Talk:Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Multiplayer

just think there should be more info on mutylplayer becuase it is such a big part of the game. For example someone could add an some information about gold weapons etc.Hungaryboy1 (talk) 13:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

thats what 'call of duty wikia' is for. it has lots of tips and info on the game and weapons. (210.50.143.22 (talk) 10:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)) a nut

there is a typo on the main page under mutply player there is no sudden death match its just a draw (I'v played for over 10 days total & hsve it since dec. 2008 I should know IM NOT RONG!!!) By PSN: zdog90210 feal free to send me a frend request.

Are you serious? 1) Reading your text hurt my eyes, your spelling is terrible, 2) This isn't a place to advertise your PSN ID and look for "frends", as nobody cares. That's what a userpage is for. --Xaerun (talk) 11:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

ive also played for roughly 10 days total and i can also vouch there is no sudden death and who ever it was who commented before me, who are you to say nobody cares just because you dont.

I dont care either... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.61.33.34 (talk) 22:12, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Consensus carry over?

Does consensus established on this page carry over to other pages about CoD 4? SirBob42 (talk) 18:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Such as? (it depends). ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 19:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

This page Characters in Call of Duty? SirBob42 (talk) 19:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, consensus made from this page carries to that page because, for instance, you still cannot speculate, nor can you use fan sites, in that article. Gary King (talk) 04:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The game modes are very good. You can kill to get xp, its 55 levels. When you reach 55 and beat it you start (reaborn)1,2,3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.160.246.129 (talk) 09:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Major gaming

Recurring NPCs, such as Gaz, Vasquez, Griggs, and Kamarov should be mentioned, as they are more prominent than Victor (who only appears in two missions). Have a seperate paragraph for the villians. GoldDragon (talk) 04:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you're going to add it, keep it brief. I remember now that the last paragraph with NPCs had literally every nameable one from the game (from the pilot of the helicopter that you rescue to the guy whose life you can save on the staircase in another level), which we just don't need. It couldn't hurt to have these other more important NPCs named. -- Comandante {Talk} 15:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't someone put Cpt. Price in there? 82.141.112.4 (talk) 16:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC) Wait, ignore me. I mixed the articles. Sorry. 82.141.112.4 (talk) 16:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

FAG template

I have moved consensus to the FAQ template now, to organize things a little. It will be easier for newbies to the article to spot, and the first thread on this page can now be archived as other threads on this page. I have also added auto-archiving to this talk page because it is getting long and unwieldy. Gary King (talk) 04:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The FAQ basicaly says the samething as the Summary consensus. In retrospect I thought I should bring it up before i deleted the consensus to see what the majority opinion was Nitsuahh87 (talk) 14:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The consensus will be automatically archived from now on, so you do not need to worry about that. Gary King (talk) 16:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I need help to copyedit this article

I have, for the first time, actually read through this article, and have already encountered several copyediting problems. I have fixed several, and will continue to do so for the entire article. If anyone has the time, please help out and copyedit the article so that it meets high standards. Feel free to brush up on your copyediting abilities by reading User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a. Cheers! Gary King (talk) 05:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

error in System Requirements

no you do not need internet connection to play. but you need it to play online and download new maps. cyberwolf (talk) 14:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

There is also an imprecision in those requirements: the graphic hardware needs to have support for Pixel Shader 3 to install the game due to a hardware check. There doesn't seem to be any software to emulate this (specifically) as it can be done for more mature (older) graphical technologies and other games. see SwiftShader and 3D Analyze. Tourist.tam (talk) 07:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

WTF? Banned?

Some person in a fourm said it is banned in Syria do to the closeness of the names Al-Asad and Al-Ass. The correct form is Al Asad in the game. I said he was wrong and he went crazy saying some dumb stuff that I was stupid. Who is right, cause I could find No Source that confirmed his statement that this game is banned in Syria. Asad and Assad are very common middle eastern names anyway 72.138.216.89 (talk) 20:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Xbox doesn't even offer official support in Syria. Don't believe everything you hear on a forum. xenocidic (talk) 20:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I love how this talk page is used as a forum... oh wait. Gary King (talk) 20:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

FUC

Addressing a concern in the FAC, I went ahead and added a bit about the epilogue awesome mission to the campaign section; it could probably be tweaked somewhat or elaborated on, but that's the best I can do since it has been some time since I last played the game. On a side note, it's a shame one of the first comments on the FAC page is an outright oppose, but I suppose that's just my pessimism speaking. -- Comandante {Talk} 20:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out :) This is the only game I really play lately, so I'd love to see it as an FAC. Also, don't worry about the first being an oppose; it's a great way to show us early on what we need to improve. I'll tweak your edits a bit if I feel they need some tweaking, but otherwise, let's just continue to improve the article to meet FA standards :) (Also, I just played the airplane mission a few days ago, actually, and there isn't really much to say about it. If someone can find a reference that explains why they even included the level in the game, that'd be many more times more useful than simply describing the level. Cheers!) Gary King (talk) 20:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

"A single-player demo for the PC4PC was released on October 11, 2007 as a Yahoo! exclusive download. It was released on various major sites the same day" - this seems like a contradiction. Could it be clarified? Epbr123 (talk) 09:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I removed it. Unsourced, and I can't find a source myself. Also, a minor point at best. Gary King (talk) 10:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

What happened was that Yahoo had the original "exclusive" download rights, and was the first to release the demo. Other sites downloaded the file and mirrored it on their servers, including major sites like fileshack and fileplanet. However it was still technically a Yahoo! exclusive, the other sites just "stole" the file. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 05:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

That's what I assumed; if a reliable news source can be found that documented this, though, then we can use it; if not, then I still consider it a minor point. Gary King (talk) 05:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I haven't looked, but I'm 99% sure taht within the charlieoscardelta archives there are links announcing the yahoo exclusive. As for the other sites, I guess the source would be the date of upload of the file? ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 05:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

But yes, it's still a very minor issue. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 05:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd very much prefer to have a reliable news site, like IGN or GameSpy, cover this, but it was probably too minor for them. Gary King (talk) 05:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, charlieoscardelta is the official site, so that's a reliable source. Fileplanet is owned by gamespy. Major gaming news portals such as IGN and UGO networks own file sites also. Also, bluesnews.com would be a good place to check, if you can dig through the archives, they're one of the gold standard of gaming news sites for years. I'd do it myself, but it's my exam period, so no time for anything but books. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 05:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Prestige

Is prestige only limited to certain versions of the game? I have the PC version and was told by someone online that it's not offered on PC, yet my husband has it on his Xbox 360. He (my husband) checked the icons of those playing in a few games with me on the PC, and he says no one seems to have the prestige features; so shouldn't this be mentioned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asinine17 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

This is mentioned in the article, per this quote: "The highest obtainable level is 55, but on the console versions of the game, the player has the option to play "Prestige" mode; " Gary King (talk) 18:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Challanges

Apologies if i don't properly adhere to the guidelines of how to write on these pages; I'm new to it. Anyway, I just noticed a small discrepancy in the 'Multiplayer' section. The last sentence states that "Completing a challenge can unlock new weapons, perks, or other bonuses, or it can grant experience points". In fact, completing challanges only results in extra experience points, which in turn can help the player level up, and so indirectly the player may gain access to weapons, perks, etc. The completion of any challange does not necessarily grant access to anything but experience points. -Dan, 19:16 April 29, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.202.135.218 (talk) 18:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Should be better now. Let me know what you think. Gary King (talk) 19:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Well you are right and wrong you do get exp for completing a challeng but if you complete all the challenges example all assualt rifle challenges=golden AK-47. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SAS sniper6610 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Redundant

The last sentance of the multiplayer section "Completing a challenge grants experience points, which can be used to unlock new weapons, perks, or other bonuses" is redundant of the paragraph it was orignally in. Can someone change this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.77.176.58 (talk) 22:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I've moved it to the beginning as a lead, which makes more sense. Gary King (talk) 23:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure that this improves the article. Origonally the preceding sentence (now the last sentence in the paragraph) told the reader what challanges are, and the last sentence explained why challanges are useful, or why the player may be motivated to complete them. Now however, the first sentence in the paragraph tells the reader why challanges are useful, and only informed what these challanges are at the end. To me, this way makes less sense.

On the content of this sentence, I think it is a little inaccurate. To me the phrasing suggests that the player can trade experience points for the weapons perks. However, completing challanges results experience points which may help the player advance in level; unlocking weapons, perks and other challanges. This is just a small issue with phrasing, and it may be my own incorrect interpretation. Just drawing attention to it. 213.202.164.186 (talk) 18:57, 30 April 2008 (UTC) Dan, 30 April, 2008

I agree with the IP. The words "Which can be used" modifying experience points implies that they are spent. It should probably say something to the effect that challenges unlock attachments and experience, whereas levelups unlock new weapons, perks, and challenges. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 05:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Reworded Gary King (talk) 05:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Comparison to Halo 3 sales

One word: helooo?--coolbho3000 (talk) 19:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Mainly because in the FAC, people were asking why CoD4 was the best selling game of 2007 when it was thought that Halo 3 outsold it; the relationship is stated to clear this up. Gary King (talk) 19:19, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Its alright to mention it if sales analysts pointed out the comparison. However, we can't "invent" the comparison; it would be like saying that GTA Vice City outsold Legend of Zelda in 2002; Vice City had a much larger audience due to many more PS2s than GameCubes. GoldDragon (talk) 21:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

question

with the prestige mode for cod 4.. after you prestige so many times do you begin to recive gamer pictures for your current prestige mode? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.109.145 (talk) 02:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Needs changing

in the multiplayer section it states that the result of a tie game is sudden death or completing the objective, however in the headquarters and deathmatch gametypes a tie game results in a draw. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.109.145 (talk) 02:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Collectors Edition

The UK collectors edition has the poster and DVD, however, it does not have the hardback art book. I don't know about other countries so it might be worth mentioning. Douglasnicol (talk) 23:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The UK Collectors Edition does have the hardback art book, it says it on the front of the box. I know because I have it and it was bought in the UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.107.179 (talk) 12:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I beg to differ, not ALL of them have it. My box says "Limited Collecter's Edition", Bonus DVD of the Making of Call of Duty 4, he SAS documentary, a level walkthrough by the developers and a downloadable bradygames strategy guide. There obviously have been a couple of different collectors editions then. Douglasnicol (talk) 18:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

New update

It is out now. [1] 80.202.209.248 (talk) 18:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Mac conversion delayed ?

the article states its being released in may 2008, now its june but there is still no word about it. Chegis (talk) 16:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The Mac release date is inconsistent in the article, in the infobox it lists "May 2008", but in the lead section it states "June 2008". Link to current version as of this writing. --Silver Edge (talk) 23:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Griggs shot in the private parts. Why?

Just how exactly was it established that Griggs was shot in the private parts? I've played through that sequence multiple times, and it does not look like Griggs was shot in the neck, since the blood splatter covers his whole head. 96.241.113.150 (talk) 23:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

When people get shot in the head in cinematics there tends to be a um... spray of pink chunks to indicate a headshot. The end of Sins of the Father is probably the best example. There aren't any chunks when Griggs gets hit so he didn't bet shot in the head. SirBob42 (talk) 17:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and changed that. No evidence to indicate whether or not it was the neck. · AndonicO ^Engage. 19:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Griggs was definatly shot in the head. Just beacuse there wasn't any bloody chunks it doesn't mean that he was shot in the neck. I watched Griggs death numerous times and the blood spray came out of his head. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.108.146.129 (talk) 22:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Captain Price

A lot of people seem to think that the Price that appears in the 2nd game is the same guy who appears in this game. It's been decided that CoD4 is set in 2011, Call of Duty 2 was set during the second world war so for Price to be the same guy, he would be in his 70s which is an impossible age to be if you're captain of an SAS regiment. Shouldn't something be added to the article? ——Ryan | t • c 10:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

CoD4 is set in 2011? That's new... I don't think it's necessary to say it isn't the same Price. · AndonicO ^Engage. 12:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Captain Price states that his flashback mission occurred a decade after the Chernobyl disaster which would make that 1996 (Chernobyl happened in 1986), fifteen years into the future would make the present day 2011 ——Ryan | t • c 12:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I see. · AndonicO ^Engage. 12:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Check the Archives, this kind of discussion belongs to Original Research; and is not conducive to the article's quality. Ulaire (talk) 13:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

If the game does indeed state those numbers, they may be used (as the game is a primary source). I think that it's a stretch to say that adding together numbers given as fact by a primary source constitutes original research... though we can't portray it as objective fact, I don't think a statement along the lines of the observation made by RyanLupin (namely, according to the dates given in the in-game narratives the storyline is set around the year 2011) is improper. Just my $0.02. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 03:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Addendum - of course, saying anything about price being the same person (or not being the same) certainly would be OR... sorry for the confusion.  ;-) /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 03:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The character models are strikingly similar. I'd have to say it's at least an homage. Fresnel149 (talk) 10:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Main Antagonist

The main antagonist for Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare is Imran Zakhaev, not Khaled-Al-Asad. Khaled Al-Asad is just the secondary antagonist. Notice that when you and your team captures Al-Asad, Zakhaev calls him(Al-Asad)on his phone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireboy000 (talk • contribs) 12:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Game engine is based off a Quake engine, can't find a citeable source

On the back of the box it says "This Product contains software technology licensed from ID software", which seems to be the Quake 3 engine. The competitive community picked up on this and found that bugs relating to fps (certain fps numbers let you jump slightly farther) from the Quake 3 engine still apply in CoD4. Can somebody help me find a source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeith (talk • contribs) 21:31, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

ID have more than one game.(121.217.56.178 (talk) 05:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC))

PC Sales?

I just noticed that the sales section gives no details on PC sales, compared to its in depth view of sales on xbox 360 and ps3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghyslyn (talk • contribs) 06:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC) Activision can't really confirm it's PC sales because of piracy and downloads. here's article: http://kotaku.com/344848/piracy-makes-call-of-duty-4-devs-sad

http://kotaku.com/364440/pc-gamings-piracy-sales-charts  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dakimstar (talk • contribs) 09:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC) 

Banned in the Middle East

This game is banned in the Middle East. I've been to All the Virgin shops here in and it's not allowed, which is Ironic seeing they allow Counter strike to go in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.150.72.34 (talk) 13:42, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

That's not irony, and also irrelevant to the article. --Xaerun (talk) 11:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Xaerun: What is 'irrelevant'? Rather, it is odd that there is no 'controversy' section in this article mentioning/dealing with subconscious reinforcement of contemporary middle-eastern conflict. Al-Jazeera ran a documentary on this kind of genre of video games: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afKENY4xcM4 and how this is possibly used as a recruiting tool in the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by S4053674 (talk • contribs) 13:14, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Prestige

You can repeat prestige mode nine times, if you were to repeat it ten times, you would be able to go into your eleventh prestige. I have corrected this error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunkalax (talk • contribs) 01:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The process of starting prestige can be repeated ten times. There is an initial set of 55 levels. After you have reached level 55, you can start prestige. There are ten prestige medals, plus the initial set of ranks, that you can earn. So, there are effectively eleven prestige levels, but the count starts at 0 and goes to 10. There are 605 levels total. You did not correct an error. Despite your good intentions, you made the article inaccurate. Please don't do it again.

