What's with all the Modern Warefare 3 Hate?

[Arcane Azmadi]

What I don't get is why people keep asking this question when the answer is always the same? Because the reason is always the same.

 

[TheEndlessSleep]

I don't understand this either...

If you don't like the game - don't play it - simple...

cod is old. but halo... now i like that series.

The original Halo actually came out at the same time as the origional COD (In fact a month before), so Halo is hardly new either.

P.S. I like it too

 

[Jakub324]

The only thing I don't like about it is the £10 per map pack thing. Gears of War did a bundle for £6 and that included 25 maps. Every time I buy a CoD map pack I feel extorted, but if you play CoD you have to get 'em or you get bored.

 

[Stalydan]

I don't hate CoD, I never have.


I'm just tired of it now. I'm tired of the what is essentially an expansion pack being released every year, £10 more than any other brand new game.

This is my opinion too. CoD is just getting boring now and really don't want to pay more for it when there are more games available that cost less and usually more fun :/

 

[TheEndlessSleep]

CoD series has become a rather slow paced but still very dumb shooter. There is no running to the gunning, you can't even sprint and shoot at the same time. Just while moving forward at brisk jogging speed your gun is so inaccurate you literally could only hit hit the broad side of a barn.

I'm not sure how you classify run and gun, but just because you can't shoot while sprinting doesn't make it a slow-paced game. There's plenty of running, and plenty of gunning, but just because they don't occur simultaneously you don't consider it run and gun?

If you play COD and compare it to, say, Battlefield or Halo, you can immediatley see that COD's small-scale maps, high weapon damage and often tight quarters make it a very quick-paced gaming experience.

Also, how are the guns innacurate? You aim, stuff dies - it's an age-old, reliable system.

 

[ZetaLegacies]

I don't even care about modern warfare 3, I'll be busy still playing Maplestory, and Battlefield 3, and WWE 12.

 

[Treblaine]

CoD series has become a rather slow paced but still very dumb shooter. There is no running to the gunning, you can't even sprint and shoot at the same time. Just while moving forward at brisk jogging speed your gun is so inaccurate you literally could only hit hit the broad side of a barn.

I'm not sure how you classify run and gun, but just because you can't shoot while sprinting doesn't make it a slow-paced game. There's plenty of running, and plenty of gunning, but just because they don't occur simultaneously you don't consider it run and gun?

If you play COD and compare it to, say, Battlefield or Halo, you can immediatley see that COD's small-scale maps, high weapon damage and often tight quarters make it a very quick-paced gaming experience.

Also, how are the guns innacurate? You aim, stuff dies - it's an age-old, reliable system.

If you try to say that games like Serious Sam are just as much Run-n-gun games as Modern Warfare 2... that is crazy.

A run-n-gun shooter you are ALWAYS on the move - not even pausing to shoot - circle strafing and back peddling to avoid incoming fire and enemies charging at you. Bunny hopping all over the place and leaping onto the enemy as bashing their brains out with a well timed swing of a wrench. That is NOT Call of Duty, and ESPECIALLY not Modern Warfare 2 or 3.

EVERY SHOOTER has running and gunning! If COD is a shooter because it has running and then shooting separately; then so too is ARMA a run-n-gun game, as well as all the Flashpoint games. Yes, to an extent you can run-n-gun in COD online (with submachinegun + steady aim) but no where near as well as:
-Painkiller
-Team Fortress 2
-Quake
-Doom
-Serious Sam
-Bioshock, even is more of a run-n-gun game

"Also, how are the guns inaccurate?"

Hipfire (fire without using sights) with an assault rifle in MW2, at an enemy that is more than 20 feet away, you'll be lucky to kill them after expending an entire magazine.

 

[aba1]

I think its just that there are much better games out there that deserve CODs level of financial success and popularity.

that combined with the fact that every games does little to add to the experiance so once you own one you own them all. Assasains creed is starting to get flak for the same thing which is why personally I think that series needs to get on with the story rather than stall for time like it has been.

 

[TheEndlessSleep]

If you try to say that games like Serious Sam are just as much Run-n-gun games as Modern Warfare 2... that is crazy.

I didn't - not sure where you got that from...

A run-n-gun shooter you are ALWAYS on the move - not even pausing to shoot - circle strafing and back peddling to avoid incoming fire and enemies charging at you. Bunny hopping all over the place and leaping onto the enemy as bashing their brains out with a well timed swing of a wrench. That is NOT Call of Duty, and ESPECIALLY not Modern Warfare 2 or 3.

Alright, let's say for the sake of argument that COD is not a run-and-gun game in the 'traditional sense'.

Even still, the fact that it's not run-and-gun does not automatically make it slow paced, like you said before, which is my main issue with your argument to be honest.

Hipfire (fire without using sights) with an assault rifle in MW2, at an enemy that is more than 20 feet away, you'll be lucky to kill them after expending an entire magazine.

You're not really supposed to hipfire, thats kind of the point of aiming. Hipfiring in real life is not accurate either, that's why guns have sights.

