The engine doesn't just have high performance and, imo, well above average graphics. The game mechanics are also extremely well done. Everything from running and crouching, to jumping and throwing grenades. Everything feels natural.worldruler8 said:Perhaps to the games specs, but it's not the "best" engine. The engine is designed for high performance and an arcade-like style. This means it can clock an average of about 60 FPS, but as a result, graphically it isn't all that amazing. I'm not saying it has bad graphics, just that other games with different engine specs have better graphical qualities. In fact, this makes them clock at around 40 FPS. The engine serves it's purpose, and for the most part, I'm happy with it.
I will not be getting MW3 however, as I feel the game has become rotten. Not by the game itself (other then it's SP, but I'm more of a SP kind of guy) but by those people who use cheap tactics and what not. I don't like where the game is heading, so I'm going to voice my dismay by not buying the game. The multiplayer is a fun joy ride of quick tactics and visceral fighting, but recently this has felt shallow to me. This doesn't mean that I don't like it, it just means that overall, CoD is not a game I can play endlessly.
When I refer to solid and polished gameplay, I'm mainly referring to the game mechanics as opposed to some of the glitches we saw in Modern Warfare 2.
As for the campaigns, there's nothing wrong with them. They are better than 90% of other FPS campaigns, and they are primarily design towards Americans, so of course they will involve Americans vs Russia in some cliche storyline.