Modern Warfare 3 Adds Folding Scopes and Smart Grenade Launchers
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
The air-burst grenades are gonna get a LOT of bitching... After MW2's noob-tube problem, it seems like IW is just TRYING to poor gasoline on the fire. Sometimes I wonder if they do it just to fuck with people. The only way the XM-25 could be fair, is if it's only in SP/Coop. As for the scope, who gives a crap? When do you engage an enemy at a distance greater than 100 meters in MP? The ACOG was almost useless in MW2, not going to be different this time around. My only consolation is that MW3 can't be worse than Black Ops.
So at what point did they say this would be in Multiplayer?
I'll wait...
Thats right they didnt. So everyone should stop jumping to conclusions, and wait till the game comes out to judge it
I'll wait...
Thats right they didnt. So everyone should stop jumping to conclusions, and wait till the game comes out to judge it
This is honestly the selling point? the "new" thing? CoD is truely on its last legs bleeding out with no good team members to revive it, the more i see on MW3 the more i actualy think i am not going to even buy it.
is it just me or is the tagline "don't fight harder, fight smarter" a bit out of place here?
CoD does have some weapons/tactics that could be represented with this phrase, but these seem to me like two more methods of relying on one strategy entirely. (which to me is the problem with loadouts/classes)
One is saying that you can get away in more situations without using more of the sandbox, and the other is designed to kill players using in-game cover.
Neither of these weapons force the player to rely on strategy or skill. They are more like an excuse for incompetence. However the positive reaction they will undoubtedly receive from their constituencies will prove that this is all CoD fans are looking for.
CoD does have some weapons/tactics that could be represented with this phrase, but these seem to me like two more methods of relying on one strategy entirely. (which to me is the problem with loadouts/classes)
One is saying that you can get away in more situations without using more of the sandbox, and the other is designed to kill players using in-game cover.
Neither of these weapons force the player to rely on strategy or skill. They are more like an excuse for incompetence. However the positive reaction they will undoubtedly receive from their constituencies will prove that this is all CoD fans are looking for.
I like how everyone is crying noob-tube, I myself am not a big fan of COD and would be getting BF3 if not for the origin kerfuffel (Up yours EA). However, I do recognize that its title is MODERN WARFARE. This is how modern warfare is, and your screams of noob-tube don't change that.
However, my guess is it takes time to properly align the distance on this thing (in game) and it will probably end in an interesting way to keep the pace up with people behind cover. Say you take a shot and someone spots you, you can't stay safe for long in your dirt hole or before long half your face will be blown off harry Osborne style.
Sounds cool, now if the game had dedicated servers and half decent engine I might consider it.
However, my guess is it takes time to properly align the distance on this thing (in game) and it will probably end in an interesting way to keep the pace up with people behind cover. Say you take a shot and someone spots you, you can't stay safe for long in your dirt hole or before long half your face will be blown off harry Osborne style.
Sounds cool, now if the game had dedicated servers and half decent engine I might consider it.
Are you fucking kidding me?! They're advertising FOLDABLE SCOPES AND EXPLODING GRENADES As a freaking feature?? Seriously? That's like advertising that you're gaming has two types of grass! Come on guys.....this just proves that there really isnt anything new being added to the game..just the same old COD.
I seriously hope they balance these. They sound cool to play with, but not to fight against. Which says it all really.
Still, I'm cautiously optimistic about MW3. COD4 was good as I recall, MW2 was unbalanced, and if they add balance to MW3's mulitplayer it should all be good again.
I hope they balance it so well that the majority of the fanbase go "WTF WHERE IS BEST GUN" and stop playing, leaving none but those willing to use skill and ninja skill to pwn d00ds.
Still, I'm cautiously optimistic about MW3. COD4 was good as I recall, MW2 was unbalanced, and if they add balance to MW3's mulitplayer it should all be good again.
I hope they balance it so well that the majority of the fanbase go "WTF WHERE IS BEST GUN" and stop playing, leaving none but those willing to use skill and ninja skill to pwn d00ds.