Dave (talk) 16:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Amount of times you can level up

You can level up a total of 540 times, because you start at level one each time you prestige and first start. Where 600 came from, I really don't know. Dunkalax (talk) 01:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

- You can actually level up 595 times because there are levels 1-55 BEFORE you prestige and then you can prestige a TOTAL of 10 times. It is a little confusing when they said you can REPEAT prestige nine times (assuming once plus nine repeats = ten total) which is technically correct. Probably should be reworded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.171.42 (talk) 19:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Mac requirements released!

I have had almost daily contact with Aspyr Games, and the requirements have just been released. I am just a noob editor, though, and do not know enough HTML or what have you to edit the chart of system reqs. The link the the reqs is here:

http://www.aspyr.com/product/game_specs/88 J1.grammar natz (talk) 21:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thought provoking..

Thought I might bring this to your attention:

http://www.gamesradar.com/f/the-wtf-world-of-wikipedia/a-2008062510326553058

--Broadbandmink (talk) 22:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to remove date-autoformatting

Dear fellow contributors

MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether a date is autoformatted or not). MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.

There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:

Disadvantages of date-autoformatting

• (1) In-house only

• (a) It works only for the WP "elite".
• (b) To our readers out there, it displays all-too-common inconsistencies in raw formatting in bright-blue underlined text, yet conceals them from WPians who are logged in and have chosen preferences.
• (c) It causes visitors to query why dates are bright-blue and underlined.

• (2) Avoids what are merely trivial differences

• (a) It is trivial whether the order is day–month or month–day. It is more trivial than color/colour and realise/realize, yet our consistency-within-article policy on spelling (WP:ENGVAR) has worked very well. English-speakers readily recognise both date formats; all dates after our signatures are international, and no one objects.

• (3) Colour-clutter: the bright-blue underlining of all dates

• (a) It dilutes the impact of high-value links.
• (b) It makes the text slightly harder to read.
• (c) It doesn't improve the appearance of the page.

• (4) Typos and misunderstood coding

• (a) There's a disappointing error-rate in keying in the auto-function; not bracketing the year, and enclosing the whole date in one set of brackets, are examples.
• (b) Once autoformatting is removed, mixtures of US and international formats are revealed in display mode, where they are much easier for WPians to pick up than in edit mode; so is the use of the wrong format in country-related articles.
• (c) Many WPians don't understand date-autoformatting—in particular, how if differs from ordinary linking; often it's applied simply because it's part of the furniture.

• (5) Edit-mode clutter

• (a) It's more work to enter an autoformatted date, and it doesn't make the edit-mode text any easier to read for subsequent editors.

• (6) Limited application

• (a) It's incompatible with date ranges ("January 3–9, 1998", or "3–9 January 1998", and "February–April 2006") and slashed dates ("the night of May 21/22", or "... 21/22 May").
• (b) By policy, we avoid date autoformatting in such places as quotations; the removal of autoformatting avoids this inconsistency.

Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. Does anyone object if I remove it from the main text in a few days’ time on a trial basis? The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 13:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

better quality picture

The image above seems to have texture resolution that wasn't set to the highest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Icyplanetnhc (talk • contribs) 18:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

This is pictured is removed. Why is this part stil here ? --Fotte (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

The movie ?

Is there a movie scheduled for the game? It has a high quality scenario. I hope they consider the production of movie for it. --Fotte (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

No not at the moment and knowing movies from games it would suck. Also this isnt what the talk page is really for. Going to gamespot or Cod 4 forums would be a better place for these things. RoyalOrleans 16:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Ultranationalist capitalization

I noticed that the word "ultranaionalist" doesn't have consistent capitalization. 24.6.160.190 (talk) 06:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

List of Guns in COD4!

Hmm? (Butters x (talk) 20:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC))

No per WP:NOT#GUIDE. ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 20:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Ehem, making a LIST of guns used in the game is NOT WP:NOT#GUIDE. (Butters x (talk) 15:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC))

As per all. It violates game guide. Why not add those in COD Wikia?. --SkyWalker (talk) 15:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Soap lives?

In the last level, it's unclear whether or not Soap survives the blast. However, when I played the epilogue, I assumed that the character I took control of was Soap McTavish, meaning that he DID survive the blast. Can anyone find a credible source to say that character was or was not Soap? Fresnel149 (talk) 10:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Nobody knows, the game developers left if hanging for the player to chose whether he died or not. Same with Captain Price. When you're airlifted into the helicopter, the screen goes white which is the same effect used when Sergeant Johnson dies from the nuclear blast. It's up to you but there won't be a source because it's not confirmed —— RyanLupin • (talk) 10:40, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Development

Infinity Ward created Call of Duty 1, 2, and 4. Call of Duty 3 and the new Call of Duty are created by Treyarch. Infinity Ward had not planned to make another Call of Duty but decided to after the release of COD3 (Maybe because of the all-around concensus that it wasn't good?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdalyspx (talk • contribs) 22:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Native Resolution

The native resolution here is said to be 720p on consoles. It's not, it is 600p. The reference is already there to an article certifying that it is 600p, it just says 720p for some reason. —— Hamish Morrison (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Criticism

Should there not be some kind of criticism section? Just a suggestion, I mean it reads like an advertisment for the most part. ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(^Ταλκ) 14:43, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

See the final paragraph of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare#Reception, which touches on criticism. Further criticism, if any, can be added there. –xeno (talk) 15:03, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Missing teen

Would it be appropriate for this article to have reference to case of missing Ontario teen, linked to the game http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_28861.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aou (talk • contribs) 20:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Probably not - I don't think it lends to a reader's understanding of the video game. –xeno (talk) 20:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but wouldn't it be good to update the sales in the overview section (from 7 millions in January this year to 10 million units sold by June this year.)? Assuming that there are enough sources, of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.233.27.196 (talk) 16:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

If the missing teen segment is re-added to the article or added elsewhere, the part concerning the teen's father needs to be changed if it still says he thought his son was serious. The reference where it was taken from mentions that the father thought his son would be back in two days with his tail between his legs; so another words he thought his son was bluffing instead of being serious. --J Grant Fox (talk) 07:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

A separate article was created concerning the incident, see Disappearance of Brandon Crisp. -- Commdor {Talk} 20:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't seem worth mentioning. The article could say he played (insert any video game known to man here) too much and be just the same. COD4 itself had little to do with it. It's worth a link in the Microsoft article, maybe.--Koji† 21:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Or maybe even the Video game addiction adiiction article but not here. Also before anyone bring it up, while there are some cases where it would make sense to mention meida stories about people connected to video games in a game's article such as with Devin Thompson who tried to blame Grand Theft Auto for his killing 3 police men this is not one of those cases. The reason is that this incident had more to do with video games in general than the content the game itself. As far as I know no one has tried to connect the content of Call of Duty 4 itself to the dispearence or death unlike the murders. --76.71.208.254 (talk) 02:45, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

The only reason for mentioning the Disappearance of Brandon Crisp incident here would be under a heading such as "Controversies", etc, that could also link to other articles such as the Video game addiction. The reason for adding it here is that a large number of print, radio, and TV news coverage specifically mentioned Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare as the game that he became infatuated with, and that led to the argument and subsequent events. A rough estimate from google search is that over 500 different and unique articles on the Brandon Crisp story specifically mention the Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare game by name, including some stories specifically devoted to the game and its relation to the case (one example of a local-newspaper story [2] ). Since COD4 was used as the 'standard bearer' in the arguments about video games and Brandon's tragedy, it could be considered part of the controversy. --GGG65 (talk) 04:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

