YouTube - Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Reveal Trailer
Printable View
OMG. OMG. OMG. I CAN'T BELIEVE IT. CALL OF DUTY MODERN WARFARE 3!!! IT'S COMING! WORLD WAR III! IT'S EPIC!!! WW3=MW3 HOLY SMURFIN **** BOIIIIIIIIIIIII
mite b cool
Ya keep milking this cow!! >.<
Luckely this cow is still healthy (for as long as it takes)
Ugh, another one? Hopefully it splits the fanbase even further and then people will stop making them.
I've gotta say, I'm disappointed that Activision seem determined to run Call of Duty in to the ground and to a bitter early death of the franchise like they did Guitar Hero games.
I am not however disappointed to see the idea of blasting your way around the world in a MW game, lets face it. Infinity Ward so far have had the mixture right for the action, smurf the story they're meant to be outlandish, if I wanted a realistic war sim...I'd just join the smurfing army and get a sun tan and some pay for going out to Afghanistan. This however looks suitably epic scaled for an outlandish storyline such as the idea of a modern day world war 3. Gotta face it, even if you don't like Call of Duty games on principle the idea that:
A Russian terrorist, supposedly dead tries to initiate nuclear war with America but is foiled by an SAS - Delta Force joint op and killed at the end at the cost of the lives of everyone in the SAS squad bar one member, the newest member Soap. But not before he manages to successfully use a nuclear device in a war-torn middle eastern country to kill over 3000 US Soldiers who are launching a massive operation within the city to capture or kill an extremist terrorist who has endangered the population and threatened nuclear hell to America.
An american Soldier is later sent undercover with a Russian terrorist organization led by Makarov, the apprentice and some say, successor of the Russian behind the plot in the first game. He's sent by Taskforce 141, a force organized after the events of the first game intended to be the elite of the elite the best troops America and Britain can provide with the purpose of preventing an increasingly hostile Russia from commencing world war 3 and dealing with the greatest threats to global security. Led by General Shepherd of the US Military who lost over 3000 troops in a nuclear bomb blast and Soap the sole survivor of the British SAS squad responsible for the death of Zachaev the terrorist behind the attack. The terrorists figure out the guy is a spy and so commit a terrorist atrocity at an airport and leave the corpse of the American agent for the authorities to find, the Russian people assuming the team who committed the atrocity demand vengeance and so their government declares war (which if you look at it, is not so far fetched, it's what happened after 9/11) on America. Meanwhile Taskforce 141 is trying to bring an end to it by finding Makarov. Eventually they storm a Russian Gulag (political prison) and find that the top secret prisoner that Makarov badly wanted to get his hands on is in fact Captn Price, Soap's former squad commander presumed dead. Price launches an EMP attack on DC to save the city though at great cost to both American and Russian forces. Shepherd tries to kill the Taskforce 141 members because he wants revenge for the death of over 3000 of his troops on the Russians and this is the greatest sign up and excuse he has. However Soap and co must be silenced to hide the truth about the attacks on the USA by Russia and the terrorist plots. Shepherd half succeedes and so the surviving members of the taskforce 141 are out numbered and wanted terrorists. Actually gaining information from Makarov they track down Shepherd but they have to let Makarov escape to do so. At the end of the game the two, one half beaten to death the other suffering from a major stab wound to the chest escape with help from a Russian contact of theirs. Shepherd lies dead and they upload the information to the web (or so it seems)
Now it looks as if Makarov takes the escalation of violence between Russia and the world Global and actually causes WW3 whether it's his desired intentions or not.
Gotta give the above some credit, it sounds pretty smurfing awesome if a little outlandish. The top of the line technological weapons makes it even a little scary because if global conflict erupted today, it would probably be a little like this providing the worlds governments didn't go with the "we nuke you, you nuke us we all fall down" option.
I'm kinda looking forwards to this though I will equally be looking to try and play Battlefield 3. I like Call of Duty especially the MW games because of the fact that it's not trying to do historical like ww2 or sci-fi like halo if I want sci-fi I will play halo or mass effect because they're better than most other things. I like the modern day weaponry involved.
I only really play COD games for its online multiplayer, and MW2 was atrocious in that aspect - full of campers and spam weapons/perks/attachments. Lets hope they clean that up for this game.
Every shooter is full of campers, the easiest way of getting a positive K/D is to sit still in one area which is passed through frequently in a hard to hit area. It's also the best place to expect a fight because one team will hold it, the opposition team will try to take it and then there's the take back ect. Rocket Edge, your post complaining bout campers is a bit of a really valid point and i'm impressed by your thinking. argument. I played Black Ops tonight and guess what, faced teams of campers..I play Halo Reach and guess what? Campers, I play Halo 3 and even in Red Dead Redemption, guess what? Campers. Controlling areas = camping and just because when you do it you call it "monitoring" doesn't make it anything less like camping. I will say however, we're all guilty of this though generally speaking I will try to rotate through the key areas on different lives rather than each respawn doing the exact same thing.
In terms of spammy attachments I am guessing you mean "noob tubing" or as it should be properly named: Grenade Launcher attachment. Yes these are overpowered and the scavenger perk allowing someone to collect an extra grenade for it each time they "scavenge" for ammo is perhaps a little much. If they could randomize the scavenge perk so it actually feels more like scavenging. for example:
Player is equipped with:
Primary: M-44 assault rifle, grenade launcher and holographic sight.
Secondary: Beretta M9, FMJ
Perks: Scavenger, Bling, Ninja.
Player collects Scavenger Bag A gets 30 assault rifle ammo, 5 pistol ammo.
Player collects Scavenger Bag B and gets 1 grenade launcher round 5 assault rifle ammo
Player collects Scavenger Bag C and gets 10 pistol ammo, 1 special grenade.
That'd be more balanced and would massively improve the flow of gameplay meaning those with the grenade launcher attachment would not pick up ammo constantly just by selecting scavenger. As it is, Scavenger is the single most powerful perk in that section, especially for those who wish to rack up large kill counts but not rely upon the conservation of ammo or the use of their victims guns. Occassionally they'd grab a grenade launcher round and that could give that person a guaranteed kill but it'd not be grenade launcher spam that you tend to see in Modern Warfare 2 right now.
Or people could go play Halo instead. :)
I gonna say it! Another Call of Duty? Whatsmurfingever!
I saw an ad for it on Aus Tv.
Games are never advertised on Aus Tv unless they are :bou::bou::bou::bou: kiddy movie tie-ins or something.
I hate that CoD is getting this attention when it's nothing amazing. I played MW2 and had fun but it still doesn't live up to any measure of hype for me. MW3 will probably be the same so I cba to spend any money on it.
The Call Of Duty games are like Michael Bay movies. Lot's of nice visuals & explosions & not much else. How long has it been since Black Ops came out? 6 months maybe? I've played every Call Of Duty since the original (thank god I didn't buy them) & not an awful lot has change! The rebuttal I normally to this is "but the multiplayer is great" but I was playing Black Ops multiplayer with a mate a few weeks ago & failed to see enough differences between it & even the multiplayer from the original COD, apart from 1 is WW2 & the other 1 is Cold War era, to make me want to shell out for a new game.
Then we get to my other gripe with the series, the price. The average new release game costs between 45-50 euros here but COD titles always cost somewhere between 55-62 euros! Excuse me Activision but another 6 hours of campaign & slightly updated multiplayer is not worth that price when there seems to be a new COD game announced at every other games convention!
Wtf do you live? I can't see any justification for any game costing more than another new game (assuming we're talking about full games).Quote:
Originally Posted by Shattered Dreamer
The CoD games drop in price about as fast as a mario game too. See: Never.
Who cares? Battlefield 3 will be better anyway.
God. I seriously hate shooters, CoD in particular.
Can't wait to not play this.
agreed with laddy :P
i dont like these 'standart war-games' either :o
Ireland. I don't think they can justify games costs their normal price let alone what CoD games seem too.Quote:
Originally Posted by NecronChaosGarland
Almost true, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and Call of Duty 5: World At War have recently dropped in price in the UK, I'll point out that we're currently in a thread about Call of Duty 8.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Cloud
In the UK some new releases are at £29.99 most are at £34.99 (pc) and £39.99 (console based) Almost always major titles will retail at £44.99 on consoles. Call of Duty games will often sell for £44.99 for several years after release never getting reduced.Quote:
Originally Posted by NecronChaosGarlandWtf do you live? I can't see any justification for any game costing more than another new game (assuming we're talking about full games).Quote:
Originally Posted by Shattered Dreamer
That is truly retarded.
It's the same over here, better/bigger releases cost more money. I don't think it's retarded at all, if Hello Kitty Island Adventure was retailing at the same price as God of War 3 then that would be retarded. Although all games do cost about 30 dollars too much in Australia, so who gives a smurf anyway.
^ Yeah, but it's just based on what the standard of inflation is in your country. It costs a lot to live in Ireland, so the games would cost more than in other countries.
@Iceglow: I agree about the Scavenger perk. It's overused, although I never used it. The reason I hated MW2 was because of things like grenade spam, much like you said. But it's the way the game was geared. Anyone could use a grenade launcher w/ danger close & rape. Commando was a joke too; Literally stabbing people from across the other side of a room does not evoke the expectation of reality. There is other perks, but I haven't played the game in so long that I don't really remember the others, however annoying they were.
Secondly, the killstreaks. It motivated players to camp. Bring in a harrier airstrike, then wait for your 11 killstreak for Chopper Gunner. It made the game completely imbalanced, especially in objective games. You were either destroying or getting destroyed.
Lastly, & most importantly, the maps were beyond :bou::bou::bou::bou:. I can only recall that airport map being decent. Every map was full of little window boxes & balconies to set up a tent & camp for the entire game - Karachi as an obvious example. It just wasn't my idea of fun. Maybe that's why I enjoyed World at War so much. A lot of criticism went toward the overuse of the MP40 in that game but at least people ran about the place. It's also the reason why I enjoy playing BO's online too - the maps are in general great. Anyway yeah, I just thought the game was dire in probably every aspect. Secondary weapons, completely forgot about them. Having a shotgun as a secondary weapon? Do you want me to camp anymore than I am? smurfoff. I need to stop, this game makes me mad. :(
I think it's interesting how many complaints about MW3 and its camp-friendly design were directly implemented into Black Ops. Like keeping Secondary Weapons to pistols, launchers, and a crossbow(w/ 2 bolts) and a ballistic knife. Also, the fact that killstreaks don't count towards other killstreaks. But especially contracts. When you have 40 minutes to get 75 kills with a weapon, you're not gonna wait for them to come to you, you're gonna throw a killer attachment on it and get out there. Even the grenade launcher was tuned down appropriately, I hardly ever see anyone using one.
So I'd like to see how MW3 reacts to Black Ops. The only complaint I honestly have about the game is that it's not at the full 60 frames per second on PS3. Other than that it was a perfect, accessible shooter.
^ I very much agree. Possibly the biggest complement I could pay to BO's is that it's designed to keep camping to a minimum.
I've always had good things to say about COD despite all the hate that is thrown towards it but Ill admit that MW3 seems like one game too many in this series. It just seems all to familiar at this point. Heres hoping this is the last one so the quite obviously talented group of people at Infinity Ward can go and do something else.
Pretty sure a fair number of them already left to go do something else. Although I certainly believe that the franchise is starting to fatigue and could use at least a two year hiatus so that people can really get excited and be blown away again, I'll still be interested in seeing how things go with MW3 if only to see what happened in the fallout of the whole Infinity Ward debacle last year. Whether or not they still have a good game in them after all of that (even just from the stress of something like that alone) is still up in the air.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
Why are you shouting in your topic? It's just a game :(.
Also, it's "warfare".
Also, I'm not really excited about it.
I'm super excited about this one because it's my dream war. I've always dreamed of starting this war and taking part in it. I hope the story does the other two justice, I liked them.
