COD WAW compared to COD Modern Warfare Wii

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for FPS1337
FPS1337

2519

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#1 FPS1337
Member since 2009 • 2519 Posts

Image 41COD WAWCOD MWImage 42COD WAWCOD MWImage 40COD WAWCOD MWCOD MWCall of Duty: World at War PictureCOD WAW
COD MWCall of Duty: World at War PictureCOD WAWCall of Duty 4: Modern Warfare WiiCOD MWNow COD MW is a lot better then COD WAW inmost of these pics. Now some people are saying COD MW looks garbage, but it looks better then COD WAW. In my opinion this is pretty good for wii and similar to a low res version of the 360 version. The Wii cannot perform 360 and ps3 graphics so dont expect that. Wii can perform slightly better graphics then the original xbox and gamecube. Good graphics on the xbox and gamecube are normally good for wii.If you expect more from the Wii then your out of luck.

Avatar image for TaMuK711
TaMuK711

3367

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 TaMuK711
Member since 2009 • 3367 Posts

WaW looks like ****, how is looking marginally better than something that looks like **** good?

You really need to go play other Wii games if you honestly think THAT looks good for a Wii game.

Avatar image for Wanderer5
Wanderer5

25727

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#3 Wanderer5
Member since 2006 • 25727 Posts

I think WaW looks a tad better, but both of them doesn't look great anyway. Medal of Honor: Heroes 2, Metroid Prime 3, and even The Conduit looks better.

Avatar image for ASRCSR
ASRCSR

2793

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#4 ASRCSR
Member since 2008 • 2793 Posts

They both look pretty similar.

Avatar image for BoloTheGreat
BoloTheGreat

3483

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 BoloTheGreat
Member since 2008 • 3483 Posts

I think this just about sums it up

http://i730.photobucket.com/albums/ww306/Scrumpmonkey/NGwii.jpg

Avatar image for jessmaster13
jessmaster13

3170

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#6 jessmaster13
Member since 2009 • 3170 Posts

MW looks slightly better

Avatar image for TaMuK711
TaMuK711

3367

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 TaMuK711
Member since 2009 • 3367 Posts

Treyarch can't even make games that can compete with last gen LAUNCH TITLES....

Halo: Combat Evolved Picture

Halo: Combat Evolved Picture

Pathetic effort Treyarch, absolutely pathetic.

Avatar image for FPS1337
FPS1337

2519

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#8 FPS1337
Member since 2009 • 2519 Posts

everyone remember, this is pre-beta, means the game is not even close to being fully produced. Also stop bashing treyarch and activision just because you wii owners didnt get mw2. You were fine with WAW but when a remake of COD4 comes we freak out. WAW is way worse then this but everyone just crys because they dont get infinityward's game. Infinityward does not seem to like working with nintendo's console. Also if we got MW2 what would be the difference between haing MW2 and COD4 besides a campaign that only wii owners wont understand (i have all consoles so dont try to say ur just saying that cuz u dont have any other console). We would get either a new engine that isn't tweeked at all and looks ugly or this engine, we would get maybe a few new guns at a price where we have either less online modes or less offline modes, it wouldn't be full featured, we would not get special ops like the 360 and ps3 (my reason being infinityward made spec ops and nazi zombies wasn't for WAW wii so why would this be, the wii probably couldn't handle it anyways), so all we get is the title. Maybe a totally new game would be nice, like the DS, but then Treyarch could screw up easier by making a crappy campaign with the same online as it has with this modern warfare. These graphics aren't that bad for a pre-beta. Treyarch said they are not done with graphical improvements.

Avatar image for BrunoBRS
BrunoBRS

74156

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#9 BrunoBRS
Member since 2005 • 74156 Posts
"looks better than something that sucks" is not necessarily good. ninjabread man looks better than ninja reflex.
Avatar image for EpiphoneMan2008
EpiphoneMan2008

7169

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#10 EpiphoneMan2008
Member since 2009 • 7169 Posts

everyone remember, this is pre-beta, means the game is not even close to being fully produced. Also stop bashing treyarch and activision just because you wii owners didnt get mw2. You were fine with WAW but when a remake of COD4 comes we freak out. WAW is way worse then this but everyone just crys because they dont get infinityward's game. Infinityward does not seem to like working with nintendo's console. Also if we got MW2 what would be the difference between haing MW2 and COD4 besides a campaign that only wii owners wont understand (i have all consoles so dont try to say ur just saying that cuz u dont have any other console). We would get either a new engine that isn't tweeked at all and looks ugly or this engine, we would get maybe a few new guns at a price where we have either less online modes or less offline modes, it wouldn't be full featured, we would not get special ops like the 360 and ps3 (my reason being infinityward made spec ops and nazi zombies wasn't for WAW wii so why would this be, the wii probably couldn't handle it anyways), so all we get is the title. Maybe a totally new game would be nice, like the DS, but then Treyarch could screw up easier by making a crappy campaign with the same online as it has with this modern warfare. These graphics aren't that bad for a pre-beta. Treyarch said they are not done with graphical improvements.

