Trailers: Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 Multiplayer Footage

[ultrachicken]

If I wanted more Modern Warfare 2, I'd play more Modern Warfare 2. They don't need to screw around with the basic formula, but sequels need more updates than this.

You obviously have not played sequels to very many games.

Lolwut? Care to explain what line of reasoning led to that statement?

Well there are two problems with your statement. One is that there have been very few multiplayer focused games like CoD that have sequels. Those that are update about the same amount as CoD does. They change a few things but keep the same basic formula. The single player games generally change even less other then the story. So why is CoD getting crap for following pretty much the same formula that nearly every other sequel does?

Good sequels are supposed to keep the basic formula that the previous entry had, but not to stick to it like glue; rather, sequels should use the previous game as a jumping off point. A foundation. Call of Duty seems afraid to make the leap.

Play Halo 3 and then Reach. Play Bad Company 1 and then 2. You'll see that big multiplayer franchises don't have to stay the same, and can be greatly improved by working on their formula.

As for singleplayer games, look at Oblivion to Skyrim, Mass Effect to Mass Effect 2, Assassin's Creed 2 to Brotherhood. These all took what made the prequels great and built on them, meeting largely with success (I know Skyrim isn't out yet, but it doesn't take a genius to see how massive the hype train is).

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Good sequels are supposed to keep the basic formula that the previous entry had, but not to stick to it like glue; rather, sequels should use the previous game as a jumping off point. A foundation. Call of Duty seems afraid to make the leap.

I'd actually be happy if it was MW2 but balanced properly. That game came so close to being amazing.

 

[Sneaklemming]

New multiplayer gameplay video is as bloody boring as ever.

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

Looks great to me, I can't wait to play it. Who cares if it is a new CoD with similar gameplay? You would have had to pay 60 bucks for all the new maps anyways, at least this way you get a bonus campaign and survival mode out of the deal.

Sorry but are you saying that we should be grateful because at least SOME of it's new!?
Pfffffft, call me when they make a new game.

Anyway, on to the actual trailer... looks the same (been established) bits are different but not by much and the mini uav/ helicopter thing looks cool if not plucked straight out of Battlefield.

 

[ultrachicken]

Good sequels are supposed to keep the basic formula that the previous entry had, but not to stick to it like glue; rather, sequels should use the previous game as a jumping off point. A foundation. Call of Duty seems afraid to make the leap.

I'd actually be happy if it was MW2 but balanced properly. That game came so close to being amazing.

I'd like it if they worked on the drab aesthetics as well, but I agree, the CoD series is high quality, but my only issue is that they never seem to try to improve on what they built.

Also, it seems like MW2 could have been balanced with patches rather than in a $60 game.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Also, it seems like MW2 could have been balanced with patches rather than in a $60 game.

Yeah, I agree with that. I gave em a chance this time as the company was falling apart at the time but if MW3 has no post launch support for fixing the inevitable mountain of broken shit people are gonna exploit, I'm done with COD for a bit.

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

And they said that Halo: ODST wasn't enough to make a standalone game...

 

[Deminobody]

As a TF2 player I always feel like I made a great purchase four years ago when I look at the other fps powerhouses. Granted as of late there can be arguments that TF2 is losing its balance and aesthetic integrity, but I can still say I've gotten four years out of a single $20 game.

I'm all for new games and sequels, but a better infrastructure for delivering more content at less cost for the developers and the consumers just seems like a more solid business model. This is why I think Valve is heading in the right direction with their "entertainment as a service not a product" approach.

As great as CoD games are I feel like they purposely lag behind in content delivery so as to justify $60 investments by its fan base every other year.

 

[The Cheezy One]

You know what? Comments hitting on the repetitive nature of this series are becoming older far faster than the game. You don't like it, don't buy it. Don't complain to the rest of us about it with predictable jokes. And before you call me a fanboy, I'm probably not going to get this game, but not because it is a sequel.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Another cheque for the devs thats all this is. When i see a sequil to a game i would like to see improvement and change but this dosent seem to do ether one, so as for the 60$ map pack i think i will pass for awile. I would hope for a price drop but hell that dosent apply to CoD series

I think you meant another check for the publishers. Since Activision doesn't really...pay it's devs. I think that was made quite apparent in the past.

