User Reviews (1 - 11 of 288)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

too short

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 11 / 98
Date: November 12, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Lots of fun, but it is way too short. Over in less then a day. Rent, do not buy.

terrible

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 138
Date: November 19, 2007
Author: Amazon User

well i purchased the game and was not impressed with the graphics or controls. i refuse to pay for xbox live when pc is free so i purchased the pc version and maxed out the graphics and resolution and it like a different game. this version ruins the experience get it for pc the 360 version is a joke

Good game , but ....

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 71
Date: December 07, 2007
Author: Amazon User

In fact, the worst thing in the game story, which is detrimental to the Arabs directly and indirectly. The city of Jeddah in the game is not as presented has been presented as a backward city and the old way. The game is good, especially online mode .

Probally the most overrated game of all time

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 26
Date: March 26, 2008
Author: Amazon User

This game is SO OVERRATED. Campaign was short. Multiplayer was the same as Halo 3. The missions in campaign that were ok are what kept me giving this a 1 star in the "fun" rating. I mean, this game blows. Its Conflict Desert Storm with a different case and slightly different missions and characters. This game is such a disgrace to the COD series. I LOVED 1,2, and 3. This one BLOWS!!!!! Get Army of Two/BioShock/R6V/R6V2 and put your 60 dollars to good use. See you later!

UPDATE4/12-I know Halo is unrealistic. I think everybody knows that. At least this game is somewhat realistic. But
1)Turrets Overheat in this game. TURRETS DONT OVERHEAT!!! I've shot turrets before, and you have to reload them after 100 shots(which you dont do in COD4 i think you know), BUT THEY DONT FU**ING OVERHEAT!! WTF!!
2)Why cant you take silencers off the guns? I know you cant do that in AO2, so dont tell me. But why cant you reach down, and screw the silencer off. Thats BS
3)Graphics. Sure they look great. BUT ONLY IF YOU STAY PUT IN 1 ROOM. THEN THEY ALL LOOK THE FREAKIN SAME!!!
Okay have a nice day goodbye

CoD4 Good, Online play BAD!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 10
Date: April 24, 2008
Author: Amazon User

I have played this game for way, way too much time and am about ready to toss it in the garbage. Graphics are superb, story is ok for local play. But let's face it, we buy this game to go online and play against real people, not a computer program. Here's where the problem lies.
Infinity Ward/Activision (I'm not sure how they work together) run the servers and software that set up the games. There are signiv=ficant issues with latency. Latency is the time lag, or gap, between different players. It has to do with each players physical distance to the servers, and possibly what type of connections on the internet. For example, Player A walks around a corner, sees Player B, raises his weapon and begins to fire. But because PLayer A has 2 seconds of latency more than Player B, Player B turns, sees Player A, raises his weapon and kills Play A. Player A clearly shot Player B, but when the KillCam (instant replay from your opponents view) is shown, it appears that Player A never raised his weapon.
Infinity Ward has a website with player forums, and in spite of the fact that they have moderators, players by the hundreds, if not thousands, can get no response to the latency issue from the authors of this game. This latency issue has turned the game into a cartoonish, Ratchet and Clank shoot the hell out of everything game.
If Infinity Ward doesn't attend to this problem, and there are other issues, I won't by anything from Activision again.

Game was boring

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 27
Date: April 14, 2008
Author: Amazon User

I owned the game for a week and then sold it. I did not play online. I really did not like the game.

Welcome Back Campers - online play review

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 22 / 38
Date: November 17, 2007
Author: Amazon User

If you enjoy getting picked off by an unseen enemy, never even having a chance to fire back, if your game is to find some hidden perch, lie in the prone position and wait for some poor soul to walk in front of your crosshairs, if you loved COD2 because it rewarded your camp/sniping by making the sniper rifle far and away the most effective gun, if you were disappointed when COD3 made the sniper rifle's scope, smaller, cloudier and more difficult to aim, then you will love COD4 because Infinity Ward has put you back on top.

In an apparent fit of spitefulness for being snubbed on COD3, Infinity Ward has reversed all of the major improvements made by Treyarch in COD3, taking the franchise back two big steps. The online gameplay of COD4 is very similar to COD2. While COD2 was a remarkable game in many ways, it had one serious drawback, it encouraged camping out with sniper rifle, and discouraged moving about the map and trying to achieve the objective of whatever type of match you were playing. The field of view on the scope for COD2 was vast, the targets inside the field of view were enormous, and to place the crosshairs over target and fire was no challenge for even a novice player. A skilled sniper, on the other hand could make the game miserable for everyone else.