You know this really annoys me when they blame Real life issues and happenings on Video games, how in the hell does what happened to this boy tie in with Call Of Duty 4?, nothing that's what, he fell from a tree probably down to playing or wanting to climb, people in the media take video gaming too seriously and I think it's very unfair to blame Video Games for anything, if he was trying to copy what they saw in the game, then that's his own fault not the game, really gets on my last nerves, he should have more responsible hell being 15 where are his parents in all this?, I feel sorry for them I do but each human being is responsible for his or her actions not some form of imitation from playing games. 91.107.166.20 (talk) 02:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Just the fact that media gave the game angle so much attention does in itself make it newsworthy, as I point out above. And yes, the argument could have been about anything else - watching too much TV, spending too much time on facebook - but in the end it was about video games, and for that reason the media focused on that point. --GGG65 (talk) 04:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Xbox World 360

They did not dislike the game. They gave it a 90%. Here is the end:

"VERDICT + Utterly spectacular + Genius in parts - Seven hours long It's smoke and mirrors and a host of cheap tricks - but, as always, it's wonderful. 90%"

HELLO, anyone editing this article? The above is true. The article is factually incorrect in their assessment of the views of Xbox World 360.

If you have the source then please edit the article accordingly. Dbrodbeck (talk) 22:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

piracy

I'm deleting the phrase "which has affected the game's sales" after the part about COD4 being a big target of piracy. Just because somebody pirates a game does not mean that if piracy wasn't an option they would automatically and by logical necessity go out and pay $60+ for it. It's an absurd myth that a pirated game equals a lost sale, or that "true *would-be* sales/revenue!" can be derived from piracy figures. It's much more accurate and informative to say that pirates are "not helping" the industry that they love so much, because they're not paying for their games. You could even go so far as to say they "harm" the industry, but only by hurting the morale of some developers, not the sales figures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.15.230.16 (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2008(UTC)

I agree. It's a point of contestion, if piracy really does hurt sales much, and it's purely speculative in the article. It appears that the edit was undone, however, and I'd like to hear the other point of view before it is redone. But since it lacks a source, and since it is, more or less, speculative, I'd vouch for a deletion of that phrase as well. Synthmon (talk) 12:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The edit wasn't undone, the IP just never made the edit due to the page's semi-protection. I've reworded the section, and the current version should be satisfactory. -- Commdor {Talk} 17:08, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

sequel

Not sure where or how to add this, but apparently a sequel is in the works, as shown here: [3]. Umbralcorax (talk) 04:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Old news, I'm afraid. See here for the section on the series article. Since we already have a section there, which can easily be split off into a separate article once we get some more concrete details about the game, there's no need for a redundant sequel section here. -- Commdor {Talk} 18:13, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok then. I just wanted to bring it up here since I didn't see any mention of it in the article or in the archived talk pages for this (or maybe I just didn't look hard enough). Umbralcorax (talk) 17:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Typo

Since it's locked, I'll post this here. Typo at "dynamics shadows" in the intro. 206.190.248.2 (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. -- Commdor {Talk} 22:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Sales figures

The sales figures in this article need to be updated, Call Of Duty 4 has surpassed 14 million copies now and is the all time number one Xbox 360 game for sales as stated on their official website. 91.107.166.20 (talk) 02:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Guitar Hero or Call of Duty 4?

The summaries for both obscure the question as to which one was the best-selling game of 2007.--66.229.57.140 (talk) 01:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Images in the Plot section

User:Mallerd recently asked me why I removed two images from the Plot section (this one and this one). I said that I think we should try and get the most relevant images for the section, not just weapons that are used for brief scenes in the game, which is why I added the image of the Marines—I tried to find one of a SAS unit as well, but it appears that the SAS article doesn't have one. I also kept the image of Prypiat, Ukraine (this one) because it helps to add some atmosphere to the section, in my opinion; it's particularly unique in that it shows the desolation of the place, which is pretty significant in the scene when the player is there. Thoughts on all this? Gary King (talk) 16:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

You are playing it slightly different now. First you said "I don't think that either helps the reader better understand the plot." Now it is about atmosphere. Anyway, for both criteria there are no "better" pictures, since you say "I believe" constantly I shall as well: I believe that the chill atmosphere of the AC-130H gunship flying high above and firing on the people at night is shown in the picture of that vehicle. The Topol missile helped at least me to better understand the plot because before I had seen the wikipedia article I did not really know how such a missile looked like. The game has some schematics on it, that's it. I am not against removing the picture of a Marine or SAS.

I thought Gary should be more consequent, because the criteria he stated applied to all pictures (at least in my opinion and I can't imagine anyone thinking different). I said to him that I feel he likes to own this article with moves like that, bending himself in strange curves (is that English?). His suggestion was to move it onto this talkpage, here it is. Mallerd (talk) 10:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Captain Macmillan's actor?

Uh, why isn't his actor listed?? It says his actor at imdb.....75.72.221.172 (talk) 04:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Captain Macmillan's actor is Ronald Baligad —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrdnsample (talk • contribs)

"Resolution"

Why does it say it's resolution is at 600p? It seems it is supported at [[ http://www.covergalaxy.com/forum/attachments/sony-ps3/5802d1227050354-call-duty-4-modern-warfare-r1-ps3-cover-dvd-cod-4-cover-3118x1748.jpg%7Cfull 1080p]], so why doesn't say so

The original release for ps3 was up to 1080i only, when the game of the year edition came out in full 1080p. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mynameisjimi (talk • contribs) 22:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

The narrative resolution of Call of Duty 4 on consoles is 600p. You can still play it on 720 and 1080 but it is being upconverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.190.240.1 (talk) 01:58, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

"Console versions of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare run at a consistent 60 frames per second."

I vote we take this out, nothing runs at that FPS, it's better to say it's a 60hz game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.182.57 (talk) 01:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Infinity Ward has stated that the game runs at 60 frames per second, so it's basically your word against the developers'. Their word is at least sourced, and unless you can back up your claims and prove the developers were wrong, then no change is warranted. -- Commdor {Talk} 00:51, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm with Commdor. I got Knights of the Old Republic running at 350 FPS. That's larger than 60, last I checked. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 10:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there any independent validation of that claim? UncannyGarlic (talk) 00:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Price's Fate

Price was in the final final level, "Mile High Club" as one of your squad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.89.62.231 (talk) 21:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

That can't be confirmed given that none of the members of the squad are identified, and when the mission took place relative to the main storyline is ambiguous. -- Commdor {Talk} 21:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

If you have the slo-mo cheat unlocked, use it during the cinimatic when Kamarov arrives at the bridge to rescue you. Look at the medic with Price. With slo-mo, you can see carefully that the medic pounds Price in frustration after giving up trying to revive him, and starts to get up, and then you're are lifted into the medevac. Try it. Look carefully and you should see it.69.114.152.45 (talk) 01:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)'anonymous'

Even if Price died, does it really matter? it wouldn't be the first time, (Call of Duty) or that he didn't seem to age between the early 1940's and the present —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.225.171.193 (talk) 00:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was Price who got executed by Zakhaev and Gaz that threw the pistol at you (and later died as the Russian tried to perform CPR). --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 10:54, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

You're a dickhead then aren't you? It blatantly says Captain Price over his head —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.42.74.122 (talk) 20:20, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow. "Dickhead." There's a deadly insult there. /sarcasm. Be polite and you'll find people will be more willing to talk to you. "It blatantly says Captain Price over his head" Neither of the two at the end have nametags above them. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Price survives, he is a NPC in Modern Warfare 2._Dominic_

Sign your posts, please. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I think the part with the plot summary should be edited at the very end. It says Price survives and plays a prominent role in MW2 but this doesn't happen until 3/4 into the game and it's a big plot twist. I would consider this last sentence a big spoiler. If I hadn't already beaten MW2 i would be upset to read this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.134.42.42 (talk) 23:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

In the words of Yahtzee, "short answer: no. Long answer: noooooooooooooooooooooooo." Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. What did you expect in the plot section. Read Wikipedia:Spoiler and the consensus on WPVG and never darken my towels again. To everyone who reads this, I know I sound bitey and I'm sorry for that, but I'm getting really frustrated about constantly having to say this. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 23:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

ok. not sure why you're so upset, we're on the talk page... it's not like i'm vandalizing the main article. I didn't see anything else in this section of the talk page regarding this as a spoiler. I apologize (not sarcastic).

