MW3 multiplayer world premiere
- Thread starter LuxSmash
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2009
- Messages
- 335
Seems haters are gonna hate...
and you expect battlefield 3 not to have noobtubes..?
lol
Gonna get MW3 when I get an xbox 360
Yes they will have it but like in previous bf games they won't be over powered and overused. They always seem to be okay but not that good.
- Joined
- May 1, 2011
- Messages
- 204
HEY, obviously Battlefield 3 is better BUT Call of Duty is still one of the best multiplayer games and honestly I really like it
Youtube
Enjoy
Exactly the same here, I'm pretty excited for BF3, and MW3.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2008
- Messages
- 2,718
I dont get it, people say CoD4 (MW1) was a great game, but then gripe whenever they see MW2 and 3 and say its the "Same Exact Thing". That must mean its great, right? Personally I dont like the Multiplayer for Call of Duty past MW1 because it became to unrealistic (And you see that in the video "LOLOLOL IM RUNNING THROUGH FIRE UNHARMED YOU CANT CATCH ME") but then at the end he pulls out a sniper and beats an obviously pro (if not hacking already) sniper who's killed him every other time? I'll probably rent MW3 first, just for the story, because I do enjoy the story for it (The Single player for MW1 and 2were just as good as Call of Duty 1 (The WW2 one) was and I expect 3 to finish the Story)
Sadly, Ive never played the BF series, not really. I played BC2 for short bit and enjoyed the game play, but there were more drawbacks for me that could never keep me interested.
Sadly, Ive never played the BF series, not really. I played BC2 for short bit and enjoyed the game play, but there were more drawbacks for me that could never keep me interested.
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2009
- Messages
- 1,335
CoD started to die right after their last WW2 game, lets be honest. Yeah, CoD4 was fun, because it was something NEW... But that was the only reason it was fun. Other companies started making similar games, most of which were better in one or more way(s) then MW had been. I wish they would bring the WW2 fps games back. I may actually end up purchasing another CoD game if they did that. Plus now they added a 'monthly subscription' (yeah, great idea Blizzard, eat up more cash.) that supposedly 'won't effect the game', yet we all know it will.
Also, their graphics engine is a joke. Take a look at the vid below comparing CoD4 graphics to MW2 graphics, EXACTLY THE SAME. -_- /end rant lol
http://www.g4tv.com/videos/45065/Call-Of-Duty-4Modern-Warfare-2-Crash-Comparison-Video/
Also, their graphics engine is a joke. Take a look at the vid below comparing CoD4 graphics to MW2 graphics, EXACTLY THE SAME. -_- /end rant lol
http://www.g4tv.com/videos/45065/Call-Of-Duty-4Modern-Warfare-2-Crash-Comparison-Video/
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2009
- Messages
- 2,354
LOL so many haters with weird reasons
grim, obviously its the same graphics if its the same map lol ...
grim, obviously its the same graphics if its the same map lol ...
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,084
its called being too much of a good thing
see everyone like CoD4 because it was new and excited
but after having 2 pretty much exact copies (with another about to be released) spit out at us, we're just tired of it and want something new
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2008
- Messages
- 2,718
But you should still enjoy it, especially considering you've had two treyarch games in between. And how do you add new stuff? What makes people think BF3 wont be like BC2? (Again, Ive never played the BF series, only BC so I dont know how they're different already)
Jets, bigger maps with more focus on the conquest game mode than the rush game mode, fundamentally different interactions between the classes because of changed and new abilities (Assault has the healing, Machine Gunner has the ammo etc.), 64 player servers, more vehicles, prone, wider field of vision.
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2008
- Messages
- 509
so you guys are going to ignore the new perks, new prestige store, new level cap, new guns, new weapon proficiencies, new death streaks, new strike packages, new facebook integration, new voices, and new animations? I can keep going but I can't remember all the new features being introduced. But, just because the menus, the fonts, and the graphics looks similar you guys think it will be a bad game? Either you don't know about all the new things being introduced or you just want to follow everyone else and say this game will be more of the same just because the graphics are similar. Tbh, we haven't even played the game yet and we can't judge it, I just think that there is a bunch of new things being added so it can't be more of the same. OH, and I almost forgot to mention that you SAVE MONEY by getting cod elite, it would cost 60 dollars to buy all the dlc OR you can pay 50 dollars a year which includes all the dlc and monthly content drops
Last edited:
Half of these sound just terrible. Prestige store? A minority of players is going to even use that. More levels? Yay, more grinding. Facebook integration? Oh cool, I can tell all the people I went to high school with how awesome I am at Call of Duty.
The rest of those sound like things that would commonly be put into an expansion and don't really require a whole new release. Perks, weapon streaks, guns, weapon proficiencies, new models and voice work. All of these require relatively little work.
