I'm a Communist. Partially....
20th May 2006
United Offensive hands down.
Pros of UO:
Usable vehicles More Maps Base Assault Gametype Usable tanks Portable Machine Guns SVT-40 (Russian Weapon; equvilent to the Gewher 43) Gewher 43 (German semi-automatic weapon) Silenced Sten Foy Bastgone Kharkov Kursk
Cons of UO
Need original CoD to play (UO is an expansion pack, which frankly sucks, because I hardly play regular CoD and play UO alot, so CoD 1 just sits there, taking up hard drive space)
Same graphics engine (I'd prefer if UO used a different graphics engine. The engine used just looks a little more cartoony than realistic)
Tanks don't have realistic armor or damage (The Sherman should be able to take only 1 hit from a Panzer IV, not 4 hits. That being said, the Panzer IV should be able to take 5-7 shots from a Sherman, not 4)
SAS makes yet another appearance (I'm frankly sick of the whole 'James Bond' style CoD experience. Sure, the Silenced Sten is cool, but I'd rather not have stealthy missions)
Quite a few glitches (I'll see an enemy through a wall sometimes, or the whole map will disappear for a minute, showing me the locations of enemy soldiers and vehicles on the entire map)
Some of the missions are frustatingly long (Crossroads is an example of that. I think there are at least 12 objectives in that mission)
Lots of tank campers in multiplayer (gets VERY frustrating)
the first cod and uo are the best cod games out there. the graphics arent the best but the story line is the most accurate and the best
Well, there's more low-ping servers on CoD than on UO. And for some reason I enjoyed the CoD SP experience more than that of UO. Probably because the ending was touching.
Call of duty 1 = good sp United offensive = good mp.UO had some graphic fix`s as an example look at the MP 44 in cod and then look at it in uo there is a difference (my opinion)
well I play both interchangeably just matters what my friends are playing atm