EVERY SHOOTER has running and gunning! If COD is a shooter because it has running and then shooting separately; then so too is ARMA a run-n-gun game, as well as all the Flashpoint games. Yes, to an extent you can run-n-gun in COD online (with submachinegun + steady aim) but no where near as well as:
-Painkiller
-Team Fortress 2
-Quake
-Doom
-Serious Sam
-Bioshock, even is more of a run-n-gun game

By your own definition of run-and-gun, I would have to agree. However, I don't agree with your definition.

 

[Henkie36]

People are just sick of IW making them buy the same bullshit over and over and over again. have you looked at the trailers? MW2 all over again. I think it's just the fact that it feels more like you are waiting for a patch for MW2 and instead you have to pay 60 euro's for it.

 

[orangeban]

I hate COD because I don't like the ultra-twitchy, quick to die gameplay. And the story of Modern Warfare 2 made me go "bwuh?" and Black Op's story made me cough up my lungs in an attempt to kill myself. Seriously, that thing was like bad Cold War fanfiction written by an idiot trapped in a nuclear bunker (Commies, Nazis, they're friends right?!)

 

[vermin_]

Jesus christ.

Another Y U NO LIKE COD. Check.

Wonder if theres gonne ba a MLP thread at the end of the day?

 

[Treblaine]

I don't hate CoD, I never have.


I'm just tired of it now. I'm tired of the what is essentially an expansion pack being released every year, £10 more than any other brand new game.

£10 more PLUS another £40 or so in map packs that you have to get if you don't want a divided community.

This is the point that pisses me off the most: sure all your friends may play the latest COD, but did you all buy the same map packs?

I'd much rather that Activision brought micro-transactions into the unlocking process like charge $5 to get the ACR or Stringer launcher early, or pay for more customisation slots. Or have Activision owned and run servers.

Just as long as all the maps were universal across the community.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

How ironic that your picture is of link....


Personally, I just hate how overhyped it is. The game itself is by no means bad, but ignorant fans yelling "HURR HURR I PLAYED THIS AND IT WAS DA BEST EVAAAA!!1!" all over the damn internet really annoys me. And then when BlackOps wins an unfair number of BAFTAs (more than 0) and every damn game in the industry lamely copies it.

It's funny that you can call me an ignorant fan without even knowing anything about me. I like my avatar, yes Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is one of my favourite games ever, I like Link, I think he's a cool character and I thought the picture of him trying to hit Navi with a flyswatter was funny. But I've only ever played 4 Zelda games, I've actually played more Call of Duty's than I have Zelda games. I've never once said any Zelda games are "DA BEST GAMES EVAR!"

But at least Zelda has done something new in some of it's titles. Wind Waker with it's new art style and Phantom Hourglass with a whole new take on gameplay using only the Stylus. Has CoD ever tried something new? No, every year it's running about aiming and shooting in the middle of explosions, explosions and, oh, more explosions.

 

[Treblaine]

I guess people are just tired of playing the same game re-released every year.

How ironic that your (avatar) picture is of Link....

>Same game Every year
>Zelda game

pick one.

There hasn't been a proper Zelda game in over Half a decade!

After 25 years there haven't even been even 8 proper home console releases of Zelda games.

And no one else is making games remotely like Zelda, it's all hard RPGs like Dragon's Age or Gears Of War slash-fest. Zelda may build on previous work but you could hardly say you are overwhelmed by the familiarity, each game tries to change as much as it can while still remaining part of the same series. I don't mean superficial changes like Final Fantasy, I mean fundamental changes to the environment and interactions.

So - the ironically named "trollpwner" - you can quit it with such weasel words, you are NOT going to excuse such incredibly trashy works as Call of Duty with innuendo that such universally lauded franchises as Zelda are somehow just as bad.

 

[Treblaine]

By your own definition of run-and-gun, I would have to agree. However, I don't agree with your definition.

I don't think ANYONE agrees with or even understands your "definition" of run-n-gun.

 

[shadow_Fox81]

Oh hello there, you must be new to the internet.

People here like to hate things, and when a bandwagon gets rolling, they want nothing more than to hop right on.

I'm new to the internet too and sympathise with the guys surprise. maybe they should ask "whats with the hate?"

 

[Treblaine]

Oh hello there, you must be new to the internet.

People here like to hate things, and when a bandwagon gets rolling, they want nothing more than to hop right on.

I'm new to the internet too and sympathise with the guys surprise. maybe they should ask "whats with the hate?"

This thread is called:

"What's with all the Modern Warefare 3 Hate?"

And everyone is giving a lot of specific reasons.

Many franchises have been around for longer than COD and some things (in their own way) are more popular yet don't get such consternation. But have you considered that hate for COD might not be entirely prejudiced? That it might be well deserved?

 

[TheEndlessSleep]

By your own definition of run-and-gun, I would have to agree. However, I don't agree with your definition.

I don't think ANYONE agrees with or even understands your "definition" of run-n-gun.

Excellent, so my argument is invalid because you don't understand it - now we're getting somewhere.

All I'm saying is that COD includes a lot of running, and a fuck load of gunning.
You can both move and shoot at the same time, so kindly explain to me how that is not run and gun?

 

[Zantos]

I think its just that there are much better games out there that deserve CODs level of financial success and popularity.

If there were, they'd have got it. CoD earned the money and popularity by appealing to most demographics, and pays for itself about 10 times over with each release. No other game does that quite so well.