CoD's story sucks anyways.AkaDad said:
OT: I'm tempted to say "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," but I'm sure most people will agree that MW2's multiplayer was broken...
MW3 no different than MW2....(some MW3 gameplay)
- Thread starter yuval152
- Start date
Recommended Videos
OT: I'm tempted to say "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," but I'm sure most people will agree that MW2's multiplayer was broken...
So far the only games that are in my sights are Battlefield 3, Ghost Recon: Future Soldier, and Ace Combat Assault Horizon. Modern Warfare 3 has yet to prove its worth because as of right now it looks like it should have been DLC for Modern Warfare 2. Even the Campaign demo shown at E3 was disappointing to me.
Especially if they are Halo or Call of Duty Fans.the spud said:
It's about time someone made a realistic military-based online-focused first person shooter! complete with gun upgrades, attachments, and perks! Holy Moonwalkers! it even has capture the flag! AND you can even dual-wield! Next thing you know you'll be able to customize what you look like too. Did they do that too?! ...I need to lay down.
I've been waiting for this kind of game forever now! What took them so long?
I've been waiting for this kind of game forever now! What took them so long?
Wait, they took MW2, which was (and still is) great, and basically gave us more of what we loved about it with fancier graphics?
Great. I'll be preordering.
Great. I'll be preordering.
Ah - the old sterotyping of fanbases, it has returned.Jesse Billingsley said:
So b/c they're COD or Halo fans they're lesser then you? Because I like Halo, you're better then me?
It's sad that people act as if COD and Halo fan are some how lesser for liking them and that if you're looking forward to different games, you're somehow better then them.
I feel sorry for you COD fans, I really do. Atleast black-ops made an effort. I'm not saying it won't be fun, i'm just saying that you are all going to spend full price for what amounts to an unusually large mappack, with a new campaign and added killstreaks. Oh i forgot the MW1 perks they added back too my bad. ima just stick to BF3.AmrasCalmacil said:
I would gladly pay $60 for 15 new maps, new weapons, and a ton of balance improvements. Hell, I'd pay $60 if they would just remove Grenade Launchers and Commando from MW2 and repackage it.psychodynamica said:
... maybe I shouldn't say that in a public forum. Activision might be watching.
The thing is,most sequels actually do change much more than CoD does,and even when they don't change that much,it's still okay because their game isn't the seventieth installment in a game that most people just buy for the multiplayer.I never planned on buying it myself just because I don't like it,but people are trying to make their games just like CoD because it's making so much money,and original ideas are getting smothered in the flood of cash to these games.
Did I say "I am more 'superior' over myself" (I am a Halo fan too dude). Do I think I am more superior then my college buddies who also like Reach? No.Korten12 said:
I dislike the people who would rather play a ported version of Halo 3's shitty multiplayer and story over something that takes both of those things, analyzes them, and then comes up with something completely different but twice as good. Go on the 343 forums, they hate Reach so much, they had to make a goddamn petition against Armor Abilities, A PETITION! Then look on the Bungie Forums, and you'll find tons of threads about how Reach blows a fat one and blame it on Bloom or Armor abilities. Those are the assholes I can't stand.
If you like Reach because its a good game, then good for you I like you.
To be honest you make a good point, but I think it's a little cheeky calling a whole new game. And I really, really, really worry about te balancing, mw2 was bad enough, i hope this is a little more polished. they must have had plenty of time to do this after all the 'work' they actually did.MetallicaRulez0 said:
You know, it's funny how we harp so hard on EA for being such a dick lately with all the BF3 vs MW3 mudslinging. Looking at comments, it seems like they are just sticking to their target demographic. The fans are acting the exact same way.
To me, it's better to compare Call of Duty to Combat Arms. Asides from the fact that it's a F2P PC shooter, it plays pretty similarly to CoD. In comparison to that, CoD is much much better.
Battlefield is nothing like either. It's not KDR centric -- in fact, going in with the intent to kill a bunch of folks is more likely to make your team lose than being tactical. I mean, you kill one or two people, but when you finally die, everyone just respawns right at the last man standing. Basically everything your Rambo-butt just did was pointless.
Unless you move as a group and coordinate your attacks, you're going to lose.
In more arcade style games like CoD and Combat Arms, it's more about shooting people in the face. I love that -- Therefore I love all of the above games.
Show the love, not the hate.
But yeah, it looks exactly the same as MW2 -- kinda disappointing.
To me, it's better to compare Call of Duty to Combat Arms. Asides from the fact that it's a F2P PC shooter, it plays pretty similarly to CoD. In comparison to that, CoD is much much better.
Battlefield is nothing like either. It's not KDR centric -- in fact, going in with the intent to kill a bunch of folks is more likely to make your team lose than being tactical. I mean, you kill one or two people, but when you finally die, everyone just respawns right at the last man standing. Basically everything your Rambo-butt just did was pointless.
Unless you move as a group and coordinate your attacks, you're going to lose.
In more arcade style games like CoD and Combat Arms, it's more about shooting people in the face. I love that -- Therefore I love all of the above games.
Show the love, not the hate.
But yeah, it looks exactly the same as MW2 -- kinda disappointing.
i don't give a flying shit. I'm getting it i don't care if or how they changed it all i want is to finish the fucking story.
