MW3 will redeem COD's name in the eyes of SW

Back in the days of Call of Duty 4, COD was a monster! Everybody loved it, and only the haters hated.

Black Ops was hailed as the redeeming COD, but it wasn't all that great.

COD4 was a perfect game, with only minor balancing problems.

MW3 is going back to the draw board and designing the MP from ground up from COD4.

Running on the MW3 engine, an engine that focused on fast, fluid gameplay rather than graphics...

It will be a sure-fire hit.

Back in the days of Call of Duty 4, COD was a monster! Everybody loved it, and only the haters hated.

Black Ops was hailed as the redeeming COD, but it wasn't all that great.

COD4 was a perfect game, with only minor balancing problems.

MW3 is going back to the draw board and designing the MP from ground up from COD4.

Running on the MW3 engine, an engine that focused on fast, fluid gameplay rather than graphics...

It will be a sure-fire hit.

xXShortroundXx

COD 4 was only okay. The reason it was so "great" at the time was due to a lack of serious competition for online games. That's changed, and CoD's netcode is just not good enough to be anything but a frustration inducing activity. It really is a pos product. Maybe if they didn't hire Ice-T for Black Ops they could have paid for dedicated servers for every CoD game this gen, and then they'd actually be doing something good for the game.

COD 4 was only okay. The reason it was so "great" at the time was due to a lack of serious competition for online games. That's changed, and CoD's netcode is just not good enough to be anything but a frustration inducing activity. It really is a pos product. Maybe if they didn't hire Ice-T for Black Ops they could have paid for dedicated servers for every CoD game this gen, and then they'd actually be doing something good for the game.

Pug-Nasty

COD 4 was only okay. The reason it was so "great" at the time was due to a lack of serious competition for online games. That's changed, and CoD's netcode is just not good enough to be anything but a frustration inducing activity. It really is a pos product. Maybe if they didn't hire Ice-T for Black Ops they could have paid for dedicated servers for every CoD game this gen, and then they'd actually be doing something good for the game.

Pug-Nasty

I totally agree with COD4, but MW3... Im not too sure. If it has anything like the killstreaks there were in MW2 I will hate it. Iantheone

[QUOTE="Iantheone"]I totally agree with COD4, but MW3... Im not too sure. If it has anything like the killstreaks there were in MW2 I will hate it. xXShortroundXx

[QUOTE="Iantheone"]I totally agree with COD4, but MW3... Im not too sure. If it has anything like the killstreaks there were in MW2 I will hate it. xXShortroundXx

Every cod is just starting to feel like im paying 60€ for new maps and weapons.

Well from what I've seen it's more of the same so not really.

Nah I wont be getting it I boycotted activision when black ops was released but I will say it will destory bf3...Bf3 beta just crashed on me.

You're barking up the wrong tree if you think SW is going to like a game that's really popular. :P

I don't enjoy paying $60 for expansion packs.

Blackops was over all very decent.... I would say its an 8.5 in my book. I didnt really do anything wrong, but it didnt bring anything new to the table. COD4 on the other hand I cant seem to put it down on the PC :P About MW3 I'm not to sure about it yet, if its going to be like MW2 then I'm going to hate it. But if its anything like COD4 it should be alright.

CoD4 was OK. But I don't think MW3 will redeem anything. CoD is always kinda fun for like two weeks and then you get so bored out of your mind that you're starving to play a more complex game.

At least that's how I felt about MW and BO. MW2 I just gave up on. That was the worst one I've played.

[QUOTE="xXShortroundXx"][QUOTE="Iantheone"]I totally agree with COD4, but MW3... Im not too sure. If it has anything like the killstreaks there were in MW2 I will hate it. gamebreakerz__

My care-o-level remains unchanged.shreshto

You care, otherwise you would never have entered this thread.

(Also, those who don't care aren't "cool", FYI)

MW3 engine? What MW3 engine? It's still using the same engine COD4 used!

MW3 engine? What MW3 engine? It's still using the same engine COD4 used!

GhoX

My care-o-level remains unchanged.shreshto

COD is always fun, just lacks any real depth. I'm buying it day one regardless though.

i5750at4Ghz

[QUOTE="GhoX"]

MW3 engine? What MW3 engine? It's still using the same engine COD4 used!

xXShortroundXx

don't worry. id released the source code for id tech 4 so IW can copy that and rename it now so they can finally upgrade their engine.

As long as the COD multiplayer remains as uncompetetive as it is then won't be getting it. A ton of F2P FPS games offer superior competetive gaming experiences. The horrid spawnsystem thats hurts tactical gameplay, the lack of notable recoil and the painfull imbalance ruiined the series for me.

CoD, get back to your roots. CoD 1, 2 and to a degree MW 1 are on a different level of quality.

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"] Nah, COD4 still has a huge playerbase. It was a very good game and its held up for quite a few years. Iantheone

Well, every CoD has a huge player base, but that doesn't make them good. CoD 4 was okay, but the p2p and glitches killed it. The last time I played it everyone was flying all over the place. Maybe they fixed it, I don't know. Either way, the game would have been solid with a much smoother online infrastructure, but Activision is far too cheap to do that.

Well, Halo 3 was on one system, and it's incredibly different. Warhawk also came out that year, and Resistance: FoM was also out. I think RS:V came out that year, and that's really the only thing comparable to CoD as far as gameplay style goes, so I consider that to be the competition for CoD during that time.

