The first time I did it I left the farmhouse for last and it did this. Gaz has cleared every house and the only yellow indicator left is in the final house (in both cases). Most of the squad is stacked up outside the door but Capt Price won’t come over to start the assault. The people are defintely inside this house (and the barn house the first time) as I can hear them and see them. It just won’t start the final scripted sequence.
Ive read of a few other people who have had this happen to them too. It’s random I guess but it’s happened to me twice now. I’m afraid to try the thrid time. I can’t unlock arcade mode until I beat the damn game though.
Yes I’m calling you out on it. Yes I think it demonstrates poor parental decision making on your part. Just as I think hardcore porno is innappropriate for a 6 year old I believe that there are inappropriate levels of violence , in video games, movies or otherwise, that are inappropriate for a 6 year old. Wee Bairn’s personal anecdotes do not sway me.
Is that what you were wanting to hear?
LOUNE,
If you do happen to end up with a bugged end of that mission I figured out how to force it to end. IF Capt Price stands still and won’t move all you need to do is call in a helicopter strike on his location and it will force him to move. That level sucks and I would hate to play through a third time so I’m glad that I figured out that technique.
My eight year old had nightmares from watching me play Resident Evil 4, and drew some disturbing pictures of “The Church of the Evil God”. Now RE4 is only played after the little one is in bed.
BTW, “The Church of the Evil God” is what the kid called it, not a name of a place in the game. There is a church with strange symbols on it that a part of the game takes place in, and it made an impression on the kid.
Considering how much more playing games affects my subconscious than watching movies (I’ll frequently dream of scenes in a game I play, dreams about movies are rare), I’d think it would be a bad idea to allow a very small child to play extremely violent games.
re: letting kids play “M” games: I fall in the cautious camp on this question, but it depends a great deal on the kid (and probably the game). [/hijack]
If a game (or movie, or whatever) is giving a kid nightmares, that’s a good reason not to let him play it. But assuming that Hentor’s kid is not having nightmares from Call of Duty 4, is there any other reason why letting him play it is a “poor parenting decision?”
Also, while I’ve not played the latest game in the series, I have played the first three, and I wouldn’t call them “extremely” violent, insofar as there’s almost no blood, or graphic violence, just lots of explosions and people flopping over theatrically after they’ve been shot. In terms of objectionable content, it’s no worse than your average PG action movie, like Star Wars, or a John Wayne movie. I don’t know if they’ve ratched up the realistic violence level for the latest one, though.
They’ve dialed up the blood to unrealistic levels in the latest one, it would definitely get an R if a movie (the earlier games were rated T if I remember correctly). Here’s a 20 second youtube link showing a series of sniper headshots, with a lot more blood spraying than would usually happen in real life - http://youtube.com/watch?v=ro4j4ieS9IE
There’s also a couple of gorey scenes in the single player campaign where soldiers are graphically dismembered, but I couldn’t find any videos of that part.
Really? That’s disappointing. I haven’t seen it yet, but the graphics improvements were something the COD4 folk harped on, IIRC. Are you looking at the console or PC version?
Xbox 360 console. Most games i can see big differences, e.g. Halo3. But CoD4 i’m just not seeing it, maybe it’s b/c i’m one of the most colorblind people you’ll ever talk to.
I don’t know if I’ve ever been as addicted to a multi-player game as I am this one. This has been the ultimate “just one more match” game for me. Leveling up, unlocking items and completing challenges is my new drug.
The single player was fine for what it was, but let’s be realistic. Games like this and Halo (the only time I’ll compare these two games) are made for their multi-player aspect, not the single player.
I have to agree with you - multi-player is why the game is here. That said, I think that the single player was very intense. I don’t think that I have ever had a reaction to the death of a NPC like when that Russian bastard shot Gaz.
That’s the big problem that’s here now: if a game designer has to pick one to do flawlessly, should it be the single player campaign or the multiplayer experience? 100 times out of 100, I’ll say it’s the multiplayer experience, because that’s where the replayability ultimately comes in.
Halo 3 did a good job with replayability of the co-op mode with the scoring and skulls and all.
I suppose Call of Duty 4 has done something similar with the Arcade Mode.
