Modern Warfare 3 PC Goes Free for a Weekend

[Treblaine]

This game only stands a serious chance on PC if it goes Free-to-play or a VERY low starting price.

Just out of curiosity, but what do you mean by 'stands a chance'. A chance to do what? It's still in the steam top sellers list and has been since launch. It seems to me that it's succeeded quite considerably already.

Not that I'm gonna bother buying it 'til I see it for less than a tenner. But whatever.

A chance of getting even half of the player numers that CS has. Outside of free play weekends they really pander rather low on numbers for the supposed best FPS MP expirience they want to achieve with every new installation of this cashcow genre.

Also, no. It is not in the steam top sellers list outside of sales.

Overall: MW3 is one of those small MP shooters on the PC. Not really worth mentioning since the last x games played exactly the same in MP, medium player numbers and added to that: it is a lazy port (yes, I call every FPS with narrow FOV a lazy port).

Just out of curiosity, is MW3 a steamworks game or are there players playing it that aren't on steam?

Anyway, regardless of that, saying that it's a 'small' mp shooter because it doesn't match the numbers of the largest seems pretty unfair.

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

Being the 6th most played game is not 'small'. Particularly when 4 of those games above it are valve games on a valve service.

Also, what do you mean by not on the top sellers list outside of sales? On the steam homepage, it was tenth when I posted, and is currently 15th due to a few new releases and sales. And it's been in that list consistently since its release.

Snip

Hell, I'm not arguing that it necessarily deserves its success, I'm just saying that it is very successful. (yes, it's losing to CS, but as I said above, no one is beating CS, 6th place is not a failure.)

All the legit users of MW3 (and MW2) have to be signed in via Steam to play. So those stats DO make up the comprehensive list.

Modern Warfare series of games are those kinds of games you buy because EVERYONE is talking about it, it's got that critical mass and I think far too much of it's reputation comes from how it is "good for a console game" but that doesn't work on PC though the reputation does transfer over. The gameplay is so cheap and repetitive.

It's not a super lazy game (to spite the number of weapons that are direct copy/pastes of models from MW2) there has been due effort put into making the game look fairly good, it's just all so unimaginative and conservative, it reeks of design-by-committee in the worst possible sense, as if any changes are the arbitrary bare minimum to say "look, it's not COMPLETELY the same".

 

[Bobic]

Just out of curiosity, is MW3 a steamworks game or are there players playing it that aren't on steam?

Anyway, regardless of that, saying that it's a 'small' mp shooter because it doesn't match the numbers of the largest seems pretty unfair.

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

Being the 6th most played game is not 'small'. Particularly when 4 of those games above it are valve games on a valve service.

Also, what do you mean by not on the top sellers list outside of sales? On the steam homepage, it was tenth when I posted, and is currently 15th due to a few new releases and sales. And it's been in that list consistently since its release.

Yes it is a steamworks game, otherwise I would not bring up "small". I call it small because we have the numbers and how it holds up to a 12y old game.

Ah yeah, the sale thing is my mistake. I looked over the list and somehow did not see it at all.

That would be a meaningful comparison were it not for the fact that literally every single game on steam is losing to that 12 year old game. 6th place isn't small.

 

[Treblaine]

And still the focus on overpowered killstreaks and emphasis on kill:death ratio. K/D ratio does nothing but encourage selfish and unambitious gamplay, i.e. camping and ignoring objectives.

You seem to be very confused. The killstreaks are actually weaker in MW3 then they were in CoD4. Also the game doesnt put emphasis on kill:death ratio certain players do.

Killstreaks are VERY powerful and persistent in MW3; the AC-130, Reaper or Osprey gunner are far worse than the helicopter in COD4 and even that was a load of bullshit. Loads of servers on CoD4 on PC just ban the helicopter outright, especially on the large 60-player servers where helicopters can be called in constantly.

Unlike in CoD4 MW3 has perks that can make any killstreak out there useless. Even the trophy system which you can use in place of a secondary grenade stops things like the ac-130, reaper, predator missile, etc. In CoD4 uavs and the helicopter were far more powerful.

Uh, K/D ratio is tracked in MW3 and every CoD game. Not in CounterStrike nor Team Fortress 2. You have to admit there is a LOT of camping in Call of Duty. There is a huge disincentive in pushing forwards as that just invites a full-auto sniper to spawn behind you. I mean crap liek dead man's hand punishes those who dare to close to kill.