As long as the COD multiplayer remains as uncompetetive as it is then won't be getting it. A ton of F2P FPS games offer superior competetive gaming experiences. The horrid spawnsystem thats hurts tactical gameplay, the lack of notable recoil and the painfull imbalance ruiined the series for me.

CoD, get back to your roots. CoD 1, 2 and to a degree MW 1 are on a different level of quality.

rastotm

[QUOTE="rastotm"]

As long as the COD multiplayer remains as uncompetetive as it is then won't be getting it. A ton of F2P FPS games offer superior competetive gaming experiences. The horrid spawnsystem thats hurts tactical gameplay, the lack of notable recoil and the painfull imbalance ruiined the series for me.

CoD, get back to your roots. CoD 1, 2 and to a degree MW 1 are on a different level of quality.

xXShortroundXx

Playing premade matches with friends & clans is a pain on especially PS 3 and to a degree 360. Non-premade competetive matches are rare as there is nearly always someone being a LamO.
Secondly the team balance is horrid and CoD suffers from massive randomness. Walk along the sides of the map instead of going to the centre, get lucky with opponent spawns, get killstreaks, nuke the objective with killstreaks and you have a win. S&D is pretty much the only game mode that doesn't suffer from this annoying randomness
The massive lack of clanplay and active clan-ladders pretty much proof my point.

Besides that just because the publishers make enough money to organize tourney's doesn't make a game competetive. Funny enough even tourney's with money prices have strict weapon policies that are made out of the game. One is not allowed to abuse OMA in a tourney for example.

That being said, yes COD is one the if not the most competetive titles on xbox 360. The only point that this statement proves is the low competetiveness of online games on consoles.

Even if it was fantastic, people will still be likE ZOMG MILKAGE

Untill they start milking battlefield half to hell, then its okay, of course.

dont worry from what im reading in the battlefield sticky, THATS doing enough to redeem cods name in SW :lol:campzor

[QUOTE="rastotm"]

As long as the COD multiplayer remains as uncompetetive as it is then won't be getting it. A ton of F2P FPS games offer superior competetive gaming experiences. The horrid spawnsystem thats hurts tactical gameplay, the lack of notable recoil and the painfull imbalance ruiined the series for me.

CoD, get back to your roots. CoD 1, 2 and to a degree MW 1 are on a different level of quality.

xXShortroundXx

Back in the days of Call of Duty 4, COD was a monster! Everybody loved it, and only the haters hated.

xXShortroundXx

Only the haters hated ? How can you hate but not be a hater, or be a hater and not hate ? I don't get it.

Running on the Quake 3 engine, an engine that focused on fast, fluid gameplay rather than graphics...

xXShortroundXx

Fixed

COD 2 was the only game that impressed me, mostly because it was the first 360 game I saw (along with King Kong).ActionRemix

[QUOTE="ActionRemix"]COD 2 was the only game that impressed me, mostly because it was the first 360 game I saw (along with King Kong).DragonfireXZ95

no matter how improved mw3 is, as long as it has Activision on the cover. I will never like ....again.

I tried playing even cod4 a few nights ago. It just irritated me

As long as they keep making yearly CoD games with minor improvements for each one, then SW won't praise it at all. The only reason why CoD4 was praised was because it pushed the series forward. The games afterwards didn't do that (except for maybe MW2). It just became a yearly release with the exact same gameplay we've already seen with the same bad animation. Look at CoD animation, and then look at BF3 animation. I'm sure you'll see the difference. It feels like the same game every year. Just look at the gameplay changes from Uncharted 2 to Uncharted 3, and from Bad Company 2 to Battlefield 3. They're big and noticeable. That's what makes them appealing, and sequels should always strive to improve from their predecessors, not be their predecessors.

The engine, graphics, animation, and gameplay are outdated. CoD is overly simplistic (which is part of why it's popular), and seeing as DICE is able to make 9 maps (each one being at least the size of 3 CoD maps with some even being the size of 5-7 CoD maps) you'd think that the CoD devs would be able to make 20+ maps. Well, I'm sure they do make 20+ maps: 8 goes into the game, and then the rest get sold later as map packs courtesy of Activi$ion. They're a disgrace to the vision name :x

Meh. It's not just the game is it.
You know what might redeem COD as a whole a little?
If DICE takes the wrong approach with its customers like by giving us similar mappacks for BF3, we might see people becoming less determined.
Which is what I'm afraid of.

Maybe we'd start looking for a third competitor. I like the number 3, it's one of my favourites.

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="ActionRemix"]COD 2 was the only game that impressed me, mostly because it was the first 360 game I saw (along with King Kong).Lto_thaG

I would enjoy, lets say, RE3's MP alot more than MW2 if it ran just as smoothly, but I'll probably get MW3 because everyone else I know will be getting it.

Meh. It's not just the game is it.
You know what might redeem COD as a whole a little?
If DICE takes the wrong approach with its customers like by giving us similar mappacks for BF3, we might see people becoming less determined.
Which is what I'm afraid of.

Maybe we'd start looking for a third competitor. I like the number 3, it's one of my favourites.

KungfuKitten

I've been enjoying the hell out of Red Orchestra 2

Seeing every CoD game has played the same as CoD 4 since CoD 4, it's quite impossible to go back to that in any ways. They never left!

After putting over 100 days into cod games I'm done with theseries. The whole spawn run die mechanic is getting tiresome. I think I'll stick to single player games.