MultiDiscussion : TES5: Skyrim, BattleField 3, COD, R6 etc.

[NeMeSiS 11]

SP could be fun again, ill see if i can borrow it somewhere.

[Col. 10]

First priority; MW3

Second: BF3

Third: ArmA3 (Because it comes in 2012)

Woah. All epic games ends with 3. Damn.

[Maio 293]

Multiplayer will be hyper-competitive .

I'm sure the SP campaign will be fun to play , if you have 4-5 hours :rolleyes: .

[smookie 11]

Realism crowd to the rescue!

I liked MW and MW2, the trailer of the MW3 isn't anything special though. Although animations/mocap kick ass big time.

[viper[cww] 14]

It's a damn cool trailer, but unless they decide to treat their PC fans at least equally with our console brethren, I won't buy it.

^^ this

First priority; MW3

Second: BF3

Third: ArmA3 (Because it comes in 2012)

^^ not this

If I ever get MW3 it will only be for the single player as the multiplayer is just... tragic

[ben_s 11]

Yeah, This looks intresting. /sarcasm

Unless they've given CoD an overhaul, it'll be the same rehashed gameplay and engine and yawn ..

I hate to say it - but even CM tried to make something new, Activision doesn't even go that far.

[ProfTournesol 956]

I hate to say it - but even CM tried to make something new, Activision doesn't even go that far.

When ? With DR, maybe. With RR, nope.

[ben_s 11]

When ? With DR, maybe. With RR, nope.

They certaintly have tried more than Activsion to make something different.

I mean seriously, look at Mw2, BlackOps and then the Mw3 trailers.

Whilst CM failed miserably to deliver, they did attempt something different. This however - isn't even trying.

[Flash Thunder 10]

The same engine again?

You would think will all the billions of dollars they've made they would just buy a awesome engine and just update what they want.

If theres not much new to Multiplayer then I wont buy it I dont care for the hollywood style campaigns.

[Defunkt 431]

Wonder if the player actually gets to do anything between cut-scenes? Depressing.

[Prydain 1]

The single player is an interactive fantasy movie, stop hating just because it is mindless.

Its just pure fun, not a game that I'll be spending a lot of time on (just like MW2) but I'll get it and play it through. MW2 was worth £20 so whos to say that MW3 isn't?

Edited May 24, 2011 by Prydain

[11aTony 0]

They certaintly have tried more than Activsion to make something different.

I mean seriously, look at Mw2, BlackOps and then the Mw3 trailers.

Whilst CM failed miserably to deliver, they did attempt something different. This however - isn't even trying.

Call of Duty is something completely else. You cant just overhaul a game like that. It highly depends on Multiplayer PvP which RR doesnt even have. Look at what happened to Counter-Strike when they overhauled it in Source. Even in 1.6 some things were weird compared to 1.5. It is a delicate kind of game to update. The game has real competitive scene playing for real money so you still always need to make the game balanced. Especially since its made for consoles where things are not so customizable as on PC. Btw, some guys made a mod for MW2, adding dedicated servers and such.

So far, Activision have only been trying the EA way. That is taking features out and putting them back in for next part. I dont this it will work much further though.

What more is there to improved in CoD? Not much besides adding all the features they had in previous parts, separately, back in and make the best CoD ever. But they know that once they do that, the only thing to update is gore and gfx. This is probably the end of CoD then.

What more can be added to CoD? Well, for example, longer, more complex spec ops style missions. War mode. Maybe PvP progresive missions. Not just typical TDM, Dem, Dom. Maybe some vehicles. Whatever, as long as it does not mean reducing content/features.

[Zipper5 74]

MW2 was worth £20 so whos to say that MW3 isn't?

Those who say MW2 wasn't worth it. ;)

(That would include myself.)

[bangtail 0]

Call of Money is a joke (as is PC gaming in general these days)

[Prydain 1]

Those who say MW2 wasn't worth it. ;)

It is a nicely polished, fun, jump-in and play with your mates, low-brow type of game.

Arma2 isn't exactly a magnificent game but it is unique and fun to you and me. Most people need a game that they can just play with their mates without spending any time talking about mod folders, mission making or all that other bullshit we put up with just to play Arma.

Call of Duty is, exactly as I said before, an interactive fantasy movie. It doesn't pretend to be high-brow or live off undeserved hype like Halo. If you can't accept that it is different from a pretend military simulator then you've got to relax those arse muscles.

[Zipper5 74]

Arma2 isn't exactly a magnificent game but it is unique and fun to you and me.

Lol, for a $60 retail price (that hasn't dropped) and the amount of money the game made, if MW2 wasn't magnificent at release, it sure as hell better have become one post release. Did that happen? Nope.

It was certainly better than BlOps, but wasn't even close to reaching MW1 standards. It's a sub-par sequel that made more money than the original.

Oh, and I like many games other than simulators, especially first person shooters, so that part of your argument is moot. You can do a lot better in the FPS market than MW2 and BlOps (and probably MW3 unless things change). They are not worth $60.

Edit: So as to also defeat the idea that I don't know what I'm talking about, even though I'm not proud of it, check out what my most played game on Steam is: http://steamcommunity.com/id/zipper593/games?tab=all

Edited May 24, 2011 by Zipper5

[bangtail 0]

It is a nicely polished, fun, jump-in and play with your mates, low-brow type of game.

Arma2 isn't exactly a magnificent game but it is unique and fun to you and me. Most people need a game that they can just play with their mates without spending any time talking about mod folders, mission making or all that other bullshit we put up with just to play Arma.

Call of Duty is, exactly as I said before, an interactive fantasy movie. It doesn't pretend to be high-brow or live off undeserved hype like Halo. If you can't accept that it is different from a pretend military simulator then you've got to relax those arse muscles.

I love a good 'jump in and play' FPS as much as the next guy, the problem is that the last 2 CoDs have not been good in any sense of the word.

Of course, there is no accounting for some tastes ;)

[ACPL Jon 68]

When flaming BlOps take a note that... singleplayer was great. Maybe it was short, yeah (2-3 nights for me, I guess), but the story was OHMYGOSH and something different. The atmosphere was great, even tho the guns or vehicle appearance didn't made any sense - and that is an accomplishment.

I'll surely remember Woods, Reznov or Ed "Hudson" Harris. Not many games made such a strong character appearance, produce such feeling for these (Type "Sgt Woods" in YT to see what I mean). Price, Gaz or other people (I don't know the MW2 guys, I didn't played MW2, I just think Makarov's creepy) never really played that important role... That's something and missing it is ignorance, IMO.

Also, game delivered bots out-of-the-box, some small easter-eggs and mini-games. IGN is shitty sometimes but they couldn't hit better with "if You go for pure >> value-for-money << go for Black Ops". It was really a step forward in dying world of CoD*. Unlike MW3.

Why would You go to Germany, Czech or France to fight as a US or in that better parts, a UK commando? FFS. There's also other armies and special forces in the world... I'd gladly utilise german G36 as a KSK operator, play a role of a GROM assault team member, hell, I'm even ready to be a fighting french, not to mention the regular armies or other countries - such as Spain or Italy - units.

*then again, MP was kinda disappointing - I miss classic fixed CTF's, and overall teamplay, with new games it's all different styles of DM

Quake 3, UT's or even Quake 1 [or DMC mod for HL] will always be better in DM thingy

CS and Firearms:Source mod will always own if we talk about teamplay

I just wish new games wouldn't be that-way only, sure, keep'em for casuals, but why can't we have things that will satisfy both sides?

I'm seriously curious about what BF3 will deliver, mostly because MoH failed miserably :(

Edited May 24, 2011 by JonPL

[ben_s 11]

Edit: So as to also defeat the idea that I don't know what I'm talking about, even though I'm not proud of it, check out what my most played game on Steam is: http://steamcommunity.com/id/zipper593/games?tab=all

I think most people here secretly have alot more time on Mw2 than they'd like to admit.

It wasn't a terrible game, Mw3 wont be terrible in any respect past the fact that it will be the same game as it was a few years ago. The real nail in the coffin with CoD is how they treat the PC fanbase. Which is sometimes saddening.

Also, I have more time on Mw2 than i'd like to admit too:

http://steamcommunity.com/id/kllr101/games?tab=all

http://www.xfire.com/profile/kllr101/

[Prydain 1]

Oh, and I like many games other than simulators, especially first person shooters, so that part of your argument is moot. You can do a lot better in the FPS market than MW2 and BlOps (and probably MW3 unless things change). They are not worth $60.

$60? Thats like £37, whats that like in real terms? Expensive? I haven't paid over £30 for a game ever I don't think and I don't consider £30 as expensive for a game.

You haven't mooted any point that I made. Just saying "that part of your argument is moot" isn't going to point out what you are debunking and how I am wrong. And why you seem to think that my observation is an attack on your experience with games is beyond me.

Call of Duty is not a simulator.

It is fantasy, its story is absurd and it isn't pretending to be anything else.

Call of Duty is for the masses.

Everyone has it, it is a game people can jump onto knowing that one of their friends will probably be online.

Call of Duty is not brilliant.

Unlike Halo, Call of Duty has quality. Things like voice acting, set-piece animations and sequenced events are polished like no other game but it doesn't 'wow' anybody because it is just, as I keep saying, an interactive movie when it comes to single player and has a very refined multilayer that has small scope and full of action and content.

None of my points are against the grain of opinion, it is just what it is, thats why it is so popular.

[side note: I don't consider Black Ops or World at War actual Call of Duty titles, not least because they are utter dogshit but are made by a gash DLC development team]

[rangerpl 13]

I have to disagree with you on WaW and BlOps. Sure they weren't innovative and Treyarch is not a first-class devhouse, but they had something about them that gave them a certain "tone". WaW was plain epic, especially the Russian missions and BlOps had this "old James Bond movie" feel to it.

MW2 was very fun (I have clocked ~300 hours on multiplayer), but it eventually got boring. Nothing beats CoD4 though, I still play that game's campaign missions even though I beat them all numerous times. They were simply amazing.

[bonchie 39]

I know COD has a tried and true formula to sell these games but I'm waiting for someone, including their immediate competitors (MOH, etc.), to evolve at some point.

How many corridor shooting galleries is enough before people get bored? I know I got bored with it almost a decade ago.

I have no idea why open world combat games haven't become the standard with the current technology we have.

[4 IN 1 0]

I am looking forward to DNF more then this.

[-)rStrangelove 0]

Just saw the trailer by accident. LOLed so hard seeing all this chaos. My impression is that COD is stuffed so full of smoke, collapsing buildings and loud explosion sounds in order to hide the fact that the developers are totally and finally out of original ideas.

Already had the feeling i'm gonna avoid it, after this trailer i know exactly why.

[Sky999 10]

I get the feeling some people feel the need to simply dislike MW3 purely because it's seen as the 'in' thing to do.

As far as games go it looks good, it's a damn sight more fun than a lot of other games, and it deserves credit for that. Obviously it doesn't have the lasting appeal that ARMA has, but it's still a good game.