What does it matter if the k/d ratio is tracked if it doesnt actually do anything? The game also tracks a ton of other stats as well.

There is also a huge disincentive to not push forwards since if you dont you will most likely loose. As for dead mans hand its not really a big deal. Its there to give people who died six times in a row a chance to do something when they die the seventh time. The blast radius is also rather small so as long as you are in knifing range your safe.

Yeah I know about Blind Eye, but why should I have to have a perk to get rid of bullshit that shouldn't be there in the first place? And sacrifice scavenger or slight of hand or another very useful perk to keeping in the fight? These are perks in place of strategy. What can you do other than wish you had another loadout?

UAVs shmuAVs, that ENCOURAGES movement as camping in one spot it is easier to be discovered. Except with camouflage/assassin/whatever the camper is at way too high an advantage, they can skulk in the corner like a DIY-claymore watching for anyone coming close and spray and pray on them. Yes, there should be a defence against UAVs but not a perk that encourages hiding in a corner with a machine gun. The UAV-beating perk needs to be TOTALLY TIED to the sniper or an otherwise weak stealth class. This is a fundamental weakness of COD, how the "create your own class" invites everyone to create totally unbalanced classes and the only way to counter this is for developers to remove perks that drastically change gameplay. Like Juggernaut and stopping power have been.

The problem with COD's perks is they aren't tied to any nerfs and DO NOT GIVE THE TIRED OLD EXCUSE that "the nerf is in not having another perk". No. A perk like UAV-invisibility is so great it must be limited by more than just being unable to use any other perk in that category. They need to be limited to stealth weapons, like the sniper rifles or a close range knife weapon or a weak silenced pistol. Much like how spy in TF2 is limited to knife and revolver.
The nerf that should go with the juggernaut (COD4) perk should be slower movement speed. As fast, tough AND lead spitting is too powerful. UAV blocking needs to be limited to circumstance, so the UAV-blocking for sniper should only work while still or moving very slowly... like the ghillie suit in that Chernobyl mission of COD4's campaign, you only went unnoticed if you stayed low and still and slow... not running around.

Imagine if in TF2 you could mix character attributes? You would of course give your character the health of a Heavy, the mobility of the scout and the weapon of the pyro. It's a nightmare trying to balance all these between 3 perk categories.

In COD, everyone tries to make this overpowered hybrid super-class in Create-a-class, there is no compromise.

Then the rebounding health, that TOTALLY encourages camping as you never have to venture out looking for health, you hunker down in a corner to recharge and realise what suits you for recharging also suits you for staying. Just move a bit every few kills to avoid revenge grenades.

 

[ASnogarD]

No thanks.

Lets see:

- FoV ? Wassat , is it a PSN feature or an Live XBLA game ?
- Yay dedi servers , too bad you cant level up in them... ah at least it stops the cheaters... oh wait.
- Least the tech is new...right ? Some DX11 in there ? Oh, the mouse is supported... thats high level.

The PC version is just a toss in to scrape up a few extra bucks, no thought goes into the port or any real effort... its a port off a ver. from a platform with 7 year old tech inside, and the engine is even older than the platform.
I would be satisfied if Activision stops pretending to support multi platform releases, at least pretending it includes the PC platform... like the Prototype 2 release, why must PC based fans wait for 3 months while the console gamers get to enjoy it and spam the net with information about it... then the port is usually sub par and not supported.

 

[Treblaine]

snip

Honestly it sounds like your problem was that you just sucked at the game. Call of Duty is about adapting your class to the environment and play styles of both your team and the enemies. It also punishes you for blindly running around since there are so many corners that people can be behind.

Half your complaints are wah wah I dont want to use any of the answers to my opponents threats and the other half are wah wah I dont want to have to look where I am going.

Also unless you are playing against really shitting players staying in a corer is a definite way to get yourself killed really fast.

WHAT! No. I regularly get top scoring of team. That's on both PC and on 360. The problem is how cheap you have to be to get on top.

"It also punishes you for blindly running around since there are so many corners that people can be behind."

Yes, campers. You CANNOT check every corner simultaneously, the camper is at huge advantage considering the time to sight in. In TF2 I can push forward to the objective and stand a chance to retreat if it's too tough. It is COSTLY to camp in TF2, like putting down a sentry it is slow to set up and easily destroyed once it's position is known.