FPS1337
Finally someone who has done their homework on the game
Avatar image for MecaShadow
MecaShadow

429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#11 MecaShadow
Member since 2005 • 429 Posts

[QUOTE="FPS1337"]

everyone remember, this is pre-beta, means the game is not even close to being fully produced. Also stop bashing treyarch and activision just because you wii owners didnt get mw2. You were fine with WAW but when a remake of COD4 comes we freak out. WAW is way worse then this but everyone just crys because they dont get infinityward's game. Infinityward does not seem to like working with nintendo's console. Also if we got MW2 what would be the difference between haing MW2 and COD4 besides a campaign that only wii owners wont understand (i have all consoles so dont try to say ur just saying that cuz u dont have any other console). We would get either a new engine that isn't tweeked at all and looks ugly or this engine, we would get maybe a few new guns at a price where we have either less online modes or less offline modes, it wouldn't be full featured, we would not get special ops like the 360 and ps3 (my reason being infinityward made spec ops and nazi zombies wasn't for WAW wii so why would this be, the wii probably couldn't handle it anyways), so all we get is the title. Maybe a totally new game would be nice, like the DS, but then Treyarch could screw up easier by making a crappy campaign with the same online as it has with this modern warfare. These graphics aren't that bad for a pre-beta. Treyarch said they are not done with graphical improvements.

EpiphoneMan2008

Finally someone who has done their homework on the game

Indeed, instead of simply trashing it based on the screenshots. Besides, they truly don't look that bad (then again, I mostly play games based on the Half-Life engine, so my vision of "good" and "bad" might be a little outdated).

In the end, these are only the first screens released so far, and usually the first screens don't fully reflect the final product. Yes, sometimes the final product doesn't look much better than the first screenshots released, but there ususally is some sort of improvement by the time the game is released.

Avatar image for OreoMilkshake
OreoMilkshake

12833

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#12 OreoMilkshake
Member since 2009 • 12833 Posts
WaW does not look that bad when you play it.
Avatar image for haziqonfire
haziqonfire

36390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#13 haziqonfire
Member since 2005 • 36390 Posts
I still can't believe some people are trying to defend this. At least its not as bad as The Conduit where it was me and like four others that said it would be crap versus like 500 others.
Avatar image for nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

41560

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 43

User Lists: 14

#14 nintendoboy16
Member since 2007 • 41560 Posts
[QUOTE="EpiphoneMan2008"][QUOTE="FPS1337"]

everyone remember, this is pre-beta, means the game is not even close to being fully produced. Also stop bashing treyarch and activision just because you wii owners didnt get mw2. You were fine with WAW but when a remake of COD4 comes we freak out. WAW is way worse then this but everyone just crys because they dont get infinityward's game. Infinityward does not seem to like working with nintendo's console. Also if we got MW2 what would be the difference between haing MW2 and COD4 besides a campaign that only wii owners wont understand (i have all consoles so dont try to say ur just saying that cuz u dont have any other console). We would get either a new engine that isn't tweeked at all and looks ugly or this engine, we would get maybe a few new guns at a price where we have either less online modes or less offline modes, it wouldn't be full featured, we would not get special ops like the 360 and ps3 (my reason being infinityward made spec ops and nazi zombies wasn't for WAW wii so why would this be, the wii probably couldn't handle it anyways), so all we get is the title. Maybe a totally new game would be nice, like the DS, but then Treyarch could screw up easier by making a crappy campaign with the same online as it has with this modern warfare. These graphics aren't that bad for a pre-beta. Treyarch said they are not done with graphical improvements.

Finally someone who has done their homework on the game

True, while the graphics look bad now. We should'nt forget that these are the first screens. They may improve overtime.
Avatar image for shoryuken_
shoryuken_

3420

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 shoryuken_
Member since 2009 • 3420 Posts

Call of Duty: World at War Picture

FPS1337

This looks like a N64 era explosion. :lol:

Almost reminds me of when you defeat a boss in Star Fox 64. The explosions look like that.

