Modern Warfare 3 gameplay - Anything new?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Frostbite3789:

natster43:
It's Activision, they found a formula that they can pretty much completely copy and paste each time and make even more money than the last time and it works. I am probably going to get it pre owned to see the end of this story in which I came into at the middle.

Yeah, that worked out so well for Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero, right?

Oh wait...

There's a reason we aren't on StarCraft 10 by now. Blizzard knows how to develop games and has somehow kept Activision's taint off that.

Yes those games did die, but look how long those series lasted before their fall and how much money they made Activision by barely changing. It is going to hurt them later, but for now it is going to keep giving them money.

ReaperzXIII:

JourneyThroughHell:
Which competitors? Battlefield? You got me there, Battlefield is a more deep experience, even if BC2 is a game I can't stand. However, unless you call Battlefield shallow, then CoD being less deep then Battlefield does not actually make it shallow. Logic.

Wh...that....doesnt even...wait...wha...WHAT?!!! I don't give shit about the rest of what you're saying but this is a criminal offence against all things that is logic.

So if a kiddy pool is less deep than an ocean that means the ocean is shallow? Is that the type of reasoning you are getting at?

The fuck.

Erm, no, that's not the type of reasoning I'm getting at. In fact, I'm suspecting a massive train wreck occured in your brain when you were writing that post.

At no point did I call Battlefield shallow. I think you can't automatically reach conclusions about CoD when comparing it to deeper games, unless you believe those deeper games are also shallow.

This leaves me at an impasse. I could accuse you of not being able to read, but you clearly named some of the things related to my post, so I'm just gonna conclude that you didn't bother re-reading it after you declared your superiority.

Thank you and good day.

Borntolose:
DLC?! Nothing new?!

How can you say that, there are TWO scopes!!!
Seriously, what other FPS has two scopes?

You make a compelling point, sir...

I just care about the single player campaign. MW2 had a fun and intriguing, if somewhat lacking, plot. I want to see what happens next. So yes, I will be buying it for that.

WanderingFool:

yeah, I can see the arguement for skill with camos. The farthest I got was Blue Tiger for my M4. Most of the guns I use the most are around Digital or Urban.

True, I get stuck on Urban or Blue Tiger for a long time (except on Snipers obviously). But that's part of the appeal for me, I feel motivated to unlock the other camos, whereas I disliked Black Ops "buy whichever one you like". I only liked Red, ERDL and Gold :(

Still wish games would let us customize gun camos, like pick out a pattern, then color, etc.

And it sucks that the whole customizable reticule thing probably won't be in MW3 because Treyarch probably trademarked that or something.

sravankb:
This is like saying that Fallout: NV is just like Fallout 3 because they look the same.

The game's not even out yet, why not save time and energy from getting frustrated at something that you haven't experienced yet? There really are better things to talk about rather than this flame bait nonsense.

dude are you a mindreader? i was thinking the same thing... are you a a jedi?

Necromancer Jim:
Snip

Judging a game by its trailer is like judging a baby form an ultrasound picture, these guys are obviously just hating on a game that's going to be popular to get a reaction from the 12 year old CoD fans.

F4LL3N:

The Call of Duty series is pretty much superior in every form to every other FPS, and infact any other genre game. Anyone who can't see that needs to open their eyes.

LMFAO!

Let's have a look shall we.

A game that shows no significant gameplay advances since MW1. 4 years later.

MW3's big competitor. Just look at the difference in gameplay, graphics, voice acting, effects, immersion, animation, destruction and it's ability to have large scale events happen without scripting.

This is a game for 2011. MW3 is no different from a game that came out in 2009.

Rage, http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/trailers/3794-Rage-Making-of-Enemies

Just look at the level of detail the enemy characters AI and individual reactionary scripting. The enemy sets into an animation that differs depending on where you shoot them and whether or not they have friends near by.

That's going to freaking add to the immersion soooo much. And just look at how beautiful it looks and how heavy and real the guns feel.

Look up the gameplay of Metro 2033.

Look up a game called Stalker. The sheer depth of that games quality more than made up for it's poor graphics.

Literally, I could go on all day here.

I don't even particularly dislike CoD. But saying what you just said then. It shows a great amount of ignorance on the subject.

