemy ass first?
What a load of shit.

United Offensive on a 60 player server, pavlovs house. Best cod.

...

It's more interesting to have the person with superior aim and movement be the victor, that said, as long as you are checking your map constantly, using UAV and know the typical camping spots of a level, the "I see you first" is not as big of a deal. So many people treat the mini-map like it doesn't exist and then shit on the game after dying over and over, which is unfortunate.

i dont think the low health and high rof weapons even factor into it. Map design is a maze like clusterfuck and spawning mechanics encourage you to sneak up behind someone and shoot them.

If the game had clear cut battle lines or encouraged a game mode other then deathmatch the series could become mediocre instead of just utter trash.

just like this thread

Interesting thread, considering that cod is shit but on a side note, what pre cod4 game has the best campaign and which post cod4 game has the best campaign

"Hurr durr I keep dying this game sucks"
Act like a retard and you'll keep dying, this is true for every shooter game.
At least it's enjoyable for the people who kill you.

observe my repeating digits

Dubs won't save us from the cuckchan flood anymore

Depressing dubs checked ;_;

Not all games should be UT / quake clones. Superior positioning is by far the key when it comes to modern combat.

le clokwerkz faec

we went through the motions in 27 posts. Shut it down that was a pretty quick run.

Your solution gives less of a punishment for the person running around headless and less of a reward for the person who was better at positioning.
Now that is nofun.

Assuming Cod4 doesn't count, 1 and WaW.
I think Activision did a really great job with that Black Cats mission, it's a part of the Pacific a lot of pro documentaries don't even mention.

United Offensive was great, the high point of the pre-MW era, it did everything the first game did but much better, it also introduced sprint which strangely enough wasn't in CoD2 for some reason. It was made by the same guys who did Return to Castle Wolfenstein as well. The first CoD was okay, but it was outdone by UO in every way and the lack of sprint makes it feel excruciatingly slow. Same for 2, which also IMO made the AI much dumber and relied on sheer numbers for difficulty instead, I never played 3 as it was console exclusive and I've also never heard anyone talk about it at all so it was probably terrible or so mediocre everyone forgot about it. If you want a WW2 CoD game then United Offensive is the way to go.

For post MW it's basically a tie between MW2 and Black Ops, though MW had some excellent missions like All Ghilled Up. MW2 has better encounter design and vertical moments, while Black Ops had the best, most ridiculous story and presentation in the whole series.

There's no skill in positioning though. Anyone can look up camping spots online, same as anyone can look up builds for RPGs that basically play the game for you. Meanwhile anyone can look up how to beat up a boss in Bayonetta, but actually doing it is far harder than simply knowing what to do.

That said, people whining about that sort of thing need to keep an eye on their mini-map and CHECK THOSE CORNERS.

In Quake, position is still important. UT probably has the same case but I can't say for myself.

On the gun barrel, you dumb fuck.
That's basic knowledge. Water is wet, fire is hot and the Germans painted thin lines on the gun barrels for each kill or a thick line for 10 kills.

Thats not world at war

RIP Nazi Zombies

cod4 promod

both of those games involve positioning

This, I kicked ass at black ops 2, hijacked was my jam, origins is the second best zombies map beside ascension. Basically any treyarch game is good, though Black ops 3 tried to go a little too deep and pretentious with the campaign in a game where the objective is "Shoot bad guy".

This is the best post. I really loved Black Ops.

CoD 4 and Black Ops 2.

Black ops is the best.

cod4

Mlg kiddies were half the fun for me. There was this communal expectation that you were supposed to let them attempt to 360 you from the crane on highrise if you were the last man standing, so I would wait for all but one of them to fuck up, then I would take the last one out with my m21. Good times.

Dubs consensus suggests Black Ops, I agree.

which game is that screen from

also, is CoD 4 still alive in terms of multiplayer? Feels like the remake they made would take away from the online life.

also also, how's the campaign in 4?

Cod4 and Black Ops. WaW for zombies. MW2 was fucking awful and introduced the most cancer.

The fall of 'Modern Warfare ' began with mw2 and blackops 2 destroyed cod

I'm pretty sure that screen is from MW2. CoD4 is still alive thanks to dedicated servers and modding, nobody plays the remake since it is fucking trash. The campaign in 4 is excellent. It is a fusion of classic CoDs anti-war message with the ridiculous over the top nature of the newer games without going full retard, a perfect balance IMO. It's the bridge between the two eras essentially. The sniper mission deserves all the love it gets, it was so crazy to me seeing a CoD level of all things require patience and a slow pace, with it building up a crescendo instead of going full in your face adrenaline rush from start to finish.

well shit, downloading it now. I bought it forever ago on a steam sell and have just been sitting on it since.

