COD:Modern warfare 3
polycounter lvl 18
how come no thread for that?
thise just went on youtube
[ame]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLmsiaN5dZM&feature=player_embedded[/ame]
live action trailer
www.findmakarov.com
i think its safe to assume MW3 is coming?
thise just went on youtube
[ame]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLmsiaN5dZM&feature=player_embedded[/ame]live action trailer
www.findmakarov.com
i think its safe to assume MW3 is coming?
Replies
However I think it's safe to assume MW3 is coming due to it being Activision and how much money the last one pulled in.
All a hoax to get people to think it was MW3 to gain a whole bunch of publicity for there COD fan vid. Worked like a charm, absolutely great viral marketing idea.
Well damn....
Ever since WaW they've been piling onto the same dieing fast pace module that is failing them. The maps are becoming smaller and more like race tracks, the guns are either all perfectly the same or completely unbalanced. Its too arcade-like now and anything that ever was tactical is slowly being removed.
Haha. well the major deciding factor was that id be getting it on xbox. after playing the beta i was pretty disappointed with the visual quality of the game.. since it plays like mw, but looks kinda the same or in some cases worse, i wont be getting it. i was excited for the vehicle aspect of it but its not that big of a deal to me. MAAAAAYBE i will pick it up for pc but im not too happy about Origin.
in general i havent really ever been a big battlefield fan since bf:1942. my brother and i played that one all the time but other games similar came out and ultimately when call of duty 1 was out... i was so impressed with it that i just kept with that series ever since.
i agree with you. not much has changed in the games since mw but really what i want it for is the story. the multiplayer is just an added bonus. :P when it comes to the mw games the story to me has been so awesome. mw1 and mw2 had absolutely some of the best endings in a game ive ever played (well.. in regards to fps).
Great game guys! Im so glad to whoever worked on this
Almost EVERYONE is aware Call of Duty 4 and WaW were the only two in the series to really hold ground, and after that they keep reskinning and pumping out the same shit but worse. Thats Activision for ya. A studio under them makes a unique game that is a breath of fresh air, game goes big. Activision sees a financial opportunity and decides to beef the game up to apply to a wider demographic, and in the process they ruin what was original about it in the first place.
Again, WHY does everyone here feel the need to support EVERY game that is ever released? Were artists, gameplay can suck. We aren't IGN, lets not be biased even if the game is Halo or Call of Duty.
@Oniram, yes I do enjoy the series' stories, I look forward to the ending scene chills :P
I mean, none of us really hated Blizzard in 1997 when Diablo was the biggest thing ever, because Blizzard wasn't exactly taking their predecessor, recycling a little, then pumping loads of money into the marketing and bribing of the press to make it bigger than what it actually is. And then we have those map packs...
It's a wonder with all the genre saturation and monotony going on amongst the consoles as marketed in media, there isn't a video game crash already.
I've been done with Call of Duty.
As to the company remark, you must not have been around long. Activision has done to Call of duty exactly what they did to Guitar Hero and World of Warcraft.
Criticism is why games are better today than they were yesterday.
All companies must change with the times, and Activision is no different. :thumbup:
Andreas, just because it is the best game you KNOW of doesn't mean you need to constantly defend it
"Great games are played, not made." - Todd Howard
When a game reaches the title of "Epic" you can't out do it. You can't improve it. You have to stick with the same module, and listen to your community and throw out stuff that isn't working. Instead, Activision made the quick decision to throw in more action hollywood stuff into the multiplayer. Activisions negligence to their community is what is killing Call of Duty. Have you noticed every time they add something new in a new game they're weaving out masses of players?
This isn't the Wolfenstien/quake/doom/mario revolution, the industry is practically at a stand still in quality right now. The good games aren't getting enough attention.
I really hate derailing this thread slightly, but every comment is just going to be "cant wait!" anyway. It'll be good to have a nice fresh discussion about our product for once. I personally hate that a character model I may spend months on is just going to be thrown into a fast paced run and gun arcade game where the detail won't even be appreciated. People are posting beautiful scenes from RAGE here, who posts pictures of the AAA quality soldier models from call of duty?
Might as well make hand crafted leather seats and put them into crash test cars.
Call of Duty is the best selling game franchise ever.
