For the best lawn care in cedar park, please visit our sponsor at lawn service cedar park They are a local lawn care and landscaping company that provide services in such as lawn care, lawn mowing, weeding, and landscape maintenance in Cedar Park, Austin, Round Rock, and Leander area. They are located at:

Lawn Care Service of Cedar Park 100 E Whitestone Blvd Ste 148, #166 Cedar Park, TX 78613 (512) 595-0884

Call of Duty vs. Medal of Honor

Which of this Classic Series Do You Prefer?

  • Call of Duty

    Votes: 17 85.0%

  • Medal of Honor

    Votes: 3 15.0%
  • Total voters
    20
Usul

Usul

Registered User
Due to the lack of new games, two nights ago i decided to install and play Call of Duty 2.

One go, non stop. I went in normal mode and didn't stop until i had liberated Europe. It took me all evening, all night and most of the morning...

What an experience. I can never get tired of this game.

Then, the next day, i decided to reminisce a little more and i installed Medal of Honor Pacific Assault.

Now, this game is obviously good. Very good. The scenery and overall graphics are superior. The vegetation sways, the water looks good and the character movement is more realistic than COD2's. The jungles were lush and very well made, but i stopped playing this game shortly after landing on the first island. It's got nice features but doesn't come anywhere near comparing to the end to end action of COD2. The gameplay is wank compared to COD2's. I mean, if i were to play multiplayer, i would choose COD2 without hesitation. In fact, you can also use tanks and vehicles in COD2.

I would have to say that Activision totally outshone EA.

Medal of Honor Allied Assault, and the subsequent add-ons, are another story.

The storyline, atmosphere and music were incredible. It was like being in a movie. They had a good mix of covert missions and all out battles. They even enlisted the help of Spielberg, and the great Gary Oldman lent his voice for one of the add-ons, which is cool. :p

Then COD came in with a relatively innovative feature though. The down the sights aiming. Genious. They weren't the first to put this to use, but still. Shooting Nazis with an Enfield rifle had never been so enjoyable.

Anyway, all in all, i really enjoyed the first MOH but i'm going to stick with COD2. Actually, i'm off to buy the new add-on! Big Red One!
 
greeny

greeny

Registered User
has to be call of duty my computer is wank so I cant play at home but I play at my mates all the time the multi player is great.
 
Barry

Barry

Registered User
I prefer Brothers in Arms to both, perhaps that is personal though.

Out of the two, the main memories consist of Omaha Beach and storming the Red Square. So awfully memorable, so intense.
 
Usul

Usul

Registered User
barryvs said:
I prefer Brothers in Arms to both, perhaps that is personal though.

Out of the two, the main memories consist of Omaha Beach and storming the Red Square. So awfully memorable, so intense.
Click to expand...
Both great maps indeed. I love how they make that chapter look like Enemy at the Gates. Being a sniper in Stalingrad like the great Vasilij Zaitsev, was such a treat.

Brothers in Arms was good, i really enjoyed that one, but it focuses on squad movement and tactics. It makes you feel like you're more in control of the outcome of the battle and are not playing entirely alone.

It's definitely worth a mention but i think the other two are superior, simply because when it comes to multiplayer action, BIA, as i recall, doesn't come close.

I think i'll play it tonight. Some sort of add-on was released for this one in the summer as well.
 
Teekay

Teekay

Human After All
I only have Medal Of Honor: Frontline for PS2, which is obiviously a very old game.

But I used to like it a lot.
 
Haribo

Haribo

Super Moderator
I love both series. I always preferred the team element on COD, as opposed to doing everything by yourself in MOH. I like the single player side of Call Of Duty, but prefer the multiplayer side of Medal Of Honor. Most people will probably think the other way round, but there are more maps for me to explore in MOD, and is a lot more accessible (easier to get into). Having said that my favourite multiplayer map is on COD. Very tough, I just can't decide between the two. Hence why I get both :ninja:
 
M

Mr Shhh

Registered User
Have to agree with Haribo, there is a lot more maps on MOH, but COD2 the graphics i feel are superior to MOH when playing online. I suppose it's watever rocks your boat.
You ever played "Return to Castle Wolvenstein"? give it a go, its dated but gameplay wise, its just a really great game.
 
Usul

Usul

Registered User
S1mon said:
personally i prefer battlefield 1942, nothing can beat it on the net
Click to expand...
Well, the maps are larger and you can use a wide range of vehicles and aircraft, but the gameplay stinks when compared to COD.

Nothing compares to the feeling you get when you're shooting people with a Kar 98k Mauser.

It's my favorite computer game weapon of all time.

It's also a great sniping rifle when scoped.
 
Usul

Usul

Registered User
S1mon said:
I prefer just scoutin around with the springfield 04 rifle
Click to expand...
I'm not a camper by nature, but i really enjoy crouching on roof tops and towers and sniping people from above. :ninja:
 
Singh

Singh

The beautiful game
Prefer Medal of Honor to any other war type game, they set the trend for only others to follow.

Medal of honor :Frontline brilliant opening scene.
 
Usul

Usul

Registered User
S1mon said:
What we can declare is that no1 comes close to EA in WW2 shooters
Click to expand...
Well, Activision created COD.

Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood was created by Ubisoft and it's really good too. Most of the maps they made in that game were based on real places and pretty accurate.

I'm off to buy Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway. Should be good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top