"Half your complaints are wah wah I dont want to use any of the answers to my opponents threats and the other half are wah wah I dont want to have to look where I am going."

Not very mature with the "wah wah wah!" bits.

I AM looking where I am going, the problem is campers do NOT hide in the direction I am going, they hide in the flanks. And with a measly 70-degree view angle your blind side is ANY direction other than directly in front of you. Such a narrow view angle is so favours the stationary. And I get good not by hiding in a corner but it SURE AS HELL is not by pushing forward, it is all about positioning for a killzone and killing anyone who wanders into it. There is NOTHING like the balance in Team Fortress 2 nor the focus on teamwork and achievement in objectives. There isn't even a deathmatch mode in standard TF2.

And what does this mean:

"to use any of the answers to my opponents threats"

and how am I not doing them? Yes, the answer to campers is a flashbang or concussion grenade, but even them you stand a heck of a chance just spraying across the room and is fucked up if they just moved to the opposite corner. Either way it hugely breaks the flow of the game trying to counter this and leaves your totally exposed to any enemy who comes across you while you are trying to flush them out.

No, the trick is to hover around a key point spraying direct fire on anyone who gets close. Domination mode is the antithesis of the namesake when 2/3 of caps holding central point is all you need to be victorious. Pushing forward into their well defended spawn and final point only leads to spawn flipping and then you have to do the same in reverse!! It is totally impractical to get a triple cap with any evenly balanced team - at least not without breaking the spawn system to spawn kill them. It essentially becomes a shitty game of king-of-the-hill except the game can be unwinnable after just a few minutes as they will develop a lead that is impossible to close. For example, assuming (reasonably) that both home flags are taken at the same time and one team holds the central flag till they have a 135 points then the other team will have only 67(or otherwise a 67 point lead), it will be impossible for them to regain the lead unless they hold triple-cap for a significant length of time. Totally impractical and I've yet to ever see it done.

Once they have greater than a 2x point lead, it's game over, they might as well fall back to their first point.

Now I've played KOTH on TF2 and regularly we have clawed back victory from the very last few seconds on the timer. In every game mode from payload to Capture-points to CTF you always have a chance to turn the game around if you just pull together and break out of the enemy's manoeuvres. It is entirely down to the players. The game ain't over till it's over. It's never worth giving up.

I've had this problem and you hear it all the time from youtube commentators complaining about the enemy team quitting and forfeiting. Well no bloody surprise as anyone can figure out that before half the game time is over you are in "checkmate".

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

Thanks but no thanks Activision. I'll stick with the Guild Wars 2 beta.

 

[Treblaine]

WHAT! No. I regularly get top scoring of team. That's on both PC and on 360. The problem is how cheap you have to be to get on top.

You say that but all of your complaints suggest otherwise. You are talking about strategies that are used by horrible people and dont effect good players like they are the best thing ever.

You mention field of view which goes back to my point of you not paying enough attention and tunnel visioning your way around the map. MW3 is not TF2 and you cant expect to play it the same way and do good.

Really? You're saying once the central point in domination is taken everyone dumbly stands on top of it rather than fleeing to the side and training their guns for fields of fire on anyone who comes near.

Unlike KOTH in TF2 it doesn't matter if you get 99% as close to capping a flag once you are killed all progress is lost in a second. In KOTH you at least get some accomplishment that you make it easier for the next person to cap the point. In CTF, if they get the flag half way back but get killed that contributes nothing as the enemy just has to touch it to return it. So no shifting defences, it's all in or complete failure, even if they grab it you can instantly move the flag back to the base.

Narrow field of view LITERALLY increases tunnel vision! You can try to fight it but with everyone at narrow FOV it favours those already in defensive positions with ready fields of fire.

You're damn right MW3 isn't TF2, we all (I hope) wish it was but it isn't. It's like saying "Transformers 3 isn't Die Hard" well whoop-tee-doo, that's and that's the whole problem. Unless you like that Michael Bay film in which the analogy is ineffectual yet still apropos.

 

[ElPatron]

Is anyone allowed to preload or whatever?

I am clicking the icon on Steam, went to the link and ran the steam app trough firefox, clicked the Free Weekend icon again and I am not getting any download.

Seriously, I knew that "activision" and "free" on the same sentence would never go smooth.