What was great about COD3 was that it leveled the playing field by making sniping more difficult. This was done in several ways. First, the field of view through the scope was much reduced. Transitioning from normal view to ADS through the scope was almost disorienting. If your distant target was not already in the direct center of your screen under normal view, it will likely be outside your field of view through the scope. Also, holding steady aim was made more difficult, and the glass of the scope was made cloudy and dirty--realistic changes. Lastly, and most ingeniously, you cannot camp anywhere on any map on COD3, without having the shine of your helmet visible to any targets in your sights. COD4 has restored the imbalance by bringing back the properties of COD2's sniper rifle and eliminating the tell tale shiny helmet. Once again snipers dominate.

Perhaps I have an unfair bias against the sniper but I don't really see the point of multiplayer gameplay when one party does not know the other is there. If you are a sniper, you don't really need to be playing with other humans. It is basically target practice--these players might be better off playing Duck Hunt on NES. They could get the same thrill of shooting an oblivious target, without wasting my time. I much prefer challenging another player or players head on, where we both know the other is there, both aim and shoot at each other and outcome is based on the reflexes, and skill of both players.

While there are many new features and improvements added in COD4 which I like, such as ranking system, and weapon unlocking, these are thoroughly discussed in the many 4 and 5 star reviews above. But for those of us in the anti-sniping camp, it is overall an inferior game to COD3 and does not have the same lasting power.

Try the demo before you buy - dissapointing when compared to other games in the same genre

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 11 / 31
Date: November 26, 2007
Author: Amazon User

I was dissapointed in two areas, enough to give it a 2 star rating:

1 - in-scene/game experience - when compared to Battlefield 2, Ghost Recon (GRAW 2), and Halo 3, I found the game experience in COD4 very linear and constrained. In this respect, it is closer to Medal of Honor Airborne, which I prefer from the recent batch of games in this genre.

2 - graphics - it did not find it as visual compelling and presenting as rich of an environment as GRAW 2 or Halo 3

On the positive side, it felt consistent in terms of performance (fps) and the cut scenes are very interesting and well made.

Overall, I recommend trying it out before buying, so that you are not disappointed afterwards.

Poor multiplayer capabilities + dizzy machine = bad product

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 8 / 22
Date: November 13, 2007
Author: Amazon User

I was very excited at getting this game...watching all the youtube postings and it was great fun. But that was more fun then playing the game itself. The first thing that bothers me is that there is no single player campaign co-op. Also, if you want to go online to xbox live, you can't go online with multiple people from your console...only one person. Which means if you wanted to play with you friends they all have to get consoles and the game...total bummer.

Lastly, I feel like I've played lots of shooters...Gears of war, rainbow six...but for some reason this game really moves too fast..and just makes you want to puke haha...probably not a problem for most...maybe i'm too used to gears of war

The graphics are pretty good with some great scenes but this is probably a rental not something to add to your library.

Holy Smokes This Game is Overrated

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 6 / 11
Date: February 01, 2008
Author: Amazon User

First off, I want to go on record as not being a Halo or Half Life 2 fan-boy. I am more of an action and RPG fan, if anything. Please keep that in mind before sending me any nasty-gram replies.

I fail to understand the overstated hype that COD4 has generated from video game critics and players alike. From either single player or multiplayer perspectives, Half Life 2, Halo 3 and Bioshock are far superior.

Here are the pros and cons:

Pros:
Graphics - No doubt this game looks great, though not as good as Bioshock
Sound - Great sound effects and voice-acting, again though, not as good as any of the shooters I have already mentioned

Cons and there are many:

Gameplay - tight shooting controls, but what is up with the enemies that re-spawn in perpetuity until you cross some invisible line on the map? For a game that sells itself on realism, that is quite hokey. The fact that you have to hold down one of the joysticks to run faster is quite clumsy. I liked the "semi-snap" to enemy function, but it just doesn't beat the mega-tight controls in Half-Life 2 (as well as the other games in the Orange Box).

Weapons - Though the guns look and sound great, the aforementioned shooters' weapons are better. Yes, those games have the creative advantage of fictional weapons, but this reviewer appreciates playing a video game more for the fantastical elements as opposed to realism. Even if we just compare the more "realistic" weapons, the main machine gun in Half Life 2, especially in Episode 2, trumps any of COD4's machine guns. It just feels incredible to weild that puppy from a video game perspective.

Multiplayer - Maybe it's just me and the fact that I am old, but I really do appreciate the wonderful simplicity that Halo 3 offers in the ease of understanding that I have to shoot the guy on the screen who's color is opposite of my team's. I could never figure out who the heck the enemy was in COD4 until I was "pwned" as the kids like to say. The enemy's uniform was the same color as my teams'. Yes, that's more realistic, but who the heck wants that in a video game (apparently everyone but me)?

There you have it. I just can not recommend this game. If you are looking for great shooters on XBOX 360, there are three of them out there that are top notch: Orange Box (The Half Life 2 series), Halo 3 (durrr), and Bioshock.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next 

Actions