Modern Warfare 2 New Trailer

clonedgamer

Just found this trailer up in HD with InGame Screen Shots looks pretty amazing! Whats everyones thoughts about the game?

http://www.gmrfm.com/lee/2009/5/25/new-modern-warfare-2-trailer-and-exclusive-screens.html#entry4076941

Onearmedbandit

Holy sh*t that looks great

cant wait

CiaranC

clonedgamer wrote: »

Just found this trailer up in HD with InGame Screen Shots looks pretty amazing! Whats everyones thoughts about the game?

http://www.gmrfm.com/lee/2009/5/25/new-modern-warfare-2-trailer-and-exclusive-screens.html#entry4076941

meh

Liber8or

Indeed it does look very good, but the Single-Player campaign is, supposedly, only an estimated 9-10 hours long and features no coop at all.

This, for me, detracts from my anticipation of a game that came from a series boasting an unrivalled single player experience. I know Modern Warfare has come to fruition through the premise of establishing ground-breaking multiplayer, but I have always felt multiplayer was the added bonus and singleplayer was the main feature. I want to buy this, but I would rather not pay 50/60 euro for a game that, who's enjoyment, will be based on a steady ping and other people playing as well.

Give us a well thought out and developed single player experience Infinity Ward. If you want to make multiplayer games, then follow DICE's example with the Battlefield series.

tat dam sexy

its gonna be class... but WaW new map pack is gonna be awsum... cant wait to get it

Twilightning

Liber8or wrote: »

Indeed it does look very good, but the Single-Player campaign is, supposedly, only an estimated 9-10 hours long and features no coop at all.

This, for me, detracts from my anticipation of a game that came from a series boasting an unrivalled single player experience. I know Modern Warfare has come to fruition through the premise of establishing ground-breaking multiplayer, but I have always felt multiplayer was the added bonus and singleplayer was the main feature. I want to buy this, but I would rather not pay 50/60 euro for a game that, who's enjoyment, will be based on a steady ping and other people playing as well.

Give us a well thought out and developed single player experience Infinity Ward. If you want to make multiplayer games, then follow DICE's example with the Battlefield series.

I lol'd. Welcome to the Seventh Generation of video games, my friend.

smooch71

Liber8or wrote: »

Indeed it does look very good, but the Single-Player campaign is, supposedly, only an estimated 9-10 hours long and features no coop at all.

This, for me, detracts from my anticipation of a game that came from a series boasting an unrivalled single player experience. I know Modern Warfare has come to fruition through the premise of establishing ground-breaking multiplayer, but I have always felt multiplayer was the added bonus and singleplayer was the main feature. I want to buy this, but I would rather not pay 50/60 euro for a game that, who's enjoyment, will be based on a steady ping and other people playing as well.

Give us a well thought out and developed single player experience Infinity Ward. If you want to make multiplayer games, then follow DICE's example with the Battlefield series.

You haven't even played the game yet and you're writing it off.

The majority of single player campaigns are around that length.

In COD4, Infinity Ward has given us the most "well thought out and developed single player experience" for years. Why are you so sure that they won't be able to repeat that?

I'm confident that this game will rival or even better COD4. In respect of multiplayer and single player.

BlitzKrieg

This, for me, detracts from my anticipation of a game that came from a series boasting an unrivalled single player experience. I know Modern Warfare has come to fruition through the premise of establishing ground-breaking multiplayer, but I have always felt multiplayer was the added bonus and singleplayer was the main feature. I want to buy this, but I would rather not pay 50/60 euro for a game that, who's enjoyment, will be based on a steady ping and other people playing as well.

you seem to be the opposite spectrum of the the general consensus, games are more likely to be severly criticized for being released without a multiplayer element, especially a first person shooter where it is almost mandatory to have some form of multiplayer at a minimum.

Also Dice have strayed away from their online only for full games with the bad company series and are releasing multiplayer only games via downloadable content.

which is not a bad idea personnally, and I love wake island so intend to get 1943, even if we can no longer pilot the aircraft carrier.

dazftw

There was like barley any proper gameplay in that.. :mad: Still looks good though :pac:

imagine it just wasnt 1st person haha

silvine

It looks epic particularly the bit at the end where the player is pulled up from the castle into the helicopter.

T-b0n3

Yea thats a very good trailer. Looking forward to the game.

calex71

No interest in multiplayer myself, but did enjoy the 1st one for what it was as a single player game. This looks to be as interesting.

clonedgamer

this is going to be epic i dont mind if its 6-7 hours single player the story lines are always fantastic

speedboatchase

Liber8or wrote: »

Indeed it does look very good, but the Single-Player campaign is, supposedly, only an estimated 9-10 hours long and features no coop at all.

This, for me, detracts from my anticipation of a game that came from a series boasting an unrivalled single player experience. I know Modern Warfare has come to fruition through the premise of establishing ground-breaking multiplayer, but I have always felt multiplayer was the added bonus and singleplayer was the main feature. I want to buy this, but I would rather not pay 50/60 euro for a game that, who's enjoyment, will be based on a steady