Avatar image for Cesar_Barba
Cesar_Barba

3665

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 Cesar_Barba
Member since 2003 • 3665 Posts

[QUOTE="EpiphoneMan2008"][QUOTE="FPS1337"]

everyone remember, this is pre-beta, means the game is not even close to being fully produced. Also stop bashing treyarch and activision just because you wii owners didnt get mw2. You were fine with WAW but when a remake of COD4 comes we freak out. WAW is way worse then this but everyone just crys because they dont get infinityward's game. Infinityward does not seem to like working with nintendo's console. Also if we got MW2 what would be the difference between haing MW2 and COD4 besides a campaign that only wii owners wont understand (i have all consoles so dont try to say ur just saying that cuz u dont have any other console). We would get either a new engine that isn't tweeked at all and looks ugly or this engine, we would get maybe a few new guns at a price where we have either less online modes or less offline modes, it wouldn't be full featured, we would not get special ops like the 360 and ps3 (my reason being infinityward made spec ops and nazi zombies wasn't for WAW wii so why would this be, the wii probably couldn't handle it anyways), so all we get is the title. Maybe a totally new game would be nice, like the DS, but then Treyarch could screw up easier by making a crappy campaign with the same online as it has with this modern warfare. These graphics aren't that bad for a pre-beta. Treyarch said they are not done with graphical improvements.

MecaShadow

Finally someone who has done their homework on the game

Indeed, instead of simply trashing it based on the screenshots. Besides, they truly don't look that bad (then again, I mostly play games based on the Half-Life engine, so my vision of "good" and "bad" might be a little outdated).

In the end, these are only the first screens released so far, and usually the first screens don't fully reflect the final product. Yes, sometimes the final product doesn't look much better than the first screenshots released, but there ususally is some sort of improvement by the time the game is released.

Outdated or not, what matters most is that the game plays well and is fun. Sure, better graphics would be nice, but if I want better graphics I'll go outside to look at my high definition tree that needs needs some trimming.

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

41560

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 43

User Lists: 14

#17 nintendoboy16
Member since 2007 • 41560 Posts
[QUOTE="shoryuken_"]

[QUOTE="FPS1337"]

Call of Duty: World at War Picture

This looks like a N64 era explosion. :lol:

No, N64 explosions look a bit weaker than that. And I have played enough N64 games with explosions to see that. (Star Wars: Rogue Squadron, Star Fox 64, Goldeneye 007, Perfect Dark)
Avatar image for darth-pyschosis
darth-pyschosis

9322

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 darth-pyschosis
Member since 2006 • 9322 Posts

So are people still dissing on this port of a good game, that will increase the COD online player size on wii and bring new content to the wii version?

they said everything will be the same as the 360 version, except graphics, and 10 players online. i guess no voice chat is a bummer, don't see why it can't be there snice its in GH5 a month b4 this comes out

all in all it sucks this didn't come out in 2007, but it will prolly again be the best online game on the Wii, and we got thrown a bone on this one, it sucks it isn't new but this game will still get a 8.0-9.0

Avatar image for haziqonfire
haziqonfire

36390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#20 haziqonfire
Member since 2005 • 36390 Posts

So are people still dissing on this port of a good game, that will increase the COD online player size on wii and bring new content to the wii version?

they said everything will be the same as the 360 version, except graphics, and 10 players online. i guess no voice chat is a bummer, don't see why it can't be there snice its in GH5 a month b4 this comes out

all in all it sucks this didn't come out in 2007, but it will prolly again be the best online game on the Wii, and we got thrown a bone on this one, it sucks it isn't new but this game will still get a 8.0-9.0

darth-pyschosis

New features like that crappy co-op garbage from world at war? lol.

Why in the hell would you want co-op in modern warfare's campaign when its meant to be played alone. There are literally only two levels that have 'some' elements of co-op but not big enough to warrant such a mode.

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

41560

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 43

User Lists: 14

#21 nintendoboy16
Member since 2007 • 41560 Posts
[QUOTE="Haziqonfire"]

[QUOTE="darth-pyschosis"]

So are people still dissing on this port of a good game, that will increase the COD online player size on wii and bring new content to the wii version?

they said everything will be the same as the 360 version, except graphics, and 10 players online. i guess no voice chat is a bummer, don't see why it can't be there snice its in GH5 a month b4 this comes out

all in all it sucks this didn't come out in 2007, but it will prolly again be the best online game on the Wii, and we got thrown a bone on this one, it sucks it isn't new but this game will still get a 8.0-9.0

New features like that crappy co-op garbage from world at war? lol.

