Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

[Mike.]

You just can't know that for sure. It's only 90 employees who have to make a new game in two years, they just have no time to start making new engines and to try to radically change the series and they don't need to. I don't really see the difference between CoD and FM.

I can definitely see the difference, and clearly so can many people otherwise the wouldnt be commenting. Anyone who has been playing COD for a long time can see it. its not just about the a new engine, the single player is a mish mash, the story is terrible, this used to be a strongpoint in the COD series. FM makes a game with a smaller development team, and a much smaller budget, and they do it every year, and yet they still attempt to try and push the game, constantly working on old flaws, while trying to bring it new ideas.

I can know well enough when a company is happy with they have. if you follow their articles and listen to what they say, its quite clear where their priorities are. You are happy fine, but people are entitled to not be happy

 

[Mads2506]

I can definitely see the difference, and clearly so can many people otherwise the wouldnt be commenting. Anyone who has been playing COD for a long time can see it. its not just about the a new engine, the single player is a mish mash, the story is terrible, this used to be a strongpoint in the COD series. FM makes a game with a smaller development team, and a much smaller budget, and they do it every year, and yet they still attempt to try and push the game, constantly working on old flaws, while trying to bring it new ideas.

I can know well enough when a company is happy with they have. if you follow their articles and listen to what they say, its quite clear where their priorities are. You are happy fine, but people are entitled to not be happy

So many people comment about it because that's the cool thing to do these days. CoD changes as many things from title to title as FM does. No one complained about WaW before it came out even though there was made nearly no changes from CoD4 whatsoever. You also have to remember that Activision are total *****. I doubt they would like it if they changed the game completely and they wouldn't give the time to do that either.

 

[Redrup]

Admittedly it would be nice if the graphics improved further on Call of Duty, but apart from that I don't think they should make any changes that they don't already try to, like the weapons and maps in particular. The gameplay is still the best in an FPS game and so I'm glad they don't change that aspect of it and, after you tick off the gameplay, maps and weapons, there's not really much else.

 

[Joel`]

So many people comment about it because that's the cool thing to do these days. CoD changes as many things from title to title as FM does. No one complained about WaW before it came out even though there was made nearly no changes from CoD4 whatsoever. You also have to remember that Activision are total *****. I doubt they would like it if they changed the game completely and they wouldn't give the time to do that either.

Activision are ***** and are the reason Call of Duty is stagnating.

 

[Mike.]

So many people comment about it because that's the cool thing to do these days. CoD changes as many things from title to title as FM does. No one complained about WaW before it came out even though there was made nearly no changes from CoD4 whatsoever. You also have to remember that Activision are total *****. I doubt they would like it if they changed the game completely and they wouldn't give the time to do that either.

Dont try and brush off my criticisms as something people do becuase its cool, has it ever occured to you that people do it because they actually feel something is wrong. They dont change as many as FM, becuase they dont make up to 800 changes , and if this is the best a 90 strong team can do when it comes to pushing a game further, with budget Activision has, then something is seriously fundamentaly wrong in there.

 

[Mads2506]

Dont try and brush off my criticisms as something people do becuase its cool, has it ever occured to you that people do it because they actually feel something is wrong. They dont change as many as FM, becuase they dont make up to 800 changes , and if this is the best a 90 strong team can do when it comes to pushing a game further, with budget Activision has, then something is seriously fundamentaly wrong in there.

Tell me what you would like to see of changes? Obviously graphics would be nice. If they change the gameplay completely it wouldn't be CoD anymore. I don't see what they're doing wrong compared to Dice with Battlefield 3. Battlefield 3 had an extremely lacklustre Alpha, they don't have a server browser on PC, it's not on Steam, their competitor Origin has some incredibly shady terms of service and to be quite honest, it looks like BFBC2, it does. And this is with 300 employees.

 

[Mike.]

Tell me what you would like to see of changes? Obviously graphics would be nice. If they change the gameplay completely it wouldn't be CoD anymore. I don't see what they're doing wrong compared to Dice with Battlefield 3. Battlefield 3 had an extremely lacklustre Alpha, they don't have a server browser on PC, it's not on Steam, their competitor Origin has some incredibly shady terms of service and to be quite honest, it looks like BFBC2, it does. And this is with 300 employees.

BF3 had actually tried to put a lot of work into to single player, and not treated it like an addon. Which is what COD does. I would like a single player that isnt such a short shamble of a story, while they churn out endless DLC's for yet more money. As i said a before if a team 90 top people cant deliver than in two years with resources they have, they either have something wrong with the their set up or its not in their interest. Which brings us back to the point on why people think its stagnated

 

[Mads2506]

BF3 had actually tried to put a lot of work into to single player, and not treated it like an addon. Which is what COD does. I would like a single player that isnt such a short shamble of a story, while they churn out endless DLC's for yet more money. As i said a before if a team 90 top people cant deliver than in two years with resources they have, they either have something wrong with the their set up or its not in their interest. Which brings us back to the point on why people think its stagnated

I don't know why epople suddently think it's stagnated when it has followed the same business model for every game since CoD4 (which was one of the most innovative "modern games" there are, how many other games have you seen utilize some of their ideas in an attempt to make their own games more successful?). Nothing has changed, I actually thought the single player in Black Ops was fairly decent and no one can know whether this one will be good or not. I don't buy CoD for single player anyway, and most people don't either.

 

[Mike.]

I don't know why epople suddently think it's stagnated when it has followed the same business model for every game since CoD4 (which was one of the most innovative "modern games" there are, how many other games have you seen utilize some of their ideas in an attempt to make their own games more successful?). Nothing has changed, I actually thought the single player in Black Ops was fairly decent and no one can know whether this one will be good or not. I don't buy CoD for single player anyway, and most people don't either.

If by following the same business model you actually mean, they've changed their business model to focus much more on the multiplayer, and just giving more of the same, while treating single player like an inconvienient add on. The point you keep missing that that they used to have a strong single player, and that has largely disappeared, hence why people say stagnation, people used to buy it for the single player, don't see why thats so hard to understand. The single player was decidedly poor in MW2, and so far it looks like more of the same. they don't push it because they have no financial incentive to, and i find that disappointing, which is why i will be giving this a wide berth

 

[playin'fm]

IMO i've enjoyed the singleplayer of every CoD,but the levels can't be replayed without getting bored.It's kind of like watching a movie for another time - you know what will happen.

 

[samloveitt]

Tell me what you would like to see of changes? Obviously graphics would be nice. If they change the gameplay completely it wouldn't be CoD anymore. I don't see what they're doing wrong compared to Dice with Battlefield 3. Battlefield 3 had an extremely lacklustre Alpha, they don't have a server browser on PC, it's not on Steam, their competitor Origin has some incredibly shady terms of service and to be quite honest, it looks like BFBC2, it does. And this is with 300 employees.

Firstly its an Alpha its not going to be the full game
2nd it looks amazing perhaps you were playing on low settings
3rd its better than "COD" in every way possible.

 

[Mads2506]

If by following the same business model you actually mean, they've changed their business model to focus much more on the multiplayer, and just giving more of the same, while treating single player like an inconvienient add on. The point you keep missing that that they used to have a strong single player, and that has largely disappeared, hence why people say stagnation, people used to buy it for the single player, don't see why thats so hard to understand. The single player was decidedly poor in MW2, and so far it looks like more of the same. they don't push it because they have no financial incentive to, and i find that disappointing, which is why i will be giving this a wide berth

Most of these people you claim to say the series is stagnating because the single player isn't what it used to have never actually played the first games in the series, like most people haven't. They've played Black Ops, CoD4 and MW2 like most people (which were all multiplayer oriented games). What you seemingly missed is that I said their business model is the same since CoD4, not earlier games. As said, most people complaining started playing the series with CoD4.

---------- Post added at 01:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:18 PM ----------

Firstly its an Alpha its not going to be the full game
2nd it looks amazing perhaps you were playing on low settings
3rd its better than "COD" in every way possible.

1. And yet, if MW3 had a lacklustre Alpha, they would have been lynched.

2. I never said it's graphics are bad. Where the **** are you taking this from?

3. Debatable.

 

[Mike.]

