Call of Duty - Modern Warfare 3

[Cluelessboy]

Originally Posted by 3 Justin 3

This franchise continues to grow, you answered your own question: people are stupid. As someone who was a die-hard fan of the series and still believes MW1 is the best multi-player game of this generation, this series is beyond garbage now.

I avoid talking about it with anyone in real life because my hatred for the series now always escalates and I don't want a huge argument. I won't bring up Battlefield as I don't need to. You can argue the awfulness of the series without bringing up the other games.

5 games and you're STILL on the same engine, "oh, it looks even better now though!" Such a load of garbage. IGN bitches about how MW3 is all the same game, but since its "the best CoD yet!" it gets a 9/10. Such a joke.

The video game industry is broken until this garbage of a franchise dies, and sadly I don't see that happening anytime soon with the amount of fools who continue to buy this game.

/rant

*Sorry if I offend anyone, obviously this is my opinion.

Thats because Activision is the Madden of FPS and doesnt care what the players want but just money. They know they can sell the game with a copy and paste job every time and throw a new cover on it and itll sell cause people fall for the hype. But for me I expect some stuff added or stuff to innovate and move the franchise ahead - in which COD has failed to do so in the past what 5 games now? Thats why they already have next years COD in pre-release, its the same damn game and they couldnt care less about moving the franchise ahead.

They already did it to Guitar Hero franchise(where is it now?) by milking the product and are doing the same thing to COD now.

[Igotnothing]

They already did it to Guitar Hero franchise(where is it now?) by milking the product and are doing the same thing to COD now.

Add Tony Hawk to that list. Next in line is WoW, and hopefully CoD.

I don't doubt that MW3 is fun, and if I bought it I'd probably enjoy it. I firmly believe it's nto worth $60 though. At best it should be an expansion pack. What it really is a cash grab. And that's not going to change any time soon as they keep making money off it. As noted, Activison doesn't care either, they've already got CoD '12 lined up. And i'm sure CoD '13 is ready to. Why? Because it's unlikely they'll update the engine. Maybe for CoD '14 they'll do an update, if only becuase the new consoles willbe right around the corner or perhaps out by then.

I don't trade ins normally, I don't like the idea of the store reaping all the profit, but if I could buy this game used on PC I would. If only to finish out the story. Despite how bad it is, I'd like to complete the arc. That's the best I can do to 'vote with my wallet'.

[Street Pharmacist]

Yeah. Down with profit and making games the public want! Clearly I am too sophisticated to play these sequels as they are not original enough.
Look, people like them. They would not buy them if they did not. As you mentioned, you are smarter than them. So why get so riled up?

A company that is profiting from this? How dare they!
Lol


/rant

[Jbo]

I Play CoD because it is fun.

/thread

[Mass_nerder]

It blows me away to see people who are lvl 60+ already!

[Cluelessboy]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

It blows me away to see people who are lvl 60+ already!

It does wonders for those losers who have played the game for the past 36 hours straight. They probably havent even left the house during that time either ha.

[Frequitude]

Is this game best played with a keyboard and mouse? Or is it designed to play on a controller?

I haven't played a FPS since Counter Strike...

[MrMastodonFarm]

Call of Duty used to be Band of Brothers, now it is Michael Bay's Transformers.

I really hope they do a serious and engaging World War 2 game again.

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Call of Duty used to be Band of Brothers, now it is Michael Bay's Transformers.

I really hope they do a serious and engaging World War 2 game again.

Yes. The last cod game I loved was call of duty 2...simply amazing.

[llama64]

I bought my xbox 360 in 2007 and it came with Call of Duty 3. Played maybe 3 hours worth before moving on and haven't touched it since.

That said, on a whim I picked up MW3. So far I've been having a blast. Don't really get the story beyond the typical shadow faction manipulating powers into full scale war thing that we usually see in tom clancy movies. Certainly enjoyable enough though - I didn't pick this game up to be enlightened.

Haven't tried multi-player yet as I'm sure I will get owned by 12 year olds.

Between this and Skyrim, my nights are booked for a while.

[TSXCman]

Originally Posted by silentsim

Yes. The last cod game I loved was call of duty 2...simply amazing.