So your point about weaving out players constantly is not grounded in the reality but more in your own view on the game. While Call of Duty rarely comes up with anything new and exciting, it's still grounded in a solid online shooter that caters to 90% of the shooter fans out there. Activision is a business and they do what any other company would do, keep giving their fan base what they want. They don't want a new intellectual french shooter where the story is grounded in a blind lesbian's problems with cereal... They wan't a mindless shooter with an explosive story that allows for some adrenaline when they finally sit down and play.
So it's fair enough you have an opinion about the game, but do atleast yourself the favor and accept that the game just doesn't appeal to you and don't try to assault Andreas' taste in games just because he disagrees with you(but I will admid his response wasn't very tastefull in itself)
He aint being objective about shit, he has trolled the BF3 thread to bits and now intends to do the same with the MW3 one. Which was my point. Nothing wrong with criticism; if its warranted. But that trailer was great, and yet you still have a troll going MOAR LIEK WASTE OF MUNY 3. Activision are going to do whatever the hell they want; don't blame people that dislike trolls for the state of COD, blame the people that make Activision millions on map packs alone.
You only embarrass yourself by putting words in peoples mouths. And ironically, you sound like a 'COD kiddie' by ranting about shooters and how they are inadequate all the time
Thank you for raising the point about map packs. Has anyone else noticed they're milking those too? Its not just my imagination.
Andreas, when someone comes to me and says "I like Call of Duty for the exact same reasons you hate it, it isn't realistic at all but I still enjoy it." I usually shake hands with them and say have fun and I respect that. But there are alot of Call of Duty players that think since they got an AC130 twice in a row they have ++epeen, and then they plug their ears and go "LALALALALA" when you criticize the one thing they're good at.
@Zpanzer, that is true. But I enjoyed Call of Duty 4, WaW, and MW2 (not for long though). MW2 the action movie hectic killsreaks was a change I didn't enjoy, and then the big one for me that made me hate Black Ops was the tiny maps that forces you to use their built in -with a back door- sniping positions. The game has changed a good bit since 4, and playing BC2 for a bit and going back to MW2 finally made me realize it 100%.
Call of Duty only really caters to the majority of console players, and you're right, most of them want to sit down and feel like a hero for a night. But the series is being milked and you can't deny it. More and more of my friends and people I know are starting to get tired of the same old stuff. Hell, people even hated WaW as soon as it came out even though it was exactly like COD4. At least I gave the series 4 years of my money just to be assured its going down a path I don't enjoy.
But console players don't have a wide range of shooter options either. They wan't to play what everyone else is playing.
People hate Wal-Mart because it destroys small business, I hate Call of Duty for the same reason. They don't allow excellent, new, and original first person shooters a fighting chance.
People will always complain about change, that's a given since they've gotten used to, and are enjoying a certain game, and a new one pops into existence with changes. It very well is that the series is going down a path you won't enjoy, but it is not the same for everyone.
Fact remains that modern warfare 2 sold great, and tons of people are playing it online.
I wouldn't disagree that it has been milked and I'm not a fan at all of the map-packs, but modern warfare 1 & 2 has been some of my most fond experiences in gaming, and this is coming from someone who's favorite games are games like planescape torment or x-com.
Your passion is most likely the reason why you are talking the way you are, it's pretty much why I can't handle any of the bioshock games at all, I found it to be too much of a change from systemshock.
MW3, while incredibly fun is going through the same old hoops, while impressive itll grow stale - Not directly related but Guitar Hero was the previous staple for Activision which had its sales go into decline, thats a thing with the genre as well though.
Zpanzer -
"So it's fair enough you have an opinion about the game, but do atleast yourself the favor and accept that the game just doesn't appeal to you"
Opinion or not, doesnt change the fact that there are aspects that could be improved given the time and money, right? infact, im sure even fans of CoD would have things theyd like to see improved... even if its to make it the best onrails action shooter ever, it can still be made better and redunancy can be removed.
Yeah but what you played was just a rush map the real battlefield IS the vehicles. There's no battlefield without vehicle combat, this is why i don't get why they released a small map as the public beta?!
Complaining about Activision making map pack after map pack and making money off it is just completely and utterly retarded. They shouldn't and will not give them away for free. People work their ass off on these. Testers are paid to test them for hours on end to make sure they run and are good and balanced.
I am so tired of the people that think they are "OWED" something because they bought the original game. If you don't want the DLC don't buy it. This is a business and they are going to make as much money as they can off it as well as give the fans more life to the product they purchased. I have no issues with that at all.