Da Orky Man:
Am I the only one who would love to play an FPS where you play as the Russians striving to fend off an American invasion? I mean, it's just as likely, and America can't just have a hissy fit cause the MW games are popular in Russia as well.

Dude, I actually think it's more likely. America invades Russia as soon as the USSR begins to collapse, and the Russians have to reorganise a force to withold against the american filth. I would play that

I like CoD Series, they are starting to bore me though, this is probably the las CoD I buy before switching side to BF ( Sadly i don't have a 4 people group to play it :( )

Still the game looks great and I don't care if it is like MW2, every sequel is always like it's predecessor, so until i genuinely unique and innovative shooter appears, I'm sticking to coD.

I still go by this fantastic comment i heard on the forums a while ago
"Call of Duty has name power, they can just shit in a box and it will still beat sales records"

The new thing is that the whole game is a scripted event so you could sit, and watch the game play itself!!!

Yeah MW3 looks like a copy paste of MW2. At least blackops had something going for with crazy stroyline and different era weapons.

caz105:

Necromancer Jim:
Snip

Judging a game by its trailer is like judging a baby form an ultrasound picture, these guys are obviously just hating on a game that's going to be popular to get a reaction from the 12 year old CoD fans.

Do you think you might be falling into one of these categories?

I think that just might be possible. I suppose you want us all to play it first, right? It's my job as an informed consumer to not do that with a product I'm 95% sure I won't like, based on previous experience (MW2, BlOps), and what footage/information has been released on this game. I can form an opinion on that.

Unless they magically transform it before November 8th, it's going to fulfill the exact expectations I have for it. As evidenced by everything they've shown off and said about it.

Hell, part of their marketing was to scream about how it runs at 60 frames per second on a 10 year old engine, on consoles. Where it will be a lagfest online and you're frames per second won't matter that much because the host of the game is 3,000 miles from you.

Kahunaburger:

Korten12:

If I where to came to this thread and said: STALKER is the best FPS and superior to everything else. No one would say anything.

Yeah, because STALKER is actually good.

Purely subjective.

JourneyThroughHell:

ReaperzXIII:

JourneyThroughHell:
Which competitors? Battlefield? You got me there, Battlefield is a more deep experience, even if BC2 is a game I can't stand. However, unless you call Battlefield shallow, then CoD being less deep then Battlefield does not actually make it shallow. Logic.

Wh...that....doesnt even...wait...wha...WHAT?!!! I don't give shit about the rest of what you're saying but this is a criminal offence against all things that is logic.

So if a kiddy pool is less deep than an ocean that means the ocean is shallow? Is that the type of reasoning you are getting at?

The fuck.

Erm, no, that's not the type of reasoning I'm getting at. In fact, I'm suspecting a massive train wreck occured in your brain when you were writing that post.

At no point did I call Battlefield shallow. I think you can't automatically reach conclusions about CoD when comparing it to deeper games, unless you believe those deeper games are also shallow.

This leaves me at an impasse. I could accuse you of not being able to read, but you clearly named some of the things related to my post, so I'm just gonna conclude that you didn't bother re-reading it after you declared your superiority.

Thank you and good day.

My point was that if something is deeper than another thing then the other thing is shallow in comparison, people were making the point that CoD is shallow, you disagreed saying CoD can't be shallow unless those games that are deeper are also shallow. I disagreed with the logic of that statement, so is it you that cannot read, sure I exaggerated but the point is just because something is more shallow than another doesn't mean the other thing is also shallow: ergo the kiddy pool and ocean example.

So I'm repeat myself one more time, if Battlefield is deeper than CoD then CoD is either shallow or shallow in comparison, therefore people can say CoD is shallow. My problem comes when you say you cannot call CoD shallow unless those deeper games are also shallow which is simply untrue

So no, there was not a massive train wreck in my head you just didn't understand the analogy, no need for an apology I forgive you.

I care about single player in Call of Duty about as much as I care about multiplayer in Mass Effect. That is to say, not in the slightest.

If I want to play CoD single player, I'd go play CoD4 again and just imagine if Michael Bay had produced it. That's essentially what CoD single player has become: a shitty mindless Michael Bay movie.

ReaperzXIII:

My point was that if something is deeper than another thing then the other thing is shallow in comparison, people were making the point that CoD is shallow, you disagreed saying CoD can't be shallow unless those games that are deeper are also shallow. I disagreed with the logic of that statement

Good, because that statement has nothing to do with what I was actually saying.

