MW3 DETAILS LEAKED (possible spoilers within)

James J said:
Not quite as every one of those games you mentioned has a completely different single player storyline for a start. Sure the multiplayer is "similar" but black ops has 100% new maps with no rereleased ones from MW1 (which MW2 had in the DLC packs for example). Theres vastly different weapon balancing in each game, not to mention their approach to killstreak rewards, levels of prestige and how you unlock new equipment (which bfbc2 didn't do very well at all).

To say no effort is put into these games is abit silly really, considering the budgets for the newer ones have been extremely high and they are also some of the best cross platform games going, with the PC version STILL feeling like a PC game...
Click to expand...

They pretty much have to do a Singleplayer. Doesn't matter how bodged together it is. Once thats done they just have to take it and create a bunch of maps off it. Certainly not worth the £40 asking price for that alone and the MP is just the same with a bunch of minor alterations

The rest of it... you actually call altering how Prestige works a time consuming event that took effort? Unlocking? You seriously telling me they did it better than BC2? 1 of the best guns in the game is restricted to level 44 or something, most of the rest are arbitrarily held back until you've got enough cash and the Pro perks are held back until you've completed arbitrary 'challenges' AND got enough cash. Balancing/handling of the weapons is the only part that might take a while, but considering 75% of players appear to have mouse 1 bound to prone+fire and mouse 2 bound to ADS+fire, I think they did a pretty **** job.
 
peterattheboro said:
Yes because having the fastest selling game and then the one after sells even faster is a sign that the series is in decline.

I persnally can't wait for MW3. I enjoy MW2 more than I do BLOPS so I have high hopes for a FUN game. Not arsed about graphics to be honest. I want good gameplay which the COD games always deliver on.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, MW2 with dedis would be absolutely perfect. That's all they need to do for MW3, it's so simple.. PLEASE get it right this time!!
 
James J said:
I'm not actually, but thanks for the concern. Its vastly better than medal of honours single player and has a great plot twist in it.

Sick and tired of all the people just saying anything new in regards to call of duty is automatically crap when the sales figures, reviews and playerbase all say otherwise.

All the people saying "BF3 will be vastly better" etc are talking out of their **** as well as no one knows how good either of these two games will be and just buy and enjoy both, just like I'll be doing, unless your all skint beyond belief...
Click to expand...


Well, each to their own, but I'd have to say:

1) BO's huge sales figures were because so many CoD fans were disappointed in MW2 and thought BO was the sheriff riding into town to sort everything out. Turnedf out it was a take-the-money-and-run tramp with no teeth and a selfish attitude.

2) Most of the positive reviews for BO were either for the PS3 were everything was fine and dandy or paid for by the publisher. There were very few truthful reviews about the PC version when it was first released - and they were rather scathing.

3) You only have to look at OcUK's very own "Worst game in history" thread or how many people have gone back to CoD4 (or even BFBC2 and MW2) to see what the playerbase thinks of BO.

Opethdisciple is right: the series is ARTISTICALLY in massive decline.
 
I didnt buy BLOPs and I wont be buying this, the series was exhausted with MW2 how they keep selling them I really dont know, I can only assume its because people are easily marketed
 
No, you said "How they keep selling them I really don't know", so I showed you Number_25's post to show you who keeps buying (and sanctioning) them.
 
People that buy cod spent tons of hours on multiplayer so they get their money worth. what is everyones problem with cod games i dont understand. let them enjoy what they like. you think buying battlefield games makes you hardcore? no battlefield is just another casual fps with tons of issues that lives in the shadow of cod suffering from inferiority complex.
 
If its different from the others, sure. Different as in it actually adds something, the others were ok as 10 minute blast games.

But, at £50 a pop, if they don't, its honestly not worth it. MW2 still has a playerbase as large as BO, so any argument about migrating to where the playerbase is is wrong. Cod 4 added something to the series, something new. MW2 didn't, but i fell for that one. BO didn't and i didn't fall for that one. The series still looks like it did 4-5 years ago. Hell, it still plays like it did.

To draw a contrast, Nintendo gets massive aggro for re-using Mario, Zelda etc, and yet at least each game develops on it, instead of just being stuck in Super Mario World gameplay (which is great still).

COD reuses the same thing again and again and nothing from the general gaming community.
 
The "Duty Calls" (youtube it) marketing gimmick for Bulletstorm sums up exactly how I feel about the call of Duty series, post COD4. They are, artistically, in decline:

-The "rank ups", rather than providing a real incentive to continue, play off on a Pavlovian, base desire to hear the "rank up" sound. It rewards the lowest common denominator, and that's part of the reason for its wide appeal; the unwashed buy it in droves.

-The whole faux "cinematic" element of single player. The developers seem to have taken lessons at the Michale Bay School for Directors. There's no pacing. Surely anybody understands that you need low moments to make the high action moments feel all mo awesome? And why does every dramatic moment have to be in slow mo? Go and watch Blackhawk Down. Right at the start, Militia forces turn an M2 .50 cal on a bunch of civilians. No slow mo involved and it was still every bit as shocking.

-The weapons feel more like power tools than real firearms: Contrary to popular belief, soldiers don't just spray-reload-spray-reload. Most infantry combat weapons, with the exception of LMGs, etc, are fired semi-automatically, in that one pull of the trigger=1 bullet. They are obviously capable of firing in full auto, but this is generally reserved for providing cover fire in the event that the LMG gunners are incapacitated.

-It's just starting to take the ****: Look at COD1, that was a sombre homage to those who fought in WWII, it was handled with due respect to the subject matter. The new ones are handled as if they were "Orange Wednesday" movies. "Yes, that's good, but can we put a remote control toy car bomb in this one?" "Yes, I know it's modern warfare, but can we put dual-wield lever action shotguns in it?" "Let's ave a snowmobile chase! It should be like all proper James Bond stuff, yeah?"
 
Perfect way of explaining how it is an arcade game and not based on realism in any way, the war setting is just that, a setting, the actual game is an arcade game. This I believe is what seperates the BF and COD games fan basis
 
Relentless81 said:
Perfect way of explaining how it is an arcade game and not based on realism in any way, the war setting is just that, a setting, the actual game is an arcade game. This I believe is what seperates the BF and COD games fan basis
Click to expand...

if you believe that BF is based on realism in any way then i dont know what to say man, i really dont.
 
Can't get more casual than COD, I played OPS for about 40 hours then said that's enough, the kill streaks and ridiculous rewards that go with them completely kill gameplay, yes there is hardcore mode but that sucks. So I'm back to BF2, a game that I have never grown bored off in the 6 years I have played it, roll on BF3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom