i don't know which one to get and i know near nothing about each one's multiplayer. I preferably want the game with a 2 player splitscreen mode (including offline 2-player, if it has this). Which one has the best maps? Best arsenal, controls, perks? Campaign i don't reaaaly care about. I can't find much info on multiplayer anywhere, not even on Ward's website... please help!
COD: BO has two player splitscreen online, MW2 only has splitscreen offline. Both are pretty much the same game-play wise. The graphics are very similar, slightly worse graphics in COD: BO (you would think they would be better.) COD: BO has Zombies, MW2 has Spec Ops. Zombies win hands down. I'd go for COD4
I thought it a bit strange that they'd lower the graphical capabilities, but if it makes the game run smoother, both in split screen and online, then it's not a big deal at all. I'd prefer to have it running smoothly than looking fantastic. Other than that, Black Ops wins hands down, and I haven't even played it yet (although I've watched hours of gameplay vids). You can play as Nixon, JFK, Robert MacNamara, and Castro in Black Ops, which automatically makes it an instant win.
okay, thnx. are the maps in 2 player splitscreen the same ones as in online? Can you create private rooms in online?
So MW2 sucks, and BO is decent. Best bet is to go with Battlefield Bad Company 2. Best fps out there atm. There's no split screen, but online multiplayer is amazing. It's a game where most people don't randomly swear, you actually talk tactic and working as a group wins games.
COD has proper dedicated servers and allows upto 40 players is it? Tbh though I'd still rather play CS.
If you get sucked into black ops, which is insanely (for any CoD) easy game, the amount of stuff to do and get is unbelieveable. I personally love it, MW2 was a beta that was released IMHO. Playing black ops and seeing the cut scenes in particular makes me feel like a Badass. And I have noticed many differences in MP b/w MW2 and BO, and BO has a much better feel also IMHO.
This. It's the only recent FPS that's really pushed the boat out and done something new and different. CoD is predictable to the point of inanity by now.
The only thing that COD has over battlefield is the amount of levels. Fortunately/unfortunately we have to wait for the Vietnam war pack.
Neither one of these is that good but they're both somehow addicting enough to get millions of us to waste too much of our time shooting each other online. I have a plan, they should start making the CoDs so bad that no one can bare to play them anymore at all, let Khalid Shaikh make the next one and everyone can all start getting out of the house more.
Battlefield: Bad Company 2... need I say more? And more game modes. But, Battlefield has about 4 or 5 times the size of a CoD map per map. So you shouldn't need more maps. Anyway, have you heard that there is gonna be a VIP Pack with old BC1 maps recreated for BC2, and this is a free one.
In BC2 you have to walk miles to get into the fight, and there's no action at all because the maps are so big. Go for BO!
Uh, yeah, realism? Matches last longer as a result, it feels more like a war, you can use vehicles if you're desperately far away and besides, you get squads... spawn next to a squad mate and you'll be bang in the middle of the action. You talk like someone who doesn't understand Battlefield at all. The maps are big but the action moves from area to area, so it's always pretty well contained and never too spread out, people are generally heading towards the same area because the objective is there.
To answer that question: I hate CoD and Halo, but here it is Battlefield Bad Company 2>>Halo Reach>Black Ops>Modern Warfare 2