Considering Black Ops II is effortlessly the least shit game in the series. I will gladly explain.

Instead of rewarding streaks just for kills you earned points for just about everything. Every action in game also counted towards the streak rewards, so you could theoretically earn good streaks just by playing the objectives. Kills counted too obviously but this system made the rampant camping that plagued the series slightly less rampant.

Black Ops II is also distinctive for having the absolute best campaign in the series and if you disagree you are either a hipster shitfuck or never played it. Black Ops II was a better RPG than any modern Bioware game.

The pick 10 system allowed you to take whatever the fuck you wanted into the game. You start off with a blank slate and are given 10 points to spend to fill out your class, and everything was optional. You could literally make a Solid snek class that carried no weapons and had to kill people and steal their guns, and the game rewarded you for making crazy classes like this because you could invest your 10 points however you wanted, so not taking a bling gun with 3 attachments allowed you to have much crazier perks and wildcards instead.

There will never be another brainlet tier FPS as good as Black Ops II ever again. And the world is poorer for it. I bought it during a steam sale because I was in the mood for some mindless dumb dudebro shit and was blown away by how amazing the game was in actuality.

The story was good, the multiplayer is almost perfectly balanced with no obvious crutch bullshit like Grenade spam or noobtubes. Quickscoping didn't work. The millstreams weren't over powered and you could equip a little device that shut them down if you were patient and had a chance to breathe.

The only stain on that game was they brought back gay as fuck nuketown which k's the most cancerous map in FPS history.

It was magical.

Also I would not recommend playing it on Veteran first time through. It requires you to know exactly where to go and to kill the bare minimum amount of enemies to reach that area before you are overwhelmed by a metric ton of infinitely respawning enemies also GRENADES EVERYWHERE and you need to do it as fast as possible. I would highly recommend Hardened (the second hardest) instead for a first time run.

Either COD2 or COD4. Haven't touched the series after MW2 which was pretty much unplayable online. Forced Steam, shitty peer-to-peer servers, horrible and unbalanced perks etc.

I'm still mad at MW2. Silly me thought they'd fix the horrible imbalances of COD4, instead they made it all around worse.

1/United Offensive

CoD 4 killed the industry because it was good. The campaign is excellent, and even 10 years later the levels are varied and interesting while still showing off the gun porn the series would come to be known for.

I'm honestly surprised you haven't played it. There are so many iconic, memorable moments I imagine your experience will be like what I felt playing Half-Life for the first time.

My only experience with BLops 2 is local multiplayer using a pirated copy on a friend's jailbroken X360, so I didn't get quite the full spectrum of experience you did, but the pick 10 system was far and away the best thing the series has ever had in multiplayer. The lack of it in newer games (either due to some patent, or pride on the part of the newer devs) is a crime.

...

How dead are some of the older CoDs online expierences? Blops 3 went to shit with loot crate guns and WW2 is hot fucking garbage. Never played any between MW:2 and Blops3 either and feel like I may of missed out on a decent one.

Black Ops 2 doesn't have respawning enemies.

wow a newer yearly rehash, I guess it's the bee's knees then, not like it's the same or even worse of a vapid shitheap of an experience

FEAR is piss easy even without using the slow-mo gimmick compared to MW on Veteran, hilarious considering MW is supposedly casual. FEAR was also a slow corridor shooter and had plenty of scripted moments, regen health on all but the highest difficulty and nothing but generic grunts for enemies. It also had a serious lack of variety, especially compared to MW, every single fucking level was an office building, what the fuck man.

My point from that post was that mastering the shooting mechanics would justify the shortcomings. F.E.A.R. is a good example of that, every gunfight has so much potential fun packed into it that everything else can go take a hike. Difficulty doesn't matter when MW isn't fun, least of all on the highest difficulty which is a test of patience, grenade spam and instant death. Also you're wrong:
In case you forgot, shootout locations were spacious, provided several routes to take and looped into themselves, allowing enemies and you to flank.
Didn't actually know this because you should always play on highest difficulty, but I just read it's partial regeneration that only covers 1/4 of your health.
There are at least 6 different enemies that commonly appear, not counting reskins of regular grunts. Modern Warfare has fucking nothing.