 

[Frostbite3789]

If I wanted more Modern Warfare 2, I'd play more Modern Warfare 2. They don't need to screw around with the basic formula, but sequels need more updates than this.

You obviously have not played sequels to very many games.

Lolwut? Care to explain what line of reasoning led to that statement?

Well there are two problems with your statement. One is that there have been very few multiplayer focused games like CoD that have sequels. Those that are update about the same amount as CoD does. They change a few things but keep the same basic formula. The single player games generally change even less other then the story. So why is CoD getting crap for following pretty much the same formula that nearly every other sequel does?

The first part of your post answers the question you ask at the end. "Those that are update(d) about the same amount as CoD does."

They're changing very little, yet this is a yearly release title. I see more innovation in my yearly NHL titles, where hell in 10, they had a brand new engine for the entire game and they're always at least adding things.

We're still using the same engine from CoD4 here. It's nothing but a cash cow for Activision to milk dry. And as long as gamers will eat it, Activision will gladly shovel this shit straight into your mouths. Year, after year, after year, after year.

 

[Juk3n]

I know that innovation is hard to come by but at least change the HUD or something. At least pretend like you're making a new game.

The HUD bothers you? It bothers you that they got it right in MW2 and so decided not to change it because it was pretty much perfect?

Also, innovation is not a prerequisite for fun. Make no mistake, this is a game for HARDCORE MW2 Fans ONLY!. If Black Ops is your favourite CoD multiplayer experience You. Will. Not. Like. This. Game.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Snip

Yeah, ignoring the entire first half of my post was pretty cool. You know, the part that explained the second part? I guess it makes your argument more valid if you ignore that the problem is the yearly releases.

If they weren't doing that, and milking this thing dry, a la Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero (this is not a new pattern for Activision), maybe they wouldn't be on this (hopefully) sinking ship.

Have you heard a single Kotick quote...ever? You can't say they're irrelevant, they're perfectly relevant for a franchise that seems minimal changes, yet is on a yearly release schedule, like clockwork.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Actually MW2 got tons of balancing patches to fix the exploits after it got released. Remeber knife runnin with care packages? Akimbo antique shotguns that could hit you from across the map? Three different infinite care package glitches? All of those and many more got fixed by them. The only stopped fixing everything after half the staff left. The only glitch that I can still think of that is left in the game is the rock in I believe fuel.

Actually they patched that rock glitch a couple of months back - I know, random.

And yeah they weren't too bad at the beginning. It's a pity people found out about OMA noob tubes and MLC classes, but by that stage the company was all but gone.

So we'll see. Maybe MW3 will give its community the continued support it deserves.

 

[Hexador]

Clearly Infinity Ward got lazy at the top...

Very Lazy.

If I wanted more Modern Warfare 2, I'd play more Modern Warfare 2. They don't need to screw around with the basic formula, but sequels need more updates than this.

You obviously have not played sequels to very many games.

You're right, sequels are generally not all that progressive in most generas. But when it comes to first person shooters, I think there is a certain expectation of progress in some direction. All I see from the gameplay here is stagnation.

Compare Battlefield 3 to Battlefield: Bad Company 2, and you can see what I mean. You could make the arguement that the two games are almost identical, and be right for the most part. But from what I've seen in the sparse gameplay footage they have released DICE has expanded on stuff like destructable terrain as well as adding completely new things to make what looks to be one heck of an amazing game.

Granted, DICE had longer to do it considering EA has a track record of aiming for bigger releases with the BF series, not to mention they clearly haven't been too happy living in Activision/Infinity Ward's shadow for 3+ years (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112486-EA-Slings-More-Mud-at-Activision).

 

[GameMaNiAC]

It's going to be awesome, I can sense it. I don't care what other people think, the Survival mode and the new Spec Ops missions alone make the game worth buying, not to mention the third chapter of the story.

So as I've said. It's going to be...

Spoiler: ...awesome.

 

[Stravant]

All the things I could ***** about with this trailer, but the one thing that got to me the most about this was that they have the gall to recycle half the sounds from MW2

Please shoot me now.

Actually scratch that, please shoot them now.