For comparison, lets look at the most obvious competitor to MW, B:BC. It introduced an expansion, Vietnam, that included: New maps, new weapons, new vehicles, new models, new animations, new sounds. Very few assets were reused. While Battlefield doesn't have perks or proficiencies or streaks, all of those really don't entail much more production time, maybe a month or two at most, and that is being generous. The price of Vietnam? Fifteen bucks. That's a fourth of the price of a new game. What more do you really get for your 45 bucks when you buy MW3? A six hour campaign.
I don't think it will be a bad game. It will just be another Modern Warfare. Little will have changed, the core gameplay and mechanics will remain the same with a few new extras. Maybe that is what you are looking for, and that's great for you, but it isn't anything to get excited over really.
I look at all these new things and I see no real changes. Weapons may shift in power, popular perks may change, there will be a few new strategies that pop up. In the end, the base gameplay remained the same. There was no innovation, nothing groundbreaking will happen with the release, except maybe a new record for number of sales.
A subscription plan for a non-mmo just so you can get the large amounts of DLC they release at a lower price. Wow, I sure hope this doesn't catch on. BF:BC2 released every single pack of maps for free. Battlefield 3 won't cost you 120 bucks just so you can get the same experience as everyone else.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2008
- Messages
- 2,718
Battlefield 2 came out in 2005, obviously the engine will be different considering BF3 is coming out 6 years later. MW1-3 have come out in 5 years together
Bad Company 2 is the most recent BF game, and it came out a year and a half ago. They are using a new engine not used in Bad Company 2 in BF3.
Okay Carmine, so in your opinion you don't think any of the new features and additions to mw3 are worth a new game. If you have ever played cod you would also know that most people who have bought the game have prestiged. I can't even remember the last time I was playing cod with a guy who hasn't prestiged yet. Just because you don't want to show off your bragging rights on facebook because only your high school friends would see it doesn't mean everybody else doesn't want it. You think that all of these features don't deserve a new game title, but a new expansion pack? Do you know how big mw3 will be in size? It will be probably at least 12gb considering that was the size of mw2. A 12gb dlc? Yeah, FOR SURE BRUHH. You say that the core gameplay and mechanics will remain the same with a few extras. Well, guess what? Call of Duty is a shooter game so obviously the core gameplay and mechanics will remain. It's not like they're switching to a role playing game with driving in it. For example I can say that your beloved bad company 2 (that you keep comparing to cod) has the same core gameplay and mechanics as battlefield 3 even though they're not even in the same series. And I can safely say this because I played the Battlefield 3 Alpha. So I can genuinely say this unlike how you can say that because neither of us have played modern warfare 3 (unless you went to cod xp the last two days).
"all of those really don't entail much more production time"
really? All of the features I listed "don't entail much more production time"? Do you know what it is like developing a game? Probably not so I don't see why you would know how long it would take to make all of the additions I listed. btw, I listed so many new features, all of these new things aren't made within a few months. It takes time and effort to make something that is call of duty. Why do you think so many people play it? Why do you think it sells as many copies as it does? Because it is a fun game, people enjoy playing it, and it is almost addicting.
You say that it won't be groundbreaking, but bf3 won't be groundbreaking either. Nobody said it was going to be groundbreaking but it will be biggest release of the year.
You don't have to buy the dlc if you don't want to. Another thing, BC2 uses the vip card to distribute dlc on consoles. Which means, if you buy bc2 on xbox and your brother wants to play on his account, he will need another vip code to play the dlc. Which means he has to buy the game AGAIN. On the other hand, when you buy the dlc for cod on consoles it applies to all the accounts on that hard drive.
"all of those really don't entail much more production time"
really? All of the features I listed "don't entail much more production time"? Do you know what it is like developing a game? Probably not so I don't see why you would know how long it would take to make all of the additions I listed. btw, I listed so many new features, all of these new things aren't made within a few months. It takes time and effort to make something that is call of duty. Why do you think so many people play it? Why do you think it sells as many copies as it does? Because it is a fun game, people enjoy playing it, and it is almost addicting.
You say that it won't be groundbreaking, but bf3 won't be groundbreaking either. Nobody said it was going to be groundbreaking but it will be biggest release of the year.
You don't have to buy the dlc if you don't want to. Another thing, BC2 uses the vip card to distribute dlc on consoles. Which means, if you buy bc2 on xbox and your brother wants to play on his account, he will need another vip code to play the dlc. Which means he has to buy the game AGAIN. On the other hand, when you buy the dlc for cod on consoles it applies to all the accounts on that hard drive.
/thread
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,084
i like how you basically turned this thread into a flame war of who can shout louder for bf3 or mw3
/thread
Similar threads