Top dollar if Reddit and normies liked FEAR he would be shutting on it right now. Call of Duty IS shit friend. But there have been some gems here or there.

I can't remember needing to master any shooting mechanics in FEAR and I have beaten it on the highest difficulty with no slow mo. If the game had advanced recoil patterns I didn't notice since the enemies went down very quick and the weapons were fairly accurate.

True of MW as well.

What is so bad about requiring patience? I thought this game was a vapid mindless shitheap? The grenade spam makes the ability to toss back grenades essential and forces you to stay on the move completely shitting on the perception that CoD games are just sitting in one location killing enemies with no effort while your health regens. You don't die instantly if you aren't playing like a fucking moron. Veteran is a legit hardest difficulty unlike FEAR where you can just shut your brain off and press bullet time to win. Veteran requires you to master use of all mechanics the game has while under tons of pressure where making a single mistake means death. You have to move constantly from cover to cover efficiently, not just choosing random shit to run to and hide behind all day, figure out which enemies are 100% necessary to kill as spending time killing randoms is a deadly waste of time that results in being overwhelmed very quickly and completing the objectives as quickly and efficiently as possible. FEAR is casual as balls compared to this despite having superior AI (negated by bullet time, AI dying quickly, attacking in small squads that don't respawn and the player having 10 fucking medkits)

Sounds like MW to me. I'm starting to wonder if you actually played it or if you were like me and shit on it because it wasn't a classic style shooter until I opened my mind a bit and gave it a try.

Oh fuck off. I distinctly remember being extremely disappointed that more unique enemy types like the invisible melee ninjas, the flying robots and those ghosts were used incredibly sparingly, 2 maybe 3 times tops in the whole game in very short engagements in favor of just having clone grunts everywhere. All of them in cramped office corridors as well. There is more variety in the first 3 missions of MW than the entirety of FEAR. MW didn't have classic FPS tier levels of enemy variety but off the top of my head there were assault rifle/submachine users, shotgunners, rockets, snipers, dogs, helicopters and various land vehicles. The variety within the levels kept them interesting to the end. Meanwhile in FEAR although I did have lots of fun, it felt like a repetitive slog in places, it seemed like they were just trying hard to pad out the game time, an hour or two could have been cut out easily.

I mean on the developers' part, they did a good job.
This is where we disagree wildly. I remember MW as utterly boring in its shooting mechanics and firefights. No ragdoll physics, none of the spectacular particle effects, completely samey weapons and only braindead numerous grunts to shoot down.
You made cowadoody of all things sound like some sort of master's sonata, good job. You're really driving this "CoD is hard and skill-based" argument to a point I've never seen, I never claimed FEAR was tough shit, it's simply a fun and largely unique shooter to experience. If I want challenge and difficulty, I'll go with something else entirely.
And yet they didn't have the enemies to utilize the environments because they had crippled simple AI.
You give me a break, most of these are the same grunt with the same health and same or very similar behavior and dogs simply ran towards you in a straight line. Vehicle battles as I remember were heavily scripted sequences where the rocket launchers weren't a complete waste.
My point from the beginning was that F.E.A.R. is a modern FPS with similar design to that of MW yet it was made much more entertaining because of qualities like its shooting mechanics, gunplay, weapon variety, more enemy variety (yes) AI and gorgeous shading and environments, despite coming out 2 years before. Not a flawless game but much more interesting than cowadoody.

this, also the best singleplayer (someone post the picture of how story choices branch out)

United Offensive you young cunts

nvm got it

I'll have to give BO2 a try. I was butthurt about it moving in a more futuristic direction instead of staying in the Vietnam era, but judging by other anons in this thread it's actually really good. Does it have the double jump, dodge, wallrun etc of the other future CoDs? I felt like those mechanics wouldn't gel well with CoD, pretty much turning it into an entirely different game and the community seems to agree (worked great in UT2004 though). This series keeps surprising the hell out me, I assumed it was just just braindead normie bullshit yet it does things better than all of its contemporaries and is more challenging and vertical than non-mainstream PC centric FPS lauded for their difficulty.

Black ops are considered the best CoD games since the newer ones completely fucked everything up by being so unbalanced in MP and having garbage SP.

Treyarch unlike the (((Other Devs))) actually try making good CoD games and do their best to balance MP out. non Treyarch games bomb hard, Treyarch games are a financial success.