Never mind, found what was wrong.

a full-auto sniper

Full auto means that a pull of a trigger will cycle the weapon until you release it or the magazine is empty. Are there really full auto snipers in MW3?

I remember the SR25 being full auto on Combat Arms, but it fired like 1 round per second so it was preferable to tap the mouse.

Your right that is the problem. You dont understand that its a different game and requires a different mode of thinking to do good. You cant apply the same strategies as TF2 so you are complaining its unbalanced and broken when instead its just that you suck at it because your trying to play it wrong.

Mode of thinking? Wait. Every class is basically the same. You just have to work around a few details (like not being a complete moron) and you can do fine. The level of customization allows for a lot of variables that don't make much of a difference - so you can defeat any opposing class.

There is health regen. You know where I am going with this.

And finally the game is stupidly easy. I truly believe it's impossible for someone to suck at that game because there is nothing to master at all - which explains all the 360 noscope bullshit.

The game is unbalanced and favors full auto "spray and pray" weapons at close range, and the players who use FA secondary weapons.

Infinity Ward still can't get shotguns balanced right.

I am sorry, I have nothing against you liking a game and it's features (I personally think that the flag reset is fine) but there is no point in arguing that there is an actual complex skill based game behind Call of Duty.

 

[Treblaine]

Really? You're saying once the central point in domination is taken everyone dumbly stands on top of it rather than fleeing to the side and training their guns for fields of fire on anyone who comes near.

Unlike KOTH in TF2 it doesn't matter if you get 99% as close to capping a flag once you are killed all progress is lost in a second. In KOTH you at least get some accomplishment that you make it easier for the next person to cap the point. In CTF, if they get the flag half way back but get killed that contributes nothing as the enemy just has to touch it to return it. So no shifting defences, it's all in or complete failure, even if they grab it you can instantly move the flag back to the base.

You do realise that that actually increases the amount of depth and strategy required to win right? It rewards teamwork and punishes lone wolf/lemming behavior. Having the flag return means it makes the game more difficult and require more thinking in order to win.

Narrow field of view LITERALLY increases tunnel vision! You can try to fight it but with everyone at narrow FOV it favours those already in defensive positions with ready fields of fire.

The FOV isnt an issue its people who dont pay attention to their surroundings.

You're damn right MW3 isn't TF2, we all (I hope) wish it was but it isn't. It's like saying "Transformers 3 isn't Die Hard" well whoop-tee-doo, that's and that's the whole problem. Unless you like that Michael Bay film in which the analogy is ineffectual yet still apropos.

Your right that is the problem. You dont understand that its a different game and requires a different mode of thinking to do good. You cant apply the same strategies as TF2 so you are complaining its unbalanced and broken when instead its just that you suck at it because your trying to play it wrong.

Hell the proof is in you trying to compare it to TF2. The games work far to differently to be compared like you are trying to.

How. How does the flag ALWAYS returning to the SAME point after being touched increase thinking? It's simple, the flag always returns to the same point, no need to think about moving forward defences. It's unsatisfying as any progress you make can instantly be undone by a spray of bullets. No depth, no strategy. There is depth and strategy in a dropped flag persisting for some time as any close by teammates can still get to it. That VALUES teamwork.

When one bullet and a touch can so quickly return the flag that FAVOURS loan wolves as the only chance is to go unnoticed. I've played this mode enough on UT2004 till I convinced the admin to put a timer on returning dropped flags.

Again, how is FOV not the issue? It is harder to be aware of you surroundings when you see 40% as much of your surroundings within the frame?!?! Your flat refusal is not contributing the the discussion it is forbidden under forum rules and nothing but foisting your opinions on people with no explanation.

The mode of thinking is far simpler in COD with hardly any teamwork interaction or dependence, as I have demonstrated and your claims to the contrary you have not demonstrated. It is a PROBLEM that nothing like the strategies of TF2 can be applied to CoD. I have detailed how utterly broken Domination mode is, how after the score lead goes beyond 135:67 then the game reaches an unwinnable state, that's poor game design. It is eminently comparable to TF2 your denialism and simplistic refutation that they are different games ignores the discussion value and as fas as I can tell breaks the forum rules.