In terms of single player story, CoD 2 was very very strong. I still load it up on my PC every few years just to give it again

[nik-]

I still maintain that CoD 1 (before the bunny hopping patch) was the best FPS ever made.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Is this game best played with a keyboard and mouse? Or is it designed to play on a controller?

I haven't played a FPS since Counter Strike...

Whatever feels best for you is the answer. As someone who grew up with mouse/keyboard, I could never play an FPS with a controller and have even feigned a hand injury to avoid being passed the controller. Love them for fighting games, racing games, etc. but any game that requires aiming (FPS or 3rd person), no way.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Call of Duty used to be Band of Brothers, now it is Michael Bay's Transformers.

I really hope they do a serious and engaging World War 2 game again.

I'm so sick of those. There are still many WWII games every year. Give us a WWI game. A Napoleonic Wars game. A Roman Empire FPS, etc. I don't care if it's about cowering in a trench and getting shellshocked and crying in the cold rainy mud. I don't care if it's about marching in a line and dying. I want to see those worlds made and experience them in first person.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

I'm so sick of those. There are still many WWII games every year. Give us a WWI game. A Napoleonic Wars game. A Roman Empire FPS, etc. I don't care if it's about cowering in a trench and getting shellshocked and crying in the cold rainy mud. I don't care if it's about marching in a line and dying. I want to see those worlds made and experience them in first person.

A Roman FPS sounds freakin' awesome until I try to figure out the mechanics of it. You can't camp, so without guns it becomes a hack n' slash, which would be terrible. A napoleonic one would also be awesome until you realize you get one shot from your muzzle loader every minute or two and have to stand in set formations.

If you want to be immersed in the Roman Empire, Assassin's Creed is amazing. Having been to Rome and Venice, the attention to detail is striking

[SHOGUN]

I maybe the only person who thinks COD: World at War was the best of all COD's....

[SHOGUN]

Originally Posted by Cluelessboy

Just sold mine for $50, saves me the hassle dealing with the rats at Future shop from just trading it in. 4hrs with it was more than enough time for me. Been there, done that, seen it all many many moons before.

Gonna get BF3 now.

If you bought it from EB games you could of get $60 back..... LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

[Rhettzky]

HAHA, clueless indeed!

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

A Roman FPS sounds freakin' awesome until I try to figure out the mechanics of it. You can't camp, so without guns it becomes a hack n' slash, which would be terrible. A napoleonic one would also be awesome until you realize you get one shot from your muzzle loader every minute or two and have to stand in set formations.

If you want to be immersed in the Roman Empire, Assassin's Creed is amazing. Having been to Rome and Venice, the attention to detail is striking

There was a time travelling game I played like a year or two ago, I can't remember what it was called now but it kind of allowed you to do that. You played a time agent from the future who had to go back in time to fix things. You always went back in time to wars or great disasters where hundreds of people died anyway so if you killed a few, it wouldn't affect the time stream. You only get screwed when you killed someone who wasn't supposed to die.

Anyway, you went to various places like The Civil War, WWI, Auschwitz, Pompeii, etc. and the hilarious part was that sometimes you got future weapons so you got to blow away Centurions with a plasma gun, etc. Most of the time you needed to use period weapons though so you didn't leave behind evidence of tampering in the time stream.

The description sounds a lot better than the game actually turned out but honestly, it was refreshing and not bad. The level design was spectacular. They had a good method of showing thousands of soldiers on a battlefield at the same time. I wish I could remember what it was called. It didn't get marketed very well and most people haven't heard of it but they should. It was one of the more creative FPS's I've played in years.

-edit: here it is, it was called Darkest of Days http://store.steampowered.com/app/37700/

The Xbox version was a lot worse than the PC version because it couldn't support the huge armies on screen at the same time

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

Whatever feels best for you is the answer. As someone who grew up with mouse/keyboard, I could never play an FPS with a controller and have even feigned a hand injury to avoid being passed the controller. Love them for fighting games, racing games, etc. but any game that requires aiming (FPS or 3rd person), no way.

As someone who has played both - mouse / keyboard combo is far and away better, however, it does change the gameplay a fair bit. I played MW2 on both ps and comp - comp was way more 'let's be a one man army, since I can twitch out of any situation' - ps seemed to have a little more strategy and teamwork, because it is very hard to take on multiple guys at once with a controller. You just can't aim fast or well enough.