Which is more realistic?

[!EpIc fAiL!]

Which do you think is more realistic? and if you want explain. I don't want this to turn into a huge argument, im just wondering what others think. Im pretty much looking to see what the differences are in the games. (Not saying one is better than the other.)

 

[Bloodcypher]

only 1 cod member vs 7 who will win duh duh duuuuuh!

 

[PIMP DADDY SMURF]

INS > COD There this should stir some things up a bit in this thread! :laugh:

Bring it.

 

[!EpIc fAiL!]

INS > COD There this should stir some things up a bit in this thread! :laugh:

Bring it.

lol i hope not. didnt want to start a huge argument.

 

[PIMP DADDY SMURF]

Haha! Too bad... :lol: :laugh: I'll do my best so that it does end up in a big argument. jk I'll keep it down, as much as I can... :mellow:

 

[Passerby]

cod 4 is just a fps based on modern combat as far as realism all it has is graphics

ins is also a modern combat fps but it is defiantly trying to go for a more authentic experience than cod4

 

[Passerby]

also you might get a bias putting this in the ins division forums

 

[xShuriken]

In my personal opinion, CoD4 has too much of an arcade feel to seem too realistic to me. That's not to say that it isn't a great game, it just excels in the style of gameplay it presents. INS feels more realistic and tactical to me gameplay-wise, and to be honest, the graphics aren't that bad either. They're nothing like CoD4, but they are still pretty good. I haven't been playing INS very long at all, so I can't comment more than that until I've gotten some more experience. However, I still figured I'd throw my two cents in.

 

[Cutter]

Where is the neutral option? I think they both need some work before they reach a suitable "realistic" level.

 

[air_nith]

You should have put this in the general forums becuase this is the insurgency forum you know what they are going to say
you would also get a big argument

 

[PIMP DADDY SMURF]

NO.

INS > COD

:thumbup:

 

[zeggy]

INS ftw, sure ut needs some improvements but still a along way better

 

[!EpIc fAiL!]

ya i know i should have put this in the other forum but, after making it i realized i should have and i didnt know how to delete it. So if someone can delete it that'd be good.

 

[RampantDingo]

You asked this question in an INS forum and expected objectivity.

 

[a pet rock]

Having played WaW and not MW, I'm not all that sure. Also, I never play Hardcore mode on CoD simply because if I want to play realism, I would be playing INS. So that being said, INS is much more realistic simply because CoD needs a second gameplay type to be close to realistic. However, if you're including HC, I really don't know since I never play it.

 

[Igoforunc09]

i like both games. i got CoD on 360 both WaW and Modern warfare. they r somewhat realistic, but at the same time ins is a lot more realisitc

 

[SCSwat]

Well, it's time to be the critical geezer that I am. Simulations that interface with machinery aka tanks aircraft cars etc... those can be considered "realistic". The day that they come out with a realistic combat sim... it better come with Depends Undergarments because most of you will be wetting yourself and soiling your knickers!
Now, to ask if a game fits more true to "combat" in theory, yes, INS is definitely more so,
but I hesitate to call it even the least "realistic". INS gives you the ability to employ real world
tactics in the gaming environment... I see none of that in COD...

 

[WaterSnake]

Not in terms of fun, but realism. INS wins for sure. It's got realism coming out it's rear end.

 

[!EpIc fAiL!]

Not in terms of fun, but realism. INS wins for sure. It's got realism coming out it's rear end.

lol. Ya i enjoy both games well at least the singleplayer aspect of COD4, ive never played it online.

 

[goooooller]

neither

arma2