]Most of these people you claim to say the series is stagnating because the single player isn't what it used to have never actually played the first games in the series, like most people haven't. They've played Black Ops, CoD4 and MW2 like most people (which were all multiplayer oriented games).[/B] What you seemingly missed is that I said their business model is the same since CoD4, not earlier games. As said, most people complaining started playing the series with CoD4.

---------- Post added at 01:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:18 PM ----------



1. And yet, if MW3 had a lacklustre Alpha, they would have been lynched.

2. I never said it's graphics are bad. Where the **** are you taking this from?

3. Debatable.

Really, i would like how you can say that, when they openly say they have played the previous ones. Their new business model is exactly my gripe that has why it has stagnated since COD4. The fact that it hasnt changed since COD4 is the reason the single player has got worse over time. You keep side stepping my point, so i'll choose not to continue this line with you.

 

[Mike.]

IMO i've enjoyed the singleplayer of every CoD,but the levels can't be replayed without getting bored.It's kind of like watching a movie for another time - you know what will happen.

I would love it if they proved me wrong, but everything ive seen so far tells me the opposite

 

[Mads2506]

Really, i would like how you can say that, when they openly say they have played the previous ones. Their new business model is exactly my gripe that has why it has stagnated since COD4. The fact that it hasnt changed since COD4 is the reason the single player has got worse over time. You keep side stepping my point, so i'll choose not to continue this line with you.

I wasn't aware the first 3 games of the series had as many copies sold as the 4 latest...

 

[samloveitt]

1. And yet, if MW3 had a lacklustre Alpha, they would have been lynched

2. I never said it's graphics are bad. Where the **** are you taking this from?

3. Debatable.

1.MW3 dident have any beta at all.

2.You said it looked like bfbc2, which is good but bf3 is a million times better.

3.As is everything in life

Did you even play the beta it was no was lacklustre.

---------- Post added at 12:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:31 PM ----------

80% only buy cod so there friends think they will be cool so they follow the crowd.

 

[Mads2506]

1.MW3 dident have any beta at all.

2.You said it looked like bfbc2, which is good but bf3 is a million times better.

3.As is everything in life

Did you even play the beta it was no was lacklustre.

1. Again, learn to read.

2. It does look like BFBC2, it looks slightly better, yes, but that development happens in every game series.

3. Sure, but you seemed to disregard that by saying it's better in every way.

I did play the Alpha and yes, it was lacklustre. The map wasn't up to par with the maps I've come to expect from the series and I felt the battlelog system is a piece of garbage.

 

[Mike.]

I wasn't aware the first 3 games of the series had as many copies sold as the 4 latest...

Have you even bothered to read what i've been saying? Not that your point makes any sense whatsoever, since it doesn't take into account the new gamers who buy it who aren't complaining. I'm talking about those who have the played them over time, a few of them are actually on this thread, who feel that it has stagnated since COD4. The fact that there are more sales now does not mean that the people who are complaining didnt play the originals oO)

 

[Mads2506]

Have you even bothered to read what i've been saying? Not that your point makes any sense whatsoever, since it doesn't take into account the new gamers who buy it who aren't complaining. I'm talking about those who have the played them over time, a few of them are actually on this thread, who feel that it has stagnated since COD4

Yes I have. Your assumptions that it's only the people who played the first few games who are complaining is just simply not something you can know for sure. How in the world would you know that the bolded part is correct??

And I thought you weren't going to discuss this anymore?

 

[TJD07]

Most of these people you claim to say the series is stagnating because the single player isn't what it used to have never actually played the first games in the series, like most people haven't. They've played Black Ops, CoD4 and MW2 like most people (which were all multiplayer oriented games). What you seemingly missed is that I said their business model is the same since CoD4, not earlier games. As said, most people complaining started playing the series with CoD4.

THAT is the issue.

1. Build a game with decent MP
2. Ram in a half decent SP with lots of firefights and a random bit of sniping.
3. Release game
4. Pump out 4-5 DLC's that cost another £10 each
5. Ignore the fact that for the first 2-3 months the online servers are terrible (they have been for every CoD so far)
6. Roll around in all the money you just made.

Now they have this elite thing which you just know some little kids somwhere will be crying to their parents to get so they can be all special. They're just building a half decent MP game based completely of CoD4. The only thing that has changed in them all really is the Perks have got more broken and OP, the maps have changed and there are new killstreaks.