Modern Warfare 3

[CptPriceless]

I'm not going to go into what I expect from this game. I think it's to be released in 2012.

 

Now I don't know if I'm looking forward to it or not. Modern Warfare (first one) was absolutely amazing, and I was looking forward to Modern Warfare 2, which turned out to be nothing more than alien piss (excuse the language) in my opinion. Still, I can't wait to see what this new one's going to be. A reviver or a freaking disappointment.

 

What do you guys think?

 

A Released Gameplay Video

(This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.)

 

Reveal Trailer

(This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.)

[Mandalorian Knight]

The first one was more... not realistic, but authentic. The story was more believable. The second was more action-movie and over the top. The difference is akin to "Saving Private Ryan" and "Diehard"

 

I'm hoping that this one will be closer to the first. The premise of Russia invading the US is ludicrous, but if the gameplay if the story following that premise is more realistic, it will be highly enjoyable.

 

I'm going to get it anyways. Regardless of how outlandish the story is, Call of Duty has always had solid gameplay.

 

And I can always complain about the story later.

[Mav]

The first one was more... not realistic, but authentic. The story was more believable. The second was more action-movie and over the top. The difference is akin to "Saving Private Ryan" and "Diehard"

You better not be implying that Die Hard was as bad as MW2, heads will roll, starting with yours.

 

My purchasing of MW3 hinges mostly on one thing, dedicated servers.

[Titanius Anglesmith]

I've only been playing Call of Duty since MW2, and I'm already sick of it. At this point, there's pretty much no chance of my buying this game.

[Mandalorian Knight]

You better not be implying that Die Hard was as bad as MW2, heads will roll, starting with yours.

 

My purchasing of MW3 hinges mostly on one thing, dedicated servers.

 

Haha, you make a good point. I was speaking more to the realism factor.

 

And if I ever make an allegation against Die Hard, I expect you behead me personally, Mav.

[GeneralPloKoon]

I want CoD to die. Call of Duty 2 and 4 were the pinnacle of how good the games were IMO.

[Sabretooth]

MW3 is being released this November, competing head-on with Battlefield 3, which comes out in October.

 

The videos were mostly boring, nothing especially new to be seen (or expected) - boring characters and blah blah. Still, on line with the rest of the CoD games, I expect it'll be a fun thrillride.

 

MW2 could have been so much better though if they'd had the balls to pull off a more realistic wartime situation involving China and the Middle-East. They had to resort to the ol' Russia scenario because they know nobody'll get pissed off then.

 

Looking forward to fighting in the NYSE though

[Lynk Former]

Do you think the Russians like being the fictional bad guys even after all these years? I mean, they've had some pretty stiff competition with the Nazi's but the Russians, Soviet or not are still up there.

 

 

To be perfectly honest about MW3... I never really liked any of these modern war fps games... so boring... kind of interested in Battlefield 3 but still overall it's meh. I guess if I was more interested in the multiplayer aspect it'd be better, but I'm not. I just want the next Borderlands lol.

[Sabretooth]

I donno, I guess they just shake their heads at the seeeely Americans and how they vastly overestimate Russia's military capabilities to end up making the Americans the underdogs.

[Liverandbacon]

MW2 could have been so much better though if they'd had the balls to pull off a more realistic wartime situation involving China and the Middle-East. They had to resort to the ol' Russia scenario because they know nobody'll get pissed off then.

 

So much this. Even with a more realistic scenario, if they really felt the need for a fight on US soil, they could easily do something like a level or two involving taking down domestic terrorist cells.

 

Battlefield interests me more, since it seems like it'll take advantage of my PC's power, and I've generally preferred the gameplay of the Battlefield series to CoD anyway.

[Taak Farst]

While I agree MW2 could have been better, I preferred it's multiplayer maps to the other games.

[CptPriceless]

Meh. MW2 had decent gameplay. I say that because there was COD 4. MW2 was basically the same game with updated graphics, a new and disappointing storyline, and new weapons and perks. I'm not really a fan of the maps either.

 

Not looking forward to Modern Warfare 3's campaign because it's built on the flawed MW2 storyline.

[Mandalorian Knight]

The premise if far-fetched, but I think it could turn out okay. The scope of locations has me hoping that we may get to play as more varied nationalities, which would be an interesting experience. MW2 might be the disappointing transition from a more realistic to a more over-the-top game. Russia invading America? Crazy. Can they make a fun game with that as the starting point? I think its possible, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

And on the subject Modern Warfare maps, Crash is among the best multiplayer maps of any shooter, IMO

[Mav]

And on the subject Modern Warfare maps, Crash is among the best multiplayer maps of any shooter, IMO

The CoD 4 MW maps were fantastic overall. Crash was great, but my personal favorite was Downpour w/ a silenced MP5, good times that ended with MW2...

[CptPriceless]

Crossfire with an iron sight desert AK for me.

[Sabretooth]

To be honest yeah, MW2's story wasn't too bad, it was really engaging and fun, just very eye-rolly all the time.

 

As for CoD4 maps/guns, it's Crash with an M16 for me.

 

Anyone planning to sign up for Call of Duty Elite? Anyone?

[The Seeker]

Call of Duty is always a great ride. Yeah the story can be far fetched, or in the case of Black Ops, as convoluted as any Tom Clancy game, but the gameplay is solid, the action is intense, and it's what a game should be first and foremost: fun to play

[Lynk Former]

I didn't think anyone played CoD games for the campaign these days... from what I know of CoD players, they all immediately skip the multiplayer and ignore the campaign completely.

[Taak Farst]

When I bought MW2 I spent about 3 months on multiplayer, not even touching the campaign.

 

while i agree the story was a little bad with the russians and such, i liked the end with General Shepard turning out to be a traitor thing :L. I loved the ending where you pull the knife out and throw it in his eye, then get carried on by Nikolai and Cpt. Price.

[jawathehutt]

I'll buy it unless they include more terrible helicopter flying/shooting levels like black ops. I have no idea how such a irritating part of gameplay managed to make it in the game. Also, why the hell couldn't they make it so you can go up and down. As much fun as slamming my helicopter repeated into a mountain to increase my elevation to shoot the enemy helicopter that is a mile above me, I never want to have to bother with it again.

[Sabretooth]

No, that was Treyarch's goof-up when they tried to one-up Infinity Ward without having a clue how to. The helicopter level in Black Ops is easily the lowest point of all Call of Duty campaigns combined.

 

----- Edito -----

 

Also, I don't really mind the melodrama in MW2's storyline. They actually went back to CoD roots - CoD's strongest selling point when it came out was that it was the anti-Medal of Honor. Where MoH was more or less a traditional one-man-army-vs-Nazis game, CoD put you in the middle of a (highly-scripted) huge battle in WW2. Bravery in the face of unsurmountable, never-before-seen battle circumstances was a theme in the series right from the beginning.

 

CoD4 actually shook things up, showing how Modern Warfare is now less about dramatic battles with words of bravery, duty and honour - things are now shorter, more incisive and brutal. You can only go so far with that. Ultimately, they went back to making a World War shooter, with the modern world as a backdrop. Of course, let's all conveniently forget how nuclear weapons were invented after WW2.

 

Black Ops' campaign is a shining example of why the CoD model is incompatible with modern warfare. Of all the missions in that campaign, probably only one or two are actually 'black ops'. Most seem to start out that way, before becoming all-out warzones. In the end, you and your squad aren't so much 'black ops' guys as just special forces who get deployed on the sidelines. Call of Duty's forte is simple - grandiose battles with hundreds of enemies to kill, with gameplay involving efficient aiming skills, movement and cover.

 

 

[This rant-ish was mostly unrelated to the thread, but I felt a need to get it out]

[Ghost]

Black Ops was a complete failure except for its zombie mode, in which I have only played once. MW 2 had awesome multiplayer gameplay, but for the story it just cliched Red Dawn. It was okay, but still it had a lot more potential and I kept asking for more. I will say however the music really was enthralling. However my biggest pet peve was it was so easy to hack, and that I cant even choose a server like in TF 2. Sometimes it has me join hacked servers which bump me up to level 70, which I want to EARN.

 

MW 1 was the pinnacle of Call of Duty, as I remember replaying War Pig over and over because of the awesome marine gameplay. Never tried the multiplayer though which I kind of kicked myself.

 

MW 3? Well I dunno, we will just have to wait and see.