Nah, just never mind me. I've just seen this sort of question more times than I feel is sane recently and it's made me a frustrated. For future reference, Wikipedia doesn't give a damn about spoilers, ever. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 08:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Having played the game, I can tell you that it is not Price who is being revived by the medic, it is Gaz. Captain Price has a very distinctive mustache, whereas Gaz has his trademark cap. The soldier the medic is trying to revive is clearly Gaz, while it is Price who slides the pistol to Soap.--Sem;colon (talk) 04:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

(is silent for a few moments) That makes no sense whatsoever. First off, we've all played the game. Secondly, why would the models change? That makes no sense. Thirdly, MW2 just showed us in the opening scene that it was Gaz who got shot in the head. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 04:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, Zakheav clearly shoots Gaz in the head and then looks like he's going to kill Soap when the chopper behind him explodes. As he and his men are distracted, Soap looks to the left and sees Price (clearly it's Price with the mustache and hat) toss the pistol to you. After you kill Zakhaev and his men, as you're being airlifted up, you see a medic working on the guy directly to your left...in other words, Price. Anakinjmt (talk) 05:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Price

Hi, what kind of accent do captain Price and Gaz have? Mallerd (talk) 17:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

i believe it's called a fake 'english' accent —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.105.228 (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah well, in England you have a lot of accents. Wondered what it was: from Derbyshire, Hertfordshire. I don't know, know it sure isn't fake though. Mallerd (talk) 00:48, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Price was voiced by Billy Murray and Gaz was voiced by Craig Fairbrass, both Londoners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.149.21 (talk) 23:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Price and Gaz are both from the Londoner East End. The accent is called Cockney. Cheerio Lads —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.4.20.54 (talk) 19:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Defo doing cockney Londoner accents (as most Americans believe London accounts for the entire of the UK). I'm surprised Infinity Ward didn't incorporate rhyming slang. --92.25.194.45 (talk) 02:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I am pretty sure the accents are British  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.12.182.178 (talk) 04:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC) 

.50 BMG sniper rifle

I'd like to change "while Price fired a sniper rifle" in the Plot section to "while Price fired a .50 BMG sniper rifle" (with the hypertext), just to put it into some context as to why the entire arm of Zakhaev could be blown off by a rifle shot. Any objection? Ken l lee (talk) 04:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

No174.112.230.127 (talk) 01:10, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Middle-Eastern Country

It seems quite possible that the country in which Al-Fulani is is executed could be at least partially modeled on some sort of of post-monarchy Saudi Arabia. Not only does the location of President All-Fulani's execution resemble Deera Square, but at the point when Al-Assad refers to "our [country's] monarchy before the Revolution," it could be that the revolution he is referring to is his own -- that is, he may be alluding to having wiped out the royal family of his country as well. Furthermore, when there is the satellite imagery and voiceover of the SAS personnel just hearing of the execution of Al-Fulani, the imagery is much more consistent will a location in Saudi Arabia than with any another nearby possibility, such as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. However, even though Saudi Arabia is certainly "oil-rich," it is not "small," so as might be expected, it seems extremely unlikely that the supposed county is intended to represent any place in the real word. One of the only determinations that can be made with certainty is that the country is question cannot be the Islamic Republic of Iran, because all the characters in the sequence are speaking Arabic -- none are speaking Farsi. SithiR (talk) 19:59, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Slight error in plot section

In the plot section of this artical it says that the american command is warned of Al-Asad having a nucleur warhead by the seals however this is incorrect as it is clearly stated in the game that the intel came from the SAS, most likly from Nikoli the informant rescued by Captain Price's squad although this is not confirmed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.189.98 (talk) 14:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

SAS is mentioned in the cutscence BEFORE the level starts, the SEAL reference is mentioned in-game, when Jackson is inside the helicopter. 222.153.225.96 (talk) 18:39, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

There is vandalism on this article, but I can't remove it

Can somebody with the authority to do so please remove this:

"The online play for PS3 has lately had a lot of players using Hacks ansd the website is in a tutorial on you tube but for any one who thinks this has ruined the game (like me) then according to you tube an asshole called Dark Mamatta found the hacks so blame that douch bag."

It is under the 'Multiplayer' part of the 'Gameplay' section.

Thank you.

The issue had been addressed. -- Commdor {Talk} 18:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Engine's name

I know that the engine's name IW 4.0 engine was confirmed for Modern Warfare 2 on IGN, but does it make CoD4's engine: IW 3.0 engine? I mean there is no absolute confirmation to affirm that...--PhantomT1412 (talk) 11:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The reference has been removed due to the lack of sourcing. -- Commdor {Talk} 19:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Well I think we can re-add IW engine since that was confirmed, but not the version's number (we don't have any source that states if it was IW 3.0 engine or IW 2.0 engine...). --PhantomT1412 (talk) 10:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Xbox World 360 Review

Here in the article, it says that they disliked the game. Untrue; they gave it a 90%. Last time I brought this up, I was told to source it and edit. The source is the magazine itself, and it is sourced. This is what I gave last time as their verdict: "VERDICT + Utterly spectacular + Genius in parts - Seven hours long It's smoke and mirrors and a host of cheap tricks - but, as always, it's wonderful. 90%" I can't edit due to protection, but until the issue with the blatant lie saying that XW360 disliked the game is removed, I can't really take this article very seriously. ShaneHaughey (talk) 00:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The phrasing was changed to just "Xbox World 360 stated 'It's smoke and mirrors and a host of cheap tricks'". -- Commdor {Talk} 00:15, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

That works well, I believe. You need to have the criticism, I just didn't want people to think they disliked it. Good work!

206.217.9.240 (talk) 03:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Game takes place in?

I believe, that it should be stated that, the game takes place, in the years 1996 and 2011. I can backup this claim, as, before "All Ghillied Up", It was 15 years ago, and Captain Price states that it's been a decade since the Chernobyl explosion. That would claim, that they year in "All Ghillied Up" is 1996, and 15 years after that, is 2011. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.169.215.79 (talk) 01:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Which is original research. Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

YES BUT IT IS CONFIRMED IN http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Call_of_duty_4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by KAPITALIST88 (talk • contribs) 08:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Please find a reliable source, a wikia page is hardly one. Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright then Do you consider IMDB to be a reliable source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1125798/trivia —Preceding unsigned comment added by KAPITALIST88 (talk • contribs) 05:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

it is actually in 2011 like the person at the top says a decade since chernobyl 15 years later that means 2011 which means Mw2 is 2016 holy crap The Guitar Master (talk) 03:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

The piracy part of the article is awful

"Call of Duty 4 is a target of piracy, which has resulted in multiple copies of the game being illegally distributed online." This sentence is INCREDIBLY bad. EVERY video game is a "target of piracy". Hell, piracy HAS no "target". Here's a paraphrase to showcase how atrociously written it is: "Cake is a target of fat people, which has resulted in multiple recipes of the food being distributed online."

