havent played either but want to. i heard call of duty rocks but theres a lot of hate because they turned away from their company and made it. as for 1942 it heard it was good too but others were better

Sudden strike taw?
i played that once, 5 hours later i was still NOWHERE. That game is neither sudden, not a strike. "Slow-waste-of-my-goddamn-money" is what they should have called it.


"If i told you a secret you wont tell a soul,
will you hold it and keep it alive"

Good old SSI... I always enjoyed "Pools of Darkness".

exactly why I like it, Arch: patient tactics, not just barging in shooting stuff up.

piss off, total war is tactics, sudden *ahem* strike is just a bad idea

you couldn't tactic your way out of a packet of crisps; I am the tactical meister.

could he tactic his way out of a box of tictacs?

that would be just ticktacketyboo! (looks like any attempt at a serious discussion is gonna fall flat on its *rse today)

Alright, enough of this "witty banter" you two .

slightly to expand and get back on-topic; Sudden Strike is very hard and tbh not easily playable, the interface is complex and yes, for long periods nothing much happens. But that's actually q realistic. However Soldiers is much better and more dynamic. I'm afraid Sudden Strike is very much an aquired taste, but it does have a tremendous depth to it if you give it a chance.

I enjoy any WWII game where I can be on the side of the Axis - i'm sick and tired playing for the Allies, so I vote for Battlefield. Though single-player games such as CoD of MoH are fun, but still...

Wisdom comes with age. But sometimes age comes alone...

After joining another really great MP game for MOHAA, it quickly dissolved. The thing i hate is that they have not really fixed the cheating problem. Worse still, unlike FL its not like you can be across the other side of the map either, they get you regardless.

What makes it EVEN worse is that they don't seem to get kicked or banned at all, and there is no "server side" only software at the mo (there is the DMW but it requiries clients to use it to work, and you can connect no probs without it).

To cap it all, they don't give a monkeys, and don't get what everynoe is complaining about, they think its alright to see/shoot through the walls, and use aim bots. Either that, or they sit there ****ing off whilst totally crappin everyone elses game. A bit like FL Dockcamping, you get spawn killing...where it takes three or four spawns to actually survive long enough to get a shot off.

Since COD now has the punk buster - which stops you joining unless you have it running, how come they haven't done this for MOHAA....cause its REALLY ruining the MP to the point where there is NO point in playing.
Also - how come the devs cannot forsee this, and build their own integrated version?!!

devs dont do stuff unless they have to, i learnt that while playing neocron

Et Voila:

---

After announcing an impressive lineup of games for the year 2005, Activision has gone out on a limb, stating that the year 2006 will be huge. CEO Ron Doornink said he was unsatisfied in the announcment of the 2005 games, so he decided to one up, in his words, "competitor A".

So, for the fiscal year of 2006, which spans from April 2005 to March 2006, sequels to some of the biggest games will be released, and guess whats among them?
Sequels to True Crime, Call of Duty , Spider-Man, Tony Hawk, Shrek, and Quake.

Most of the titles are rumored to be released on the next generation of consoles, but one can hope that PC will not be left out.

On another note, when asked who "competitor A" was, Doornink paused, then said simply "EA"!

So there you have it. Call of Duty 2 will be released sometime between April 2005 and March 2006! Early speculation says it will be running the new Quake engine, so most likely, not only will it look better than the first, but it probably will be better? Now, I wonder if I can preorder yet......

---