Fuck Holla Forums I'm getting the fuck off this shithole

Where the fuck am I? Cuckchan?

advanced warfare, blops 3 and infinite warfare all had the pick 10 system (aw added the scorestreaks to the individual loadouts so its pick 13 there)

see you in a day

Black Ops 3

You're at your computer fighting for the approval of people you'll never meet.

CoD 4.
CoD 2 was great but save a few misshaps that were patch out, the unlock/progression system was providing variety without fucking up the balance of the game which made CoD 4 CoD 2 + progression done right.

Without a few infuriating features (P2P, last stand BS, not enough maps, etc…) it would quite possibly have been THE best FPS multiplayer of the decade.

How many of you and the people fishing for dubs post in Halo threads? How many of you never actually played CoD yet shit on it anyway like I used to do?

It's a really shitty CoD (which is saying something) though.
The choice have consequence is the only good aspect of it and a minor thing. It's scream of the one autist wanting that feature and actually caring about it when the plot is garbage, the gunplay vastly garbage, there are bugs everywhere and the dialogs are comically bad (even by vidya standards… which is saying something).

BO3 is still great if you can handle the vertical element of it

World at War was objectively the best, multiplayer included. It was also the beginning of the end, and the start of the yearly three dev cycle that very quickly sunk the series into mediocrity.

call duty is my favoritest gaem!! XD

I have no fucking clue how people tolerate that shit aside from being ignorant of just how fantastic it is to aim with a mouse. Even as a kid with vastly lower standards playing Goldeneye and Perfect Dark the controls completely killed it for me. Thank fuck someone hacked both to give it M+KB controls and 60fps, now if someone could just do the same for Jet Force Gemini and the Timesplitters series.

I don't need to be greeted with WOAH! +500XP! LEVEL UP! SUPER EXTREME SERGEANT OF MASTER SERGEANTS! UNLOCKED P-3N1S!
It's almost as if this is worthless trash to captivate otherwise uninterested players. It's almost as if the game alone wouldn't stand by itself without the facade of a super duper cool progression system that calls you hardcore and rewards you like a dog with treats every time you play the game. It's cancer that evolved into ITEM GET check out this new lootcrate! Not to mention every time you want to replay it with a new profile, you have to deal with being completely restricted for a while.

Nope, all of that stuff was introduced in Advanced Warfare which, came out 2 years after BO2. The only dodge it has is the dive move from the first Black Ops, I believe.

But yes, I'd say the single player is worth a pirate. In terms of gameplay it's nothing amazing but I genuinely can't think of a game from the last or current generation that handled choices better than BO2's campaign apart from New Vegas. Actually allowing you to fail a mission and then giving you an optional RTT-esque side mission to rectify it isn't what I expected from a Call of Duty game, at any rate.

CoD United Offensive

If you don't put a progression system in a game you always end up with everyone taking the best meta gun.
The progression system forces players to master and play with different weapons which in turn make players most likely to stick with a gun they like/fit their style and bring a nice diversification to the fights instead of the intense AWP duels of CS.

The thing to not fuck up is "how to to make people grind, without actually giving them a real edge over players that don't" and that's something MW2 did very well.

I don't think so. The big problem is the number of weapons. Why do you need 5+ weapons per weapon type?
People bitched about the "small" number of weapons in Battleshiet1 but in reality there was way too many weapons and the automatic ones fucked up the whole WW1 experience. Also there's no need for 10 knives or 10 shovels for melee.
My ideal "current year" CoD game would have no perks, a progression system that allows you to unlock new pieces of uniforms (cosmetic only), a proper class system (each class has its own role to play, medic, supply, engineer), the scorestreaks would be a map-specific collective reward for playing the objective (for example a team gets control of point A, they activate the missiles or some shit like that, another point would give them better vehicles, etc.).
United Offensive will always be the best CoD game.
The huge problem of post-MW games is the lack of team play. You can't get people to play for the objectives, it's always "muh K/D ratio". Sadly this will never change because Activision is deep into esports.

World at War has the best basic gunplay in the series, while Black Ops has the best map design.

At the end of the day though, CoD is a casual franchise just like CS. I left those sorry point-&-click simulators long ago.
Battlefield is the thinking man's FPS, where the real men prove themselves.

Yeah because CoD2 multiplayer wasn't insanely popular right? Fucking hell man you haven't even played these games at all. How many people are playing FEAR multiplayer right now? What? Zero? Even though it's free? How sad. CoD 2 was released the same year and still has hundreds of players despite there being 13 games in the series, having no progression system and being 12 years old.