call of duty isn't co-op

Hellgate london doesn't support lan

hey bud,

Microsoft extended the warranty to 3 years, you've had yours for less than 2. Why not call support, have them send you the shipping box and you keep your harddrive, send the system in and get a free one back in a few weeks.

No need to buy another

Some of these suggestions don't make sense, lol.

CoD 4 has no co-op at all...

HellGate london doesn't allow lan play, only online

i think the topic was for lan co-op games, no?

If you're playing multiple long sessions, id say neverwinter nights. Even better if you can get more than one buddy to play with you

The newest game in the Conflict series, Denied Ops is the 5th in the series famous for its 4-player co-operative splitscreen game. Yet this newest "Next-gen" addition to the series does not feature 4-player co-op...wait..how does that work? How does the NEWEST game for the NEXT GEN have less features than ALL FOUR of its predecessors? I'm so confused, why do I want to play all the older ones more than the newest one? Why can I NOT play the newest one on my X-box 360 (which has 4 controller slots by the way, i dunno about yours) with my 3 gaming buds?

More importantly, Why has Gamespot not reviewed this game yet? Newer games have come out and been reviewed, but not this. Will this game be reviewed?

-----Eidos----

what? Eidos...what does that have to do with anything. Eidos is responsible for this game...as they were the very controversial Kane and Lynch game...a game which reviewed by this site possibly ended advertising revenue and possible ended a certain editor's job here.

Because Conflict: Denied ops is such a poor game, a game that ruined the series and took out the only feature making it worthy of playing, is Gamespot refusing/delaying or afraid to review this game? Are they afraid of more conflict (no punn intended) with Eidos..perhaps losing ad revenue some more? The users have been voting away, giving this game around a 5 on PC and consoles. When Will Gamespot Review this Game?Why the Delay? And What score will it get?

this is quite the test for Gamespot

I think the only appropriate answer is 'NONE' because this console and its game developers are ruining all these franchises.

For Example: Ghost Recon...How is it Ghost Recon 2 and GR2: Summit Strike for the first x-box supports 4-player splitscreen co-op and is the best fun I've had on the X-box....then GRAW does not...it instead creates 4 stupid missions in a city block where all you do is kill everyone...GRAW2 tries to compromise and does a poor job...

Perfect Dark...Why is every character exactly the same when I could make 1000+ combinations for my what my character looks like in the first Perfect Dark a decade ago for N64? Why also can I not have the same multiplayer options as I could in that game? Why does that game have better single player AND better Multiplayer? And more options? AND more features?

Conflict Series.... . there are 4 Conflict games...I repeat: FOUR conflict games for the first X-box ALL of which support 4-player splitscreen co-op with its traditional 3rd person style....the next Gen game (By Eidos...uh oh) which comes out Feb. 8, only features 2-player co-op, is no longer 3rd person and has none of the characters from the first 4 games.....uhhhhh... how is it a Conflict Game then?....and how is it next gen if it doesn't do ANYTHING the first game does and does EVERYTHING WORSE than the first 4 games do....

Then there's Halo 3, the most overrated game in history, defended to death by blind wallet feeding fanboys who also think paying Microsoft to play online (when its free on PC with MORE features AND free downloads WITH dedicated servers, etc....) is cool. This game takes 5-7 hours to beat....wait what? yeap 5-7 hours to beat....woah...and that came out in 2007...welcome to the next gen ladies and gents, gameplay less than what you found a decade ago...a console with 4 controllers that you cannot use...sure Halo 3 supports 4 player co-op...PSYCH!!! you can only play with 2 on your console...hah, had you fooled... you thought it would have next-gen features and were wrong again. Yeap the game looks alright for next-gen but is not that much of an improvement of Halo 2 which also sucked ass single-player. This game gets so boring so fast and the gun balance is as worse as ever, they brought back the original Halo rifle but made its clip 28 shots less...you still can't put single-fire on the battle rifle, the guns all have so few ammo and are still retardedly week. You're better off with a real gun from WWI or WWII, hell a bow and arrow would do more damage then half the weapons. You know they're desperate when they give you a Hammer to use in Halo. The multiplayer is boring as hell with again barely any customization or features that you could find in the first Unreal a decade ago or again the first Perfect Dark on N64. Thank god we got COD 4 shortly after, geeze. How did this game get 9.5? How is this 95% perfect? Well because if it got an 8, whoever wrote the review would get fired by Microsoft...err I mean Gamespot (ala Kane & Lynch style)

So no more sequels to GOOD games, make sequels to crap games, that won't hurt long-time fans or real gamers.

Awesome

PMing you right away with my votes