COD: 4 vs COD: MW2

As an experienced player on both CODs, albeit on different consoles, I have to say this is a very tricky decision. I used to play COD: 4 MWR, which stands for Modern Warfare Reflex edition, Reflex edition basically means, on the Wii. Nowadays, when you think of shooter games you think of PC, Xbox, Playstation, or even PSP/Vita, not Wii, and that's understandable, it's not designed for that sort of game, it's a "kid's console", but I've spent countless hours playing COD on Wii, and no, it's not as graphically advanced as other consoles, and yes, it's pretty damn laggy, but my god, it's fun. The controls are so exceptionally unique, and one of the best things about the Wii is, it's not rage provoking at all, unlike Xbox or Playstation, where I know atleast 3 people that have broken their tv from throwing their controller or battery pack at it. Anyway, back to the subject, COD4 is just, how to put this... Beautifully simple. It's elegant and almost flawless in the balance of guns and perks, it's super fun, yes there's a tonne of hackers, but truth be told, every hacked lobby I've been into has been a neutral one (meaning the hack is for everyone in the lobby, not just the one guy running around insta-killing everyone) and I've had great fun in them, flying around the map, trying to quickscope everyone else who use OP explosives. Also, there's so little things to make you want to scream, for example, in all the new CODs there are these "death streaks" where if you die for a certain amount of times in a row without getting a kill, you get a huge advantage. So when your team is doing superb, you've got them pushed back in their spawn, you're 2 of that streak you want, you kill one guy, run forward, realise the guy was on a death streak and had martyrdom, BOOM, you're dead from that stupid grenade he left behind. MW2, it's a sniper's game. If S&D is your thing, but sniping isn't, don't get this game. You will be very disliked in every search lobby for being the sweaty try hard who runs around ruining the trick shotting game. It's a great game other then that though. There are few flaws, there tends to be more people who really want to win, not just have fun then in COD4. So what I'd suggest is, if you just want COD for a fun time, little rage and an easy life, I'd say go with COD4, if, however, you're of the competitive nature, and would rather win even if it meant hiding the entire game doing nothing, I suggest MW2. I do feel like I'm underselling MW2 though, it is an amazing game, I love it, just COD4 is, for me, the funniest Call of Duty yet. Hope this helped.

Call of Duty vs Battlefield

As a long time fan of CoD since COD: 4 I may be slightly biased on this subject. BF has many different features, usually more realistic, like vehicles that you can actually use without having to get a killstreak unlike in CoD. Also, in BF there is a lot more destroyable stuff, which is always great. However, in Ghosts (the newest edition to the CoD franchise) there is stuff outside of red barrels and cars which can be destroyed now, it still doesn't live up to BF on that level. In CoD you can blow up a tree or such, and it will always fall in the same place, every time no matter where you shoot it from, BF, however, you can blow up walls at the bottom of a massive skyscraper and it can fall to crush your enemies, and, quite often, you. I have never played BF4 but I have played BF3 quite a bit back in my time, and quite frankly I wish I'd had BF before CoD because then I might not suck at it, as, it is a better game, however, I find CoD more fun as I can successfully kill people every now and then. So, if you have neither CoD or BF I would suggest BF4 over Ghosts, however if you're on a tight budget and are going for an old game, you should stick with CoD as the early ones like CoD 4 and MW2 are quite frankly, superb and immensely fun, but BF2 and BF1 are pretty damn shoddy, BF3 is great but much more expensive then the very old CoDs.