I'd be more than happy to hear a logical refutation of may explanation, but you simply dogmatically claiming to the contrary adds nothing

 

[Treblaine]

It's not working for me either and I'm in the UK if that counts for anything. I'm not exactly hugely disappointed, it's only the completionist in me that wants to play MW3, because it's a popular game and I should play it just so that I know. Like how you have to see Citizen Kane even if you think it's a load of wank. Yes, I compare Modern Warfare 3 to Citizen Kane.

Is anyone allowed to preload or whatever?

I am clicking the icon on Steam, went to the link and ran the steam app trough firefox, clicked the Free Weekend icon again and I am not getting any download.

Seriously, I knew that "activision" and "free" on the same sentence would never go smooth.

a full-auto sniper

Full auto means that a pull of a trigger will cycle the weapon until you release it or the magazine is empty. Are there really full auto snipers in MW3?

I remember the SR25 being full auto on Combat Arms, but it fired like 1 round per second so it was preferable to tap the mouse.

I know that. Just because the gun isn't called a sniper rifle in game, that doesn't mean it isn't effectively a sniper rifle.

I mean sniper-rifle in the gaming convention sense. They are hitscan (no projectile flight time) weapons with perfect accuracy. Recoil only moves the point of aim and plenty of weapons have virtually no recoil, the ACR especially but true for all the weapons, even most of the submachine guns. And a weapon that has a fire cap of several hundred rounds per minute - considering how easily you can rapidly tap a trigger - even the semi-auto rifles are effectively full auto sniper rifles.

Like the MP7 in MW3, it's effectively a full auto sniper rifle with such tight spread and such relatively high damage.

 

[ElPatron]

How. How does the flag ALWAYS returning to the SAME point after being touched increase thinking? It's simple, the flag always returns to the same point, no need to think about moving forward defences. It's unsatisfying as any progress you make can instantly be undone by a spray of bullets. No depth, no strategy. There is depth and strategy in a dropped flag persisting for some time as any close by teammates can still get to it. That VALUES teamwork.

If a team/player can't prevent getting killed while carrying the flag it means that either someone got sloppy or the defending team was able to predict the enemy move.

If a team can't prevent the enemy from touching the flag after the carrier got killed, it's not being effective/supportive.

I like both kinds of CTF and I believe we should be given an option. But if the rules dictate that if you are not capable of retrieving a flag before the enemy touches it then there is no way around it: according to the rules, it's a loss.

 

[anthony87]

Is anyone allowed to preload or whatever?

I am clicking the icon on Steam, went to the link and ran the steam app trough firefox, clicked the Free Weekend icon again and I am not getting any download.

Seriously, I knew that "activision" and "free" on the same sentence would never go smooth.

Never mind, found what was wrong.

How did you get it working? I'm having the same problem.

 

[Treblaine]

How. How does the flag ALWAYS returning to the SAME point after being touched increase thinking? It's simple, the flag always returns to the same point, no need to think about moving forward defences. It's unsatisfying as any progress you make can instantly be undone by a spray of bullets. No depth, no strategy. There is depth and strategy in a dropped flag persisting for some time as any close by teammates can still get to it. That VALUES teamwork.

If a team/player can't prevent getting killed while carrying the flag it means that either someone got sloppy or the defending team was able to predict the enemy move.

If a team can't prevent the enemy from touching the flag after the carrier got killed, it's not being effective/supportive.

I like both kinds of CTF and I believe we should be given an option. But if the rules dictate that if you are not capable of retrieving a flag before the enemy touches it then there is no way around it: according to the rules, it's a loss.

Well it's not hard to get killed in CoD, you move so slow and it's like playing in an all-crits server. But the getting killed is the common ground, the point of distinction is what happens to the flag AFTER getting killed. The enemy is going to be close in CoD, closer than typically in TF2, so running into the dropped flag is hugely likely.

The other team mate would have to be SO close AND be in a position to kill the guy who just killed the flag carrier, you have to be way closer together, this is too much to expect of teamwork. Then there is the challenge for BOTH TEAMS how the intel is now in a new location, the attacking team has a brief BUT MANAGEABLE window at an alternate route to grab the intel.

I suppose it's largely preference, but it is less dynamic with the flag so easily returning to the base. Surely you can recognise the dynamism in the flag staying where it is dropped for a short time how it shifts the point of defence, Even if it isn't to your personal taste.

With good teams, if there is not a timer for flag to return then it favours the defence too much, matches so often go into overtime with no points scored.