Call of Duty Series

[UGZ-GHOSTFACE2]

For people who play/played Call Of Duty:World At War don't you think trearchs graphics looked way better?I think it looks more realistic!

Message Edited by UGZ-GHOSTFACE2 on 11-29-2009 10:40 AM

[SpecOp_Viper]

I thought WaW was complete utter garbage.

[Kryptonite158]

---

SpecOp_Viper wrote:
I thought WaW was complete utter garbage.

---

Same here.

[MrKrayzie420]

WaW did looks better at some parts, yeah.

[coperson]

Mw2 uses a dif engine than mw1

well a better version of it  said to be 4 times as strong as MW1

and yea WaW graphics looked the same as cod3: really **bleep**ty

Message Edited by coperson on 11-29-2009 12:58 PM

[leukoplast]

I thought WAW looked like hypercrap. IMO It actually looked worse than COD4. Treyarch fails miserably at everything, even directly copying another game with access to all the source code. MW2 does look better than COD4 and a LOT better than WAW.

[Boricua_012]

Yeah... WaW graphics are horrible and so is the game... lol

[kKrySh12]

they were all from the cod4 engine?  

w@w looked slightly better than cod4 and mw2 looks better than both.  

[UGZ-GHOSTFACE2]

Sorry haters!

[leukoplast]

---

UGZ-GHOSTFACE2 wrote:

Sorry haters!

---

You should go play WAW exclusively then. I mean if it's so superior you shouldn't play MW2 at all anymore.

And I mean come on, WAW is so fresh with it's original WW2 style gaming, no other game has done that before! And they did all the hard work to actually make the graphics engine and everything else from the game. When people say they didn't do anything and just copied COD4 and slapped different weapons and maps in, don't believe them! /sarcasm