Read again, would ya? If you were, perhaps, to see that I was not making a point but a counterpoint to somebody (not that it was easy to notice the quote, mind you, so it's all good), i.e. I was not actually disproving CoD being shallow but arguing that it being less deep than certain other games is in no way proof of it being shallow. But, alas.

So, yeah, I stand by the train wreck thing.

Abandon4093:

F4LL3N:

The Call of Duty series is pretty much superior in every form to every other FPS, and infact any other genre game. Anyone who can't see that needs to open their eyes.

LMFAO!

Let's have a look shall we.

A game that shows no significant gameplay advances since MW1. 4 years later.

MW3's big competitor. Just look at the difference in gameplay, graphics, voice acting, effects, immersion, animation, destruction and it's ability to have large scale events happen without scripting.

This is a game for 2011. MW3 is no different from a game that came out in 2009.

Rage, http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/trailers/3794-Rage-Making-of-Enemies

Just look at the level of detail the enemy characters AI and individual reactionary scripting. The enemy sets into an animation that differs depending on where you shoot them and whether or not they have friends near by.

That's going to freaking add to the immersion soooo much. And just look at how beautiful it looks and how heavy and real the guns feel.

Look up the gameplay of Metro 2033.

Look up a game called Stalker. The sheer depth of that games quality more than made up for it's poor graphics.

Literally, I could go on all day here.

I don't even particularly dislike CoD. But saying what you just said then. It shows a great amount of ignorance on the subject.

Right after watching both of them videos both of which I havent seen before I have to ask what are you on and where can i get some

First game play both the videos where identical the play had a gun and shot people (yes i know battlefeild had tanks but thay where not included)

Graphics: again identical (may be diffrent on pc but not hear)

Voice acting: again identical (no argument)

Effects: where more or less the smae with battlefield being slighly ahead

Immersion: again both looked more or less the same

Animation: I would say battlefield had a slight edge but some of the animations note the sprinting and the first set of crawling animations where floaty as fuck to the point of the ground looking like an optional extra but then again I was kinda impresed when he got blown back from the rocket in the car park but it looks just to be a stright up canned animation

destruction: got to gowith battlefield as I was kinda suprised when the building that get hit near the end of the MW3 dident fall down plus battle feild has that whole everything falls down option

and on the last point about scripting you honastly thing none of the BF3 video was scripted cos that would be a mighty silly comment to make

lastly about the feel of the gun i would like to point out both the m4s where using the same sound file not simmiler but the same and both sets of guns look way to floaty with less recoil than I would expect from a assult weapon on full auto

over all from them two videos if i give battlefield and 8 I have to give MW3 a 7 with the only diffence beeing the destruction part of BF3

long post is long Captcha *cookie cutter*

JourneyThroughHell:

ReaperzXIII:

My point was that if something is deeper than another thing then the other thing is shallow in comparison, people were making the point that CoD is shallow, you disagreed saying CoD can't be shallow unless those games that are deeper are also shallow. I disagreed with the logic of that statement

Good, because that statement has nothing to do with what I was actually saying.

Read again, would ya? If you were, perhaps, to see that I was not making a point but a counterpoint to somebody (not that it was easy to notice the quote, mind you, so it's all good), i.e. I was not actually disproving CoD being shallow but arguing that it being less deep than certain other games is in no way proof of it being shallow. But, alas.

So, yeah, I stand by the train wreck thing.

If you read what I said after then CoD is either shallow or shallow in comparison thus they are not wrong in calling it shallow, so stop saying I cant read when you obviously skip over the things I type.

Ok fine it has nothing to do with what you are actually saying but I was arguing with the logic since the beginning not your actual point.

theonecookie:

Abandon4093:

F4LL3N:

The Call of Duty series is pretty much superior in every form to every other FPS, and infact any other genre game. Anyone who can't see that needs to open their eyes.

LMFAO!

Let's have a look shall we.

A game that shows no significant gameplay advances since MW1. 4 years later.

MW3's big competitor. Just look at the difference in gameplay, graphics, voice acting, effects, immersion, animation, destruction and it's ability to have large scale events happen without scripting.

This is a game for 2011. MW3 is no different from a game that came out in 2009.

