Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   Media (https://www.musicbanter.com/media/)
-   -   So who is excited for MW3? (https://www.musicbanter.com/media/58579-so-who-excited-mw3.html)

SGR 09-18-2011 09:22 AM

So who is excited for MW3?
 
Anyone going for the hardened edition to get all the cool extra stuff and save on map packs?

anticipation 09-18-2011 09:28 AM

Battlefield 3 > MW3, don't waste your time.

Mykonos 09-18-2011 09:53 AM

Nah, I've grown out of Call Of Duty now. I'll be getting Valve's next Counter Strike even though it'll probably be awful, then nothing else for multiplayer shooters.

Alfred 09-18-2011 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anticipation (Post 1104142)
Battlefield 3 > MW3, don't waste your time.

This. I pre-ordered Battlefield 3.

I'll only play MW3 if I borrow it from a friend, and even then, it'll just be to play the 5 hours of single player.

RVCA 09-18-2011 12:16 PM

Mw3 is the same game they released 4 years ago as COD4, and then again 3 years ago as WAW, and then again 2 years ago as MW2, and then again last year as BO. It's running on an ancient game engine.

Oh, and it's shipping with a record-low number of multiplayer maps so they can be sure to gouge you to hell for $15 DLC packs. Assuming there will be three, the game ends up being a $105 expenditure. ****ing ridiculous.

Also, the Infinity Ward that made Mw3 is completely different from the one that made Mw1/2, since the two founding heads were sacked and 40+ members followed them.

But anyway, have fun with your game!

Alfred 09-18-2011 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVCA (Post 1104172)
Mw3 is the same game they released 4 years ago as COD4, and then again 3 years ago as WAW, and then again 2 years ago as MW2, and then again last year as BO. It's running on an ancient game engine.

Oh, and it's shipping with a record-low number of multiplayer maps so they can be sure to gouge you to hell for $15 DLC packs. Assuming there will be three, the game ends up being a $105 expenditure. ****ing ridiculous.

Also, the Infinity Ward that made Mw3 is completely different from the one that made Mw1/2, since the two founding heads were sacked and 40+ members followed them.

But anyway, have fun with your game!

Couldn't have said it better myself.

midnight rain 09-18-2011 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVCA (Post 1104172)
Mw3 is the same game they released 4 years ago as COD4, and then again 3 years ago as WAW, and then again 2 years ago as MW2, and then again last year as BO. It's running on an ancient game engine.

Oh, and it's shipping with a record-low number of multiplayer maps so they can be sure to gouge you to hell for $15 DLC packs. Assuming there will be three, the game ends up being a $105 expenditure. ****ing ridiculous.

Also, the Infinity Ward that made Mw3 is completely different from the one that made Mw1/2, since the two founding heads were sacked and 40+ members followed them.

But anyway, have fun with your game!

And yet, video game review sites will miraculously give it 8s, 9s, and 10s across the board for it's supposed "innovation"

Mykonos 09-18-2011 02:35 PM

I'm not saying the Cod games are anything more than the gaming equivalent of Supermarket Pop, but it doesn't mean they can't be entertaining. I put hours into Cod4/WAW, and didn't pay any extra for the DLC. I also found them to both be enjoyable in different ways.

RVCA 09-18-2011 02:42 PM

Cod4 is great, make no mistake. But then Activision turned the franchise into their first-person shooter version of Guitar Hero, where a new "version" comes out every year, resulting in a stringent development cycle divided between two studios that ultimately exhausts everyone involved, devs and fans included. And let's not forget what a colossal ****ing douchebag Activision's CEO is, and the latest shenanigans that he's trying to pull with COD Elite.

To be fair, however, it's nice to see that Mw3 is giving the killstreak system a reboot, and that they're not afraid to try new things.

I'm just not going to let myself get excited (or pay money) for the shooter equivalent of EA pumping out a clone of its sports games every year

Freebase Dali 09-18-2011 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anticipation (Post 1104142)
Battlefield 3 > MW3, don't waste your time.

This.

Anyone going to be on BF3 for PC?

LoathsomePete 09-18-2011 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVCA (Post 1104208)
Cod4 is great, make no mistake. But then Activision turned the franchise into their first-person shooter version of Guitar Hero, where a new "version" comes out every year, resulting in a stringent development cycle divided between two studios that ultimately exhausts everyone involved, devs and fans included. And let's not forget what a colossal ****ing douchebag Activision's CEO is, and the latest shenanigans that he's trying to pull with COD Elite.

To be fair, however, it's nice to see that Mw3 is giving the killstreak system a reboot, and that they're not afraid to try new things.

I'm just not going to let myself get excited (or pay money) for the shooter equivalent of EA pumping out a clone of its sports games every year

To play Devil's (other) advocate, EA isn't doing much better. Requiring PC gamers to download and use Origin, which has a much broader definition when it comes to scanning your computer for info to sell to 3rd parties. Steam has the same thing, but their ToS is limited to computer hardware, whereas Origins' didn't use any limiting words, leaving the legal document open to interpretation.

To be honest I think both companies' lack of professionalism over the last year has been a little appalling and only encourages the fanboys even more when they see their daddies getting into the mess. The way I've always thought of both series' (both of which I've been playing since their inception in the 2002 and 2003) is that Battlefield is for online players and Call of Duty is more focused on a single player campaign. While CoD is second only to Halo for console online gaming, each of the games has still put a lot of work into their single player campaign (well... it's debatable with MW2). The Battlefield series will always have better online play, but that's about it when it comes to that franchise. Maybe Battlefield 3 will change that and deliver a compelling single player narrative, but if we're just going by the numbers, Call of Duty has continually delivered a single player campaign worth playing.

It's also worth noting that the Call of Duty series has been the only WWII FPS to include a Canadian campaign, actually acknowledging that we did stuff in that war. I know it's a minor point to many, but it definitely made me happy when I played CoD3.

Kirby 09-18-2011 09:35 PM

CoD2 will always be the BEST Call of Duty game.
Until they make another like it, I won't care for the series.

Mykonos 09-18-2011 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freebase Dali (Post 1104263)
Anyone going to be on BF3 for PC?

I might. Still not sure if I want to get back into online FPS gaming though (except for Team Fortress 2, obviously).

GravitySlips 09-20-2011 03:43 PM

I'm getting both MW3 and Battlefield 3, but I'm expecting to play Battlefield 3 a lot more.

Main reason I'm getting MW3 is because it's fun to play online with friends... I wouldn't play that game online if my friends didn't play it so much.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:22 PM.


© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.