Saying there have been no other shooters that have come out is a bit on the silly side as well. There was Singularity from Raven Software / Activision that came out in June of 2010 and while it wasn't a 90-95 on metacritic it was a fun new thing to play with and mp was actually quite cool and had some different aspects, plus the art was nice.
There are plenty of other games out there as well if you don't want to play COD.
If you don't like something then don't play it or buy it. I can't stand 99% of the Wii games out there but I'm not going to go hunting down those threads on the internet to discredit all the people that do like or enjoy them.
Valve have the right idea, they totally embrace their community... why the fuck dont these people understand that a mod community can almost be free labour in itself? if theyre so happy to make money then these people will give their game value and ask for nothing in return.
Jesse did you play your own game / read the more negative reviews? Just askin out of curiosity really, ive never played singularity but when i initially glanced over it it looked like the time mechanic was just another key/door gameplay mechanic under a different guise. Overall it didnt really look the game was built entirely around the concept ala Portal and portal puzzles. These are ignorant comments though having not played it so i apologise if im totally and utterly wrong. (having read reviews i feel like watching a playthrough to see whats what)
Overall i dont really want to discredit anyone for liking something, its just that their love of it shouldnt make them blind to things that could/should be made better.
I read almost all of the reviews and I can agree with the good and the bad. There was def some much more needed polish on the game and sadly activision didn't want to do that and they basically wrote it off before it even came out. Which is sad to do, but what can ya do?
I will say however with this last thing not to derail the COD thread any more that it is def worth a play through. Sadly you probably wont get much MP out of it since I tried to join a game and there was like only 1 other dude in the world trying to play at the same time, but the SP is a decent ride.
It really bums me out to see stuff get overlooked though, and all the more so for those to have worked on a game to get forced to play their hand. Multiplayer is such a mixed bag, id imagine singularity mixing in with how deadspace 2 handled its, although from the videos singularity looked to be far more fast paced and fun.
Multiplayer communitys are an enigma to me as typically players go where players are, so you either need momentum or some "x" factor thats not always related to the quality of the game... MMO's are the most obvious for this annnnd thats enough derailing.
Thanks for feeding my curiosity though, peace out.
I am really really looking forward to this for sp and mp. I love the new killstreak system idea and unlocking all kinds of new goodies never gets old. I really love call of duty for being an fps full of gun porn...
Not to mention the fact the craziness is the closest thing we have to a modern day quake style deathmatch game which I just don't really get tired of. Variety is nice but if it ain't broke don't fix it.
Do remember that the philosophy behind Valve and Activision are two different ones. While I love the way Valve handles their games and community, you also got to realize that Valve operates totally different then any of the studios under Activision. First of all they don't have a publisher that holds them in a tight leash nor a giant board of investors that need to see a new game out every 2 months.
Valve is also in the unique position unlike many other studios, they are nearly financial independent, that is also why they can take their time to finish a product much like Blizzard is able to. I don't think there exist a game studio out there that wouldn't like to be in Valves shoes.
Hoping that every studio would engulf in their community and make open tools(that in Call of Duty's case would end up costing them money since they wouldn't be able to profit on map packs) is very unrealistic dream in my opinion, I would love to see it happen, but I just don't think it would be feasible for 90% of the game studios out there.
It's not that they'd loose anything on it, most won't, but there's nothing to gain from it.
Valve does it as a PR bonus, it's not an instant pay-off and companies know this.
It's still one of those practices that most companies could gain from in the end, that and releasing the sourcecode of the game further on after the game and its sequels using the same engine have had its life.
It's never hurt bethesdas dlc that there is an editor widely available, and there's way more mods available for that than there is for modern warfare.
So yes, it's a longterm way of building a good releationship with your fanbase, I would say that this is the thing missing in the call of duty franchise.
I hope youre not referring to me here, as I never said that Activision shouldnt charge for their map packs, but rather that people shouldn't be buying them at all, as it lets Activision know we can be ripped off as consumers. $15 Million they've made off map packs!!! How much of that you think artists and testers got?
Expansion packs people, remember those? Kill DLC and bring those back. They came long enough after the release, featured enough content, and were fairly priced enough that they were awesome and worth anticipating. The fact that DLC is announced and detailed prior to the actual game coming out these days, kills the magic for me, because its thrown in our faces that 'its a product'. Skyrim is one such example for me personally. For competitive games like BF, its a good idea to announce and detail. But not for single player games (IMO).