The paragraph on piracy should probably be removed from the article altogether as the quote cites no numbers, makes no comparisons to other games, and is all around weaselly. The sentence in question should certainly be removed as it adds nothing to the article and the information contained in covered in the quotes. UncannyGarlic (talk) 00:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Multiplayer section

At the intro to the section the article begins listing the type of game modes in multiplayer however leaving out objective based game modes it only list team based and deathmatch I feel that needs to be added in. Also the article says that the different game modes all require unique strategies however that is not true. One team could use a simple strategy of just killing the enemy team and complete every match they play with a win or tie. This is true due to the fact that most game modes killing all enemy players in sudden death or the last round/2 minuet timer results in a win. That brings me to the final point of not game modes give a sudden death timer like the article states. Matches like team deatchmatch will soley result in the two teams tieing and the gaming ending.70.94.249.191 (talk) 00:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Is it noteworthy that there is a teddy bear located somewhere on every multiplayer map? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mynameisjimi (talk • contribs) 23:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

There is not a teddy bear on every single map. Ambush, Bloc, Crossfire, 2 at Overgrown, Chinatown — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.190.240.1 (talk) 01:54, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Year

A user continues to add what he thinks the year is, 2011. The references used are a wikia article, a posting on gamefaqs and imdb. These do not meet WP:RS and I have reverted the change Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

IMDB is used on many Wikipedia articles as a reference and Gamefaqs is a very well known Video Game Website so what would you consider to be a reliable source of Information? --KAPITALIST88 (talk) 05:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

The wikia article is not a RS, as for IMDB, check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_source_examples#Popular_culture_and_fiction and scroll down to the bit on IMDB. Dbrodbeck (talk) 11:50, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Even so why are you against this because anyone who plays and enjoys the game will know that it is said in the missions and can therefore figure out that the game is set in 2011. --KAPITALIST88 (talk) 05:33, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

What I want or you want is immaterial. We must follow WP:RS Dbrodbeck (talk) 10:57, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

If it's said in the missions (I presume you mean MW2), say which trailer and there's your source right there. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 20:36, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Wait, never mind. Thought I was on the MW2 talk page. ... where does it state 2011 in CoD4's movies? --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 20:38, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to point out the IMDB article uses logic, not uncited facts to come to the conclusion the game takes place in 2011. As stated in the game, the flashback mission takes place 10 years after the Chernobyl incident (1986), and the rest of the game takes place 15 years after that. 1986 + 10 + 15 = 2011. --75.30.176.16 (talk) 04:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Price's ultimate fate

I can't really source this (or edit the article for that matter), but Modern Warfare 2 reveals what happened to Captain Price. Somehow he ended up in a Russian gulag. In the mission "The Gulag", your goal is rescure prisoner #627, who turns out to be Price. Price joins your team, and Soap gives him back the pistol that he used to kill Zakhaev at the end of COD4. I won't spoil how Modern Warfare 2 ends, but Price will play a big part. When the game comes out, someone should update Price's fate at the end of the article's story to say that "he survived, but was imprisoned in a Russian gulag up until the events of Modern Warfare 2".164.107.91.60 (talk) 14:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

If this really is in the game, then yes I imagine it will be added, but currently, without a legitimate source, that sounds like utter speculation/a hoax, and most likely will to other editors. RWJP (talk) 14:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The only reason I can think of as to why you can't source this is that you're a pirate. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 14:50, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

How sad. I read all of this spoiler.--AM ^(talk) 14:07, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not apirate, it's all on COD wiki. If naything, there the pirates over their. That's why I cant source it, because the stuff on the wiki isn't sourced. I think it's true, though.164.107.91.223 (talk) 18:44, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Then why the hell didn't you simply say "it's on the CoD wiki"? --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 18:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I never thought about it. The up-dating to the sentence cant happen until Modern Warfare 2 is out anyway, so I thoght by then you would have your source, the game. I was just pointing out a change that would have to be made soon. It was more trouble than its worth. Anyway, now you know what I know and what the world will know in five days. 164.107.91.3 (talk) 22:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, the information on Price wouldn't even go here anyway now that I think about it. It's not relevant to this game's plot. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 22:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes exactly, Price's fate is not relevant to the first game's plot. So all information or speculation about the game's plot beyond what is shown in the first game should be moved to the Modern Warfare 2 page. This should include the fact that Price is alive, which no doubt belongs on the modern warfare 2 page because it is not clear from the first game's plot. You stated before that this is an encyclopedia. I agree, so let's keep the information organized and where it is supposed to be. If I want to read information about a game's plot I would like to read that plot, not another plot.Cpt.MacTavish (talk) 03:39, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

It does mention that Price's fate is left unknown. Clarification that he survived to be in the sequel would be a no-brainer since MacTavish's fate is also clarified. We could just say that Price survived. It's short and doesn't stray into the sequel's plot. I'm getting the game tonight, I may post later to confirm that Price does reappear. =/= Ironoclast (Talk) 22:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Unlikely. If Price does appear as a prisoner, it'll be about the middle of the game. So unless you're playing on Recruit (coward!) you may have to wait for a while. :P --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 22:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I mean tomorrow, like the afternoon or so when I get back from work. I can't pay for the Prestige version with dirt and twigs. I'm no coward, I will be playing Hardened difficulty or I will until I die for like the fifteith time on a level. Then Recruit. It shouldn't take too long if the campaign really is the same length as the first game. =/= Ironoclast (Talk) 22:51, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Removed Spoiler

I removed a small bit at the end of the synopsis where it revealed that Price was revealed to play a major role in the second Modern Warfare game. I felt this was necessary seeing as though many of us thought that Price had indeed died after the first game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dysenterymatt (talk • contribs) 22:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

And I reverted instantly. Wikipedia doesn't care about spoilers. Full stop. Ever. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 22:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Agree this should be removed, you're needlessly ruining the second game for people who are trying to catch up on the storyline. What does Price being revealed to be alive have to do with CoD4? In CoD4 his death is kept intentionally ambiguous. The fact that he survived belongs in the article about Modern Warfare 2, not here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthforitsownsake (talk • contribs) 02:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It should not be removed in terms of keeping the information consistent.Dibol (talk) 05:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Not in the interest of protecting spoilers or the like, but the reappearance of characters in MW2 does not impact anything about this game. We can use the words "apparently dead" or the like to imply the unconfirmed fate. Or, if its really necessary (and I haven't played enough MW2 to know) if this story is connected to MW2, then that can be made. --MASEM (t) 05:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Modern Warfare 2 is a direct sequel to this game, and they are connected to each other.Dibol (talk) 05:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Read the above thread, guys. Same query, basically. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 13:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I really, really strongly think that sentence should be removed. Not for spoiler purposes, I know wiki doesn't care about that, and neither do I. But because, as has been mentioned before, it's really not related at *all* to the *plot* of *this* game. All the information about the sequel is fully documented on its page, and any reader would understand to look for it there. The plot summary should only include details truly salient to the overall plot of the game, and I don't think this point qualifies. I think the way the section would end without that sentence is perfectly appropriate in regards both to the ambiguity of the ending of this game and to what follows in the next game. Besides, the orphan one-sentence paragraph just looks sloppy. -132.183.140.236 (talk) 23:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, this sentence has nothing to do with the plot of this game. --Leivick (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Modern Warfare 2 is a direct sequel to game. Fates of characters should have consistent information.Dibol (talk) 04:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