Why in the hell would you want co-op in modern warfare's campaign when its meant to be played alone. There are literally only two levels that have 'some' elements of co-op but not big enough to warrant such a mode.

Hmm, maybe to help a friend when he struggling in the game? Or it's their preferred form of multiplayer?
Avatar image for MecaShadow
MecaShadow

429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#22 MecaShadow
Member since 2005 • 429 Posts

[QUOTE="MecaShadow"]

[QUOTE="EpiphoneMan2008"] Finally someone who has done their homework on the gameCesar_Barba

Indeed, instead of simply trashing it based on the screenshots. Besides, they truly don't look that bad (then again, I mostly play games based on the Half-Life engine, so my vision of "good" and "bad" might be a little outdated).

In the end, these are only the first screens released so far, and usually the first screens don't fully reflect the final product. Yes, sometimes the final product doesn't look much better than the first screenshots released, but there ususally is some sort of improvement by the time the game is released.

Outdated or not, what matters most is that the game plays well and is fun. Sure, better graphics would be nice, but if I want better graphics I'll go outside to look at my high definition tree that needs needs some trimming.

Yes, that is true as well. When I said outdated I was referencing my personal definition of quality graphics, but in the end it is the gameplay that is most important and that is someting that cannot be argued otherwise. Even though I am probably not going to buy this Wii port, admittedly (I'm aiming to get an xb360 this year anyway), as long as it plays as well as the original, it should be perfectly fine.
Avatar image for Cesar_Barba
Cesar_Barba

3665

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 Cesar_Barba
Member since 2003 • 3665 Posts

[QUOTE="Cesar_Barba"]

[QUOTE="MecaShadow"]

Indeed, instead of simply trashing it based on the screenshots. Besides, they truly don't look that bad (then again, I mostly play games based on the Half-Life engine, so my vision of "good" and "bad" might be a little outdated).

In the end, these are only the first screens released so far, and usually the first screens don't fully reflect the final product. Yes, sometimes the final product doesn't look much better than the first screenshots released, but there ususally is some sort of improvement by the time the game is released.

MecaShadow

Outdated or not, what matters most is that the game plays well and is fun. Sure, better graphics would be nice, but if I want better graphics I'll go outside to look at my high definition tree that needs needs some trimming.

Yes, that is true as well. When I said outdated I was referencing my personal definition of quality graphics, but in the end it is the gameplay that is most important and that is someting that cannot be argued otherwise. Even though I am probably not going to buy this Wii port, admittedly (I'm aiming to get an xb360 this year anyway), as long as it plays as well as the original, it should be perfectly fine.

I'm sorry, I understood what you said, just that I forgot to mention it in that post. I did not mean to sound like a smart ass anbout it, I actually thought what you said was good. Like you said, you play games based on the HL engine which is just fine, other people would make their first comment as to how it doesn't look as good as a game like Crysis.

Avatar image for Hoodstock
Hoodstock

2050

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#24 Hoodstock
Member since 2008 • 2050 Posts

WaW looks like ****, how is looking marginally better than something that looks like **** good?

You really need to go play other Wii games if you honestly think THAT looks good for a Wii game.

TaMuK711

WAW is the best game on the Wii. The problem with gamespot is that the only people that post responses are people who want to tear games down. Tell us, what is good. I'm sure it's not.

Avatar image for lrk1
lrk1

44

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 lrk1
Member since 2010 • 44 Posts

So far I've only played COD_WAW and COD_MWRE on the Wii, so i have no "comparison material" on other platforms.
Oke the Wii versions have fewer options (infantry only), fewer maps than Xbox, Pc or Ps3,
But despite all that I really like these games very much.

Especially since the WII is the only COD-platfrom that natively supports a Wii ZAPPER! which no other platform has (eat your heart out other platform players)
This gives me the feelings or actually shooting at a target, and allow me to be dragged into the game. I bet your "mouse, joystick and keyboard" can never match this ingame feeling that a Wii Zapper does...

Why else is the Xbox being "extended" with Kinect and PS3 by Move controler??? :-P Because they miss that untilmate gunlike controller Zapperrr feeling ..

Avatar image for unrealtron
unrealtron

3148

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#26 unrealtron
Member since 2010 • 3148 Posts

old thread