EDIT: Uhh, is it actually $15 million? Or am I an idiot. I could have sworn I saw that figure reported on Kotaku, but that sounds like ridiculous money.
Hey Hey Hey, don't forget the first Unreal Tournament :poly118::poly118::poly118:
Yeah gotta agree. All this complaining and hating in here just gives me a headache. Modern Warfare is fun, I spent a lot of time with 2 and there's very little I'd change about it other than simply wanting more.
Pior, I wouldn't get Black Ops, it's ok, but only a 7/10 compared to MW2. At least don't pay 30 or something for it.
THIS. i havent read anything in the thread past this but i really needed to respond to it.....
why do you criticize them then!? and if you mean "you" as in the generic sense of the term then for one... why do you even bother to have chat enabled in the game? this is one of the reasons why i NEVER use my xbox headset anymore. if im in a party playing a game id much rather use skype because i dont have to deal with the random bullshit that the 12 year olds spew out every 10 seconds.
what do you mean they want to sit down and feel like a hero for a night? while yes its true that most call of duty players are avid fans of the game.. it also gets a HUGE majority of people who would normally never be seen playing video games. people who would go out and call someone a nerd for playing video games typically (if they own a console) have 2 games in their library... madden, and call of duty. COD reaches out to everyone, not just gamers. thats why it is so successful.
when you say people hated WaW because it was the same.. from my point of view i saw it different. all my friends hated WaW because it wasnt the same. it had different dynamics of gameplay. the controls.. especially aiming.. felt very different. it was something that took getting used to and thats why i as well as a group of my friends who played modern warfare didnt jump on it at first.. because it wasnt modern warfare.
I think console players have just as much games available as PC gamers. while those games if released on console may not be as popular than they are on PC, there are still a good number of people who play them. Call of Duty is an opposite on that though. Most people play it on console. not pc. not just because thats the only game out.. but because its a good game and it has a strong community of players. Guaranteed there are just as many people who will dedicate their time to other shooters like Halo or Gears of War.
Saying call of duty destroys small businesses, as in not even giving them a chance... is like saying (just pulling out a random name).. Christopher Nolan destroys other movies.
This isnt some other business that if you have money then you expand and put the other companies out of business. Call of Duty has gotten it right since day 1. The people at their studios have been doing things the way that people like, and its not their fault if other companies could not do that before them or even still. Im not bashing on other companies because certainly there is promise for other games out there, but if you (as a general term) want to live up to a game like call of duty... then you need to do just that. Call of Duty has it right.. and there is no disputing that at all ever.. the 1 or 2 people who may hate the game because they die too often (gears players are like that), or it only takes 3 or 4 hits to kill you (halo players are like that) can feel free to stick to their preferred games.. it will not effect how strong the community is for call of duty as a whole.
also on a side note..
to say that call of duty hasnt changed is ridiculous. when i played mw1.. i was blown away. that was nothing like ive ever seen before. world at war introduced nazi zombies... how many other games have tried and failed at making a game mode like this!? nazi zombies was the sole reason why i played WaW and bought the map packs for it. i had no issues finding money to pay for it.. because it was worth it. When it was just the 1 nazi zombie map at first, yes it did feel a bit too repetative.. but then look what they did with just dlc... adding perks, and new enemies and new guns... a fucking ray gun.. when have you ever seen that in a war game!
why did they do it? because they were bored with the usual crap! that is a fact. i listened to a speech given by one of the lighting artists at the time for WaW and he said that it basically went like this..
guy1: hey so what if we have this electrical fence that will completely vaporize any enemy who touches it!?"
guy2: no... we dont have time.. get back to work on the same ol bullshit.
next day.
guy1: hey so i finished that electrical fence.
AND THATS HOW IT HAPPENED! how freaking amazing is that.. because the people who are making the game get bored with it... they change it. its because of that why Nazi Zombies is so outrageously fun. because thats what its designed for. I dont know how many times i mustve played through, trying out new tactics to progress further...
when other games have the same mode... gears of war for example... and by the way this comes from me, a person who plays gears more than any other game on my shelf.. i played horde until i beat it.. wave 50.. done.. never touched it again. i find myself getting bored with it and ultimately i (and many others i imagine) lose interest. even with gears 3.. the ability to put up defenses n whatnot.. it still gets kind of boring after a while. for whatever reason.. nazi zombies doesnt. ever. no clue why but it things like this that make me and others love the game.