We don't need to describe what happens to characters in future games within this game. It is unimportant to the general reader trying to understand this game. --MASEM (t) 04:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Uh, Saint's Row had a similar detail revealing the fate of the main character. Why bother leaving the fate "ambiguous" if they're already said to be alive in another article?Dibol (talk) 04:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

← In my experience, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS also applies to details in articles, so the Saint's Row argument is invalid. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 12:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I've fixed the SR bit too - again, it is a detail that its lack does not impair the reader from understanding the rest of the plot much less the rest of the article. --MASEM (t) 15:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect information

In the article, it mentions that a Russian medic attempts to resuscitate Price. This is incorrect. He was trying to resusitate Gaz, as Price was concious —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.239.226.41 (talk) 07:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Gaz was the one to have his face blown out of the back of his head. That's an injury he won't recover from unless he's a Ghost (pun intended). I originally thought the medic was trying to revive Gaz, but watch the "Previously on Modern Warfare" section in MW2. It's Gaz who gets shot, Price who slides the pistol towards Soap. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 11:52, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

As Thejadefalcon said, during the scene on the bridge, the player (Soap) watches Zakhaev shoot Gaz in the head with a Desert Eagle, and is then passed a pistol by Price, who is lying off to the players left hand side. When the Russians arive to rescue the surviving members you see Price being resuscitated (or at least, the medic is attemting to). RWJP (talk) 14:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

And obviously succeeds. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 14:34, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Manifest != "Manifest File" (JAR)

In section 2.2, paragraph 1: manifest should link to the following page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest#Industry Derekawesome (talk) 00:38, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thank you. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 00:49, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Best Selling?

"It was the top-selling game worldwide for 2007, reaching over seven million copies by January 2008, and over 13 million by May 2009.[3]"

According to the 2007 in video gaming it was outsold by both Halo 3 and Wii Play.

WesUGAdawg (talk) 21:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

You are looking only at the US figures. --Mika1h (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Somebody needs to sign their post!!!! Uncle Soprano (talk) 23:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Advanced AI

Anyone think the upgraded AI system should be mentioned? Uncle Soprano (talk) 02:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

First person shooter/romance? Wtf?

Why is this game described as a "first person shooter/romance" game in the beginning of the article? What does romance have to do with it? --JZAONE (sorry don't know how to sign my discussion yet)

Two hundred years of development? What?

Under "Development" the article says, "Call of Duty 4 was developed by a team of a hundred people, over the course of two hundred years." I don't know much about the game, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't in development since the Napoleonic Wars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.232.73 (talk) 17:12, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

fixed. Dbrodbeck (talk) 17:17, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Russian Ultranationalists, or Eurasianists / Communists?

Why is ewerhwhere here written about some Ultranationalists?

Russian Ultranationalists don't wish to restore USSR, and many of them hate this period of our history. Some of them even want to cut off Northern Caucasus as non-Russian home of hated islamic Caucasians. And Chechen Imran Zakhaev (his name is Chechen) cannot be leader of Russian nationalists - this is a nonsense like a Black leader of Aryan Nation.

In-Game Russian insurgents can be Communists of some sort, or Eurasianists (like Alexander Dugin) - but not Ultranationalists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.81.185.23 (talk) 15:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

PS3 Game Of The Year Edition

In the 'Retail versions' section, it states that "The PlayStation 3 version included the Variety map pack on the disc, and while the Xbox 360 Game of the Year edition initially included an insert in the packaging which could be redeemed on Xbox Live Marketplace to download the Variety map pack, later releases did not contain the inserts, and so were no different from the original release of the game."

However this isn't correct, the PS3 version does not include the variety map pack on the disc. Like the Xbox 360 version, initially an insert was included with a unique keycode to obtain the first Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare Map Pack for free. Later releases did not.

The release which includes the insert has a circle on the bottom right hand corner of the cover with the words "FREE *4 New multiplayer maps" (http://au.gamespot.com/ps3/action/callofduty4modernwarfare/index.html?tag=result%3Btitle%3B0).

203.32.16.176 (talk) 04:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC) Milto 28/01/2011

poor gaz

gaz was a great guy and was shot to death for no reason. i like the g36c's though —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.76.41.58 (talk) 04:04, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

not a forum TehMissingLink ^Talk 21:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Captain Price in Call of Duty 1

The article should mention somewhere the character Captain Price in Call of Duty the original. He's a main character who appears in the American and British campaign as a British soldier, he's even got the signature Price mustache. I assume he's implied to be the Modern Warfare Price's father. Someone with more experience contributing to Wikipedia pages than I could add this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.30.176.16 (talk) 04:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

That isn't exactly relevant to this specific article. There is no proof that Captain Price is the CoD4's Captain Price's father, and it isn't important enough to put in the article in the first place. Razr95^☣ 01:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Plot section

I think the plot section is too long and should be trimmed down a bit to make it concise-SCB '92 (talk) 16:01, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Actual dates for COD4 and MW2 confirmed in MW3

I know the years Call of Duty 4 and Modern Warfare 2 take place in have long been the source of speculation, well now they've finally been confirmed in Modern Warfare 3. The mission "Blood Brothers" shows flashbacks of events that occurred in COD4 and MW2 with actual dates attached to them. The flashback of the Zakhaev assassination attempt in Prypiat (COD4 mission "One shot. One kill") is labelled as "winter 1996". The flashback of the nuclear detonation in the middle east (COD4 mission "Shock and awe") is labelled as "2011". Finally, the flashback of the Zakhaev airport massacre scene (MW2 mission "No Russian") is labelled "2016". These had long been the speculated dates, but now that they're actually confirmed, I was thinking they could be added into the COD4 and MW2 articles. Splew (talk) 20:15, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Basis for Gaz's Character

I can't help but wonder if "Gaz" is based off a man of the same name in Andy Mcnab's Immediate action, and can't help but wonder as well whether it would be useful to try to find some information about how they designed the characters.109.156.192.4 (talk) 14:23, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

WHAT ABOUT MW2??????????????

We need to protect mw2's page too, why is this protected when its 5 years old, when mw2 is up and free? Just wondering. =)140.198.46.138 (talk) 00:19, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Inconsistent abbreviated title

Reading through this article I've noticed that when referring back to the title of the game, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Call of Duty 4 and Modern Warfare are used all over the place. Can we reach consensus on how the article refers back to and edit the article to reflect this? CR4ZE (talk) 08:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Why should we? Diversity is good. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Referring to the game under different titles is confusing to the reader. We are writing an article for the non-gamer, and someone who has no knowledge of the game beforehand. Therefore there needs to be one abbreviation used and the article needs to stick with it. CR4ZE (talk) 09:27, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

No, it isn't confusing. It wasn't for me. Diversity is good. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 14:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Lisa, but you're making an argument based on what you think is "good", not based on what WP:NCVG says. "Use the most commonly accepted English name first, if one exists. This is usually the official title in the initial English release, but not always". The article needs one consistent naming convention, not three. CR4ZE (talk) 02:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes to the first, I am telling my opinion, and there is absolutely nothing wrong about that. No to the second, because the wikilink is a guideline on article title, which we aren't discussing, as opposed to references to title, which we are discussing. And, for the record, throwing the wrong wikilink into the discussion has offending effect instead of a compelling one. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 06:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

(From WT:WPVG/AG) Since we use italics, it is less of an issue when more than one is used. But it is still just confusing matters and we really ought to use one short version, I would say Modern Warfare since it is more succinct and easier to read. If repetition really becomes a concern, it can be alternated to Call of Duty 4 or something, although I'm not sure why it ever would since we can easily use just "game" or something when referring to the game. Not using different names unless necessary is common practice as far as I've seen on VG articles. It's common to use synonyms for better prose for common words, but this is a proper noun, so we shouldn't assume the reader wants to memorize all the variants of how it can be used, especially given the COD franchise game naming. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:20, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Generally when shortening long titles, especially when the franchise title is the beginning, we use the subtitle. So Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country becomes The Undiscovered Country. By the same logic Modern Warfare makes the most sense to refer to the game beyond its first full mentions in the lead and article body. As to Lisa's comments, uniformity is a virtue when it comes to encyclopedia writing, as is accuracy. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:22, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. That's what I said in the first FA nomination of Microsoft Security Essentials. No, it isn't a virtue unless it has practical uses. "Uniformity" can become "repetition" too. Consider this:

Modern Warfare is a game [...] Modern Warfare features [...] Modern Warfare received [...] Modern Warfare was subjected to [...] Modern Warfare made it so [...] The Modern Warfare update [...]

