mickcenary said:Is there a reason why the logo in the main banners says: "WW3 (Warfare Warfare 3)"? Is this some in-gag that I'm just totally not in on?
World War 3.
mickcenary said:Is there a reason why the logo in the main banners says: "WW3 (Warfare Warfare 3)"? Is this some in-gag that I'm just totally not in on?
unomas said:Gears of War 3 (check)
Arkham City (check)
Modern Warfare 3 (not sure, but I've completed 4,5,6, and 7 on Veteran....)
Assassins Creed Revelations (I want it badly)
The question is do I pick up Modern Warfare 3 even though I barely played any mulitplayer in black ops and Modern Warfare 2? I just feel a little Call of Duty burnout, but the hype and excitement is getting to me a bit!
NullPointer said:Hail to the King baby.
If I'm looking for a linear super-scripted shooting gallery cranked up to 11 with perk based multiplayer there is only one place I look where that's a very, very good thing: Modern Warfare.
(QTEs still suck in any shooter though. Hopefully there are few if any in MW3.)
Been burned on blockbusters and pre-orders so I'll give it a week or two after release and check on impressions. With the brain drain to Infinity Ward I'm hoping this still retains the IW magic that World at War and Black Ops lacks. But the upgrades to Spec Ops and the thought of continuing the campaign are drawing me in.
Excellent OP too.
Fully disagree.DGRE said:Uhh...Black Ops is the best game in the series. Hands down.
DGRE said:Uhh...Black Ops is the best game in the series. Hands down.
CcrooK said:
dmg04 said:I don't get wtf the cards are for.
Matts Legacy said:Sent you a trade.
CcrooK said:Awesome. That completes my sets Thanks very much.
Victrix said:Played some Cod4 earlier for shits and giggles.
Shocking how well it holds up.
The maps are smaller, there's less viable builds and less 'stuff' overall, but the core gameplay is rock solid, 60fps is still great, hit detection is good, and it's just plain fun.
I don't think they've really revolutionized the formula at all, I'll be curious to see where they go after MW3. Even the team has to be suffering some burnout at this point, especially if they don't do something new.
Definitely makes me curious about seeing what Respawn has to offer, since EA must be backing them hardcore.
None of which makes me less excited for MW3, can't wait to run around on a ton of maps with a ton of guns
TestOfTide said:It worked as intended, and as a result, you didn't have the bullshit like in Black Ops, where the silenced ARs did equal damage per bullet at range as high 30-20 SMGs did within range.
It was deliberate. And the fact that no one was having trouble getting good scores with the AK-47 even with the Red Dot shows that it was a good decision. Without that nerf, the gun's low recoil and small sway would have meant those easy headshots (because the whole point of ARs was that could players could get consistent headshots with them) would completely negate any damage drop-off at range.
The entire point of the AK47 was that the gun was devasting within its 40 damage range, and its low rate of fire made it's recoil more easily manageable.
Are you really trying to argue that the assault rifles in MW2 didn't need nerfing? Do you think that IW put idle sway on the ARs in CoD4 by accident? It was deliberate because they found that the guns were otherwise overpowered. For example, they made the M4 Carbine have a slow, but large sway becasue it was a high RoF, low recoil gun (so much so infact that even with sway it was the easiest gun to get consistent headshots with at a distance.
But all those guns still were more popular than all the LMGs and non-UMP SMGs because they all had low recoil and no sway, leading to more headshots, especially if you used the reduced flash of the silencers.
All you have to do is look at what they did in CoD4 to see, for the most part, how to balance the ARs.
I'm saying that it probably was changed to a 30-20 (meaning you have to get the head for a one burst kill). The point of the gun is that it becomes exponentially better against players that aren't moving as much (such as campers) and even with the nerf that will hold true.
Sources for gun stats:
http://denkirson.xanga.com/632800688/call-of-duty-4/
http://denkirson.xanga.com/715966769/modern-warfare-2/
Freezie KO said:From the looks of the IGN video, they're really going for a CoD4 look to the maps.
Yeah, what's up with that? :|Radec said:I don't know about the 10th though.
I second this. The glitching and exploits just made MW2 unplayable for me.roosters93 said:COD4 > Blops > MW2
Only ones I've played.
In the stream did anyone mention if players who subscribe to Elite get to keep the DLC forever?Spinning Plates said:This stream on Twitch.tv is better quality than the youtube vid...
http://www.twitch.tv/ignlive/b/298922161
Yes, you own it forever. It was confirmed at the CoD XP keynote.Untracked said:In the stream did anyone mention if players who subscribe to Elite get to keep the DLC forever?
Or do you lose them when your subscription runs out?
By purchasing the Hardened Edition, am I just pre-renting DLC?
That sounds so fucking wrong, but do I actually own the map packs?? I'm guessing not?
vatstep said:Yes, you own it forever. It was confirmed at the CoD XP keynote.
_Alkaline_ said:CoD4's maps had a really quiet, desolate and abandoned feel to them. MW2 went with scale and novelty, something that Black Ops also went for (but to a lesser degree).
These look somewhere in between. I like.
dmg04 said:Fully disagree.
Radec said:
Hmmm, I thought it was confirmed at XP during the keynote...vatstep said:Yes, you own it forever. It was confirmed at the CoD XP keynote.
But now they don't seem so sure? I smell shenanigans.Kyoufu said:The IW/Sledgehammer guys on the IGN stream said "I doubt it".
roosters93 said:COD4 > Blops > MW2
Only ones I've played.