Skyrim is adding Tentacle Bears! And removing some skills! Are you fucking kidding me?! Seriously? That's like advertising your game has buttons and menus! Come on guys... this just proves that there really isnt anything new being added to the game.. just the same old Elder Scrolls.Darth_Dude said:
Yes, I went there. No, I don't really believe it. In fact, I've never played an Elder Scrolls game. But saying that a game is crap because it's adding new content must be some sort of all time low. If it was bad content (which it might be) that would be understandable. But you're complaining about there being new content at all.
It's the next game in a series. It's a shooting game. Don't act surprised that they're adding new guns.
I didn't say that the game was bad because it was adding new content, I'm saying that the content they are advertising is so.....trivial? It's like, do they actually have anything substantial to add in?Ninjat_126 said:
EDIT: Here's a list of Skyrim's changes by the way, http://forums.bethsoft.com/index.php?/topic/1207439-skyrim-information-iiii/
What is with you people?
1) You don't know if it will even be in Multiplayer. There's plenty of weapons in CoD single player that don't make it into Multiplayer
2) You don't know how it will be implemented in the game. You only know what the real life equivalent of the weapon can do.
3) Is it so hard to believe that both BF3 and MW3 could be fun and enjoyable? It's not like purchasing one locks you out of purchasing the other (unless you're very poor that is). By all means don't play BF3 or MW3 if you don't like them - no one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy it.
4) As for Steam V Origin - that's an entirely separate debate. It has nothing to do with this debate
5) For all those who are simultaneously claiming that this is the worst weapon ever, AND that you'd never play MW3.... what are you complaining about? Why would you care about what weapons are in a game.... when you claim you are not going to play it anyway? That makes no sense at all.
Please children. Can't we all get along? Why can't we be friends?
Unless you personally work for Activision or EA, or you're a 10 year old kid who can only afford one video game because your mum buys them for you, I fail to see why anyone would be so emotionally invested in this trivial debate over "BF3" or "MW3". Get one or both or neither. They're just games people..... juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuusssst gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaames. I, personally, am going to buy both. Because I have a job and all that jazz.
1) You don't know if it will even be in Multiplayer. There's plenty of weapons in CoD single player that don't make it into Multiplayer
2) You don't know how it will be implemented in the game. You only know what the real life equivalent of the weapon can do.
3) Is it so hard to believe that both BF3 and MW3 could be fun and enjoyable? It's not like purchasing one locks you out of purchasing the other (unless you're very poor that is). By all means don't play BF3 or MW3 if you don't like them - no one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy it.
4) As for Steam V Origin - that's an entirely separate debate. It has nothing to do with this debate
5) For all those who are simultaneously claiming that this is the worst weapon ever, AND that you'd never play MW3.... what are you complaining about? Why would you care about what weapons are in a game.... when you claim you are not going to play it anyway? That makes no sense at all.
Please children. Can't we all get along? Why can't we be friends?
Unless you personally work for Activision or EA, or you're a 10 year old kid who can only afford one video game because your mum buys them for you, I fail to see why anyone would be so emotionally invested in this trivial debate over "BF3" or "MW3". Get one or both or neither. They're just games people..... juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuusssst gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaames. I, personally, am going to buy both. Because I have a job and all that jazz.
I remember Soldier of Fortune 2 having the same weapon (Technically the OICW, but the XM25 is just the grenade launcher part of that gun, when they figured out the whole OICW was too heavy), and needing a 5 minute tutorial halfway into the game just to learn how to use the range-finder option.
And I'd comment on this being a pretty meagure thing to make a whole escapist article about, but I just took the time to write a reply so... pot calling kettle I guess.
And I'd comment on this being a pretty meagure thing to make a whole escapist article about, but I just took the time to write a reply so... pot calling kettle I guess.
Seconded, then probably go back to Batman, I mean, Batman...UberMore said:
But unless they remove this from MP I can see a large proportion of their player-base jumping ship to Battlefield.
Good.
Folding Scopes can make quite a difference in the game, and the new grenade launcher is a perfect way to destroy all the campers and whoever dares call me a noob.
Folding Scopes can make quite a difference in the game, and the new grenade launcher is a perfect way to destroy all the campers and whoever dares call me a noob.
I'm glad that they are keeping this realistic weaponary concept up. I prefer it over guns that don't seem the slighest bit real in a game that is ment to be real.