Replacing it with alternative nouns, pronouns and descriptors helps a lot. If you guys want to use a single noun form, please be my guest, but when you guys say "people find it such and such" and I find I don't find it so, it makes me feel like I am a martian! How do you guys know what people think in the first place?

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 17:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are making up hypothetical bad prose to suit your point here. I can equally say

Modern Warfare is a game [...] Among the core features are [...] The game received [...] Gameplay became a subject to [...] The developers made it so [...] The first update [...]

and use that as indicator that there is no repetition. I don't think anyone said we can't use other pronouns or descriptors. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:17, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Basically what Hellknowz said. If you've got sentences back to back to back starting with the same words, that's an issue of poor writing, which various names for the same product will not ameliorate. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 20:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. That's exactly what I said: alternative descriptors. "The game", "gameplay", "it" and "first" replace "Modern Warfare" in this example. So, thanks Hell Knowz, for establishing that repetition is not a virtue. I was going to ask "so, you point?" but I am not going to. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 14:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Lisa, ultimately as I said, when we write a Wikipedia article we are writing it for the non-gamer, somebody who has no previous experience with the CoD franchise. As Hellknowz pointed out, keeping one abbreviation consistently throughout the article doesn't constitute repetition, which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if written correctly anyway. The problem with using multiple abbreviations is that the non-gamer is likely to be confused, and think that "Call of Duty 4" and "Modern Warfare" could be separate entities, such as in the Reception section where you introduce with "Modern Warfare', then "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare", and later, "Call of Duty 4". CR4ZE (talk) 01:48, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

You know what? I agree. If they read the article as carelessly as Hell and David read my message, they actually might. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 14:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Nobody's here to have a personal attack at you, so you should avoid firing one off at others. They read the point you were trying to make, which didn't have anything to do with the original discussion, and dismissed it. If you're taking that personally that's your own ego getting in the way. It's in our best interest to preserve the quality of Wikipedia's articles wherever possible, and as this is a FA-class article, that's especially important. I'll go through and edit the article for you to keep one consistent abbreviation throughout the article. So would you rather Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Call of Duty 4 or Modern Warfare? CR4ZE (talk) 15:26, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I have no specific preferences. I just rolled a dice. It came 3. So, your third option. Interpret it however you like. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 18:54, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

And while we are at it, CR4ZE: I did not take Hell's or David's message as a personal attack; and my message was not meant to be any sort of retort or personal attack. Surely, "careless" is not a personal attack. They misunderstood my agreement as disagreement and I half-jokingly commented on it. By the way, if you don't know, Wikipedians send eachother trouts in these cases. That's not a personal attack either, okay? But using the word "ego" in conjunction with a person who twice expressed his consent ("be my guest" and "I agree")? Now that is sailing close to wind. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 22:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Extended description for revert #586750114

Hi.

I just made a mass revert to four edits added hours ago. Here is an extended explanation of why. Basically, the edits:

1. Added a lot of intricate details, creating wordiness, which is against WP:FACR
2. Added a lot of wrong piece of info

For example, in the first sentence:

In 2011, a civil war has broken out in Russia between its current government and Ultranationalists

"Current" is superfluous. Certainly, "its government" never means "its past government" because if it is past, it is no longer government. Same goes for additions like:

• "killing the previous leader" (the word "coup d'état" says exactly that)
• "to remove him" (certainly, they didn't invade "to cuddle him")
• "though where, is unknown" (wrong; they perfectly knew where)
• "arrive on scene" (already said with "join the fray"; besides they can't "tend to the wounded" without arriving first)

Then we get to more grave issues.

As U.S. Marines invade the palace, the Marines engage Al-Asad's ground forces.

Seriously, how can Marines both invade the place and meanwhile engage ground forces elsewhere? They can't; the original text was correct. SEALs and their EOD team invade the palace. Marines stay in the city.

Finally, in violation of WP:IINFO, a lot of character names were added and attempt was made to dramatize the ending. As IINFO explains, these additions only make sense to those who already know about them and only serve to detract from the focus of article on Zakhaev.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 06:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080708223934/http://videogames.yahoo.com/xbox360/call-of-duty-4-modern-warfare/cheatsheet to http://videogames.yahoo.com/xbox360/call-of-duty-4-modern-warfare/cheatsheet
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080501105926/http://ve3d.ign.com:80/articles/news/38135/CoD4-Variety-Map-Pack-Downloaded-Over-One-Million-Times-in-Nine-Days to http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/38135/CoD4-Variety-Map-Pack-Downloaded-Over-One-Million-Times-in-Nine-Days

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:12, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 15 external links on Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071107040738/http://www.music4games.net:80/Music_Display.aspx?p1=644 to http://www.music4games.net/Music_Display.aspx?p1=644
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080609230458/http://www.computerandvideogames.com:80/article.php?id=190547 to http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=190547
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080626105835/http://www.gamedaily.com:80/articles/features/activision-gets-streetwise-on-charlie-oscar-delta/?biz=1 to http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/features/activision-gets-streetwise-on-charlie-oscar-delta/?biz=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080309192344/http://www.gametrailers.com:80/player/19006.html to http://www.gametrailers.com/player/19006.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080411132525/http://www.bbfc.co.uk:80/website/Classified.nsf/0/2cb92f9e50afaf8c8025737c003a67bc?OpenDocument to http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classified.nsf/0/2CB92F9E50AFAF8C8025737C003A67BC?OpenDocument
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080531235841/http://iamfourzerotwo.com:80/2008/05/30/variety-map-pack-sponsored-by-nvidia-hits-pc-june-5th/ to http://iamfourzerotwo.com/2008/05/30/variety-map-pack-sponsored-by-nvidia-hits-pc-june-5th
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080301000109/http://www.gametrailers.com:80/player/27308.html to http://www.gametrailers.com/player/27308.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080214155903/http://bestof.ign.com:80/2007/xbox360/24.html to http://bestof.ign.com/2007/xbox360/24.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080216055523/http://bestof.ign.com:80/2007/xbox360/3.html to http://bestof.ign.com/2007/xbox360/3.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071203213313/http://xbox360.ign.com:80/articles/838/838857p1.html? to http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/838/838857p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090114200710/http://ve3d.ign.com:80/articles/news/35295/Call-of-Duty-4-First-Impressions to http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/35295/Call-of-Duty-4-First-Impressions
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091113044738/http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk:80/article.php?id=13130 to http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=13130
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080118023718/http://www.pcworld.com:80/article/id,139653/article.html? to http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,139653/article.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090513102046/http://www.gamedaily.com:80/articles/news/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-sells-13-million/?biz=1 to http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-sells-13-million/?biz=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080610103228/http://www.gametrailers.com:80/player/34978.html to http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34978.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)