Rage, http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/trailers/3794-Rage-Making-of-Enemies

Just look at the level of detail the enemy characters AI and individual reactionary scripting. The enemy sets into an animation that differs depending on where you shoot them and whether or not they have friends near by.

That's going to freaking add to the immersion soooo much. And just look at how beautiful it looks and how heavy and real the guns feel.

Look up the gameplay of Metro 2033.

Look up a game called Stalker. The sheer depth of that games quality more than made up for it's poor graphics.

Literally, I could go on all day here.

I don't even particularly dislike CoD. But saying what you just said then. It shows a great amount of ignorance on the subject.

Right after watching both of them videos both of which I havent seen before I have to ask what are you on and where can i get some

First game play both the videos where identical the play had a gun and shot people (yes i know battlefeild had tanks but thay where not included)

Graphics: again identical (may be diffrent on pc but not hear)

Voice acting: again identical (no argument)

Effects: where more or less the ssame with battlefield being slighly ahead

Immersion: again both looked more or less the same

I wanna use facepalm so badly but they will call me a fanboy :(

Frostbite3789:
Snip

I presume from your post the only reason you're in this thread is to complain about the game. Obviously it's going to be similar to 1 & 2 because its made by the same company and the other games sold well, but still wait for the game to actually come out to judge it fully, the campaign may well be different to what you expect. It probably wont be but at least give it a chance.

How in my post have I said just buy it? You can if you want but I'll be waiting for my friends to get it first ;).

Korten12:

Kahunaburger:

Korten12:

If I where to came to this thread and said: STALKER is the best FPS and superior to everything else. No one would say anything.

Yeah, because STALKER is actually good.

Purely subjective.

Well, considering that an objective assessment of an FPS game is "this is a game where you move through a virtual world through use of the mouse and the w, a, s, and d keys. Other keys have different functions." the whole "subjective" thing doesn't actually mean anything.

kidd25:

sravankb:
This is like saying that Fallout: NV is just like Fallout 3 because they look the same.

The game's not even out yet, why not save time and energy from getting frustrated at something that you haven't experienced yet? There really are better things to talk about rather than this flame bait nonsense.

dude are you a mindreader? i was thinking the same thing... are you a a jedi?

*waves hand*

You will transfer all of your money to my account in the next 24 hours.

theonecookie:

Abandon4093:

F4LL3N:

The Call of Duty series is pretty much superior in every form to every other FPS, and infact any other genre game. Anyone who can't see that needs to open their eyes.

LMFAO!

Let's have a look shall we.

A game that shows no significant gameplay advances since MW1. 4 years later.

MW3's big competitor. Just look at the difference in gameplay, graphics, voice acting, effects, immersion, animation, destruction and it's ability to have large scale events happen without scripting.

This is a game for 2011. MW3 is no different from a game that came out in 2009.

Rage, http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/trailers/3794-Rage-Making-of-Enemies

Just look at the level of detail the enemy characters AI and individual reactionary scripting. The enemy sets into an animation that differs depending on where you shoot them and whether or not they have friends near by.

That's going to freaking add to the immersion soooo much. And just look at how beautiful it looks and how heavy and real the guns feel.

Look up the gameplay of Metro 2033.

Look up a game called Stalker. The sheer depth of that games quality more than made up for it's poor graphics.

Literally, I could go on all day here.

I don't even particularly dislike CoD. But saying what you just said then. It shows a great amount of ignorance on the subject.

Right after watching both of them videos both of which I havent seen before I have to ask what are you on and where can i get some

First game play both the videos where identical the play had a gun and shot people (yes i know battlefeild had tanks but thay where not included)

Graphics: again identical (may be diffrent on pc but not hear)

Voice acting: again identical (no argument)

Effects: where more or less the smae with battlefield being slighly ahead

Immersion: again both looked more or less the same

Animation: I would say battlefield had a slight edge but some of the animations note the sprinting and the first set of crawling animations where floaty as fuck to the point of the ground looking like an optional extra but then again I was kinda impresed when he got blown back from the rocket in the car park but it looks just to be a stright up canned animation

destruction: got to gowith battlefield as I was kinda suprised when the building that get hit near the end of the MW3 dident fall down plus battle feild has that whole everything falls down option

and on the last point about scripting you honastly thing none of the BF3 video was scripted cos that would be a mighty silly comment to make

lastly about the feel of the gun i would like to point out both the m4s where using the same sound file not simmiler but the same and both sets of guns look way to floaty with less recoil than I would expect from a assult weapon on full auto

over all from them two videos if i give battlefield and 8 I have to give MW3 a 7 with the only diffence beeing the destruction part of BF3

long post is long Captcha *cookie cutter*

Dude, what are you on so that I can avoid it.

Seriously. I don't say this often, but your opinion is simply incorrect.

This video has never, ever been more fitting.

I really don't like to use that. But honestly, it is the perfect response to what you just wrote.

Modern Warfare is the lepper of the FPS genre. It makes the genre stagnate, it makes it look ugly, and non-evolving.

Ow and yes, im such a hipster becouse i dont like MW, and i also hate popular games. Well sorry, im guesing Minecraft is popular? So are Bioware games? Or Valve games? Hate to break it to You, but I like them.

I dont like "popular" and "mainstream". I hate series that don't evolve, give you the same shit over and over and over again, charging 15 EU for 5 maps. Ow, also i dont like bad games/series. MW is a bad series. And yes, i prefer CSS or Battlefield multiplayer wise. U mad?

Korten12:

Xzi:
snip

It's ironic, you slash him for his opinion but basically say: Oh if you thought these where, that's fine.

If I where to came to this thread and said: STALKER is the best FPS and superior to everything else. No one would say anything.

Probably because you'd be right...it's hard to argue the truth.

MW3 is a modern military glitch based multiplayer biased ego-fest developed for the teens who need to release some tension and can't do it by playing Battletoads.

MW2 was a modern military glitch based multiplayer biased ego-fest developed for the teens who need to release some tension and can't do it by playing Mega Man.

There's your difference.

Borntolose:
DLC?! Nothing new?!

How can you say that, there are TWO scopes!!!
Seriously, what other FPS has two scopes?

ARMA 2 OA

Ace mods.

You asked.

Is anyone even surprised? I knew CoD was going down hill when they used MW1 maps as DLC for MW2. BlackOps was very similar sure, but at least they changed a bunch of stuff around to make it seem like they were progressing towards a more evolved formula. But it seems from MW2 on they're just copy/pasting the game and making minimal changes.

sravankb:

kidd25:

sravankb:
This is like saying that Fallout: NV is just like Fallout 3 because they look the same.

The game's not even out yet, why not save time and energy from getting frustrated at something that you haven't experienced yet? There really are better things to talk about rather than this flame bait nonsense.

dude are you a mindreader? i was thinking the same thing... are you a a jedi?

*waves hand*

You will transfer all of your money to my account in the next 24 hours.

sorry, i'm using anti mind reader glasses, i kinda figured this might happen.

kidd25:

sravankb:

kidd25:

dude are you a mindreader? i was thinking the same thing... are you a a jedi?

*waves hand*

You will transfer all of your money to my account in the next 24 hours.

sorry, i'm using anti mind reader glasses, i kinda figured this might happen.

Curses! It figures that you'd be wearing them now, when I finally decide to put my powers to use.

sravankb:

kidd25:

sravankb:

*waves hand*

You will transfer all of your money to my account in the next 24 hours.

sorry, i'm using anti mind reader glasses, i kinda figured this might happen.

Curses! It figures that you'd be wearing them now, when I finally decide to put my powers to use.

wait if i knew you would that then... i'm i a mind reader!?!

The only thing I have against CoD is that they release games with little differences between them in a short period of time.

It's like they're actually yelling "THIS IS A MASSIVE CASH GRAB STUNT, PLEASE BUY OUR GAMES"

The games are above average, let's be honest, but fuck, a new game every other year? For 60$? No way in HELL I'm getting that.

Maybe if they had a dev. cycle of more than a year and a half to make a solid game, I wouldn't be so skeptic about them.

RagTagBand:
FPS's don't tend to change drastically between sequels, just little things which accumulate over time. I mean BF3 doesn't look *that* different from BFBC2 (not a direct sequel but...same dev, same kind of game, same vein etc) and New Vegas didn't look *that* different from Fallout 3, so i'm hardly surprised that COD8 doesn't look *that* different from COD7.

Picking it out and calling it a special case, as if all sequels from all other games are wildly different from their predecessors, is just typical fanboi-ism.

You're missing the point. The physical resemblance isn't the issue.
The problem is that there appears to be absolutely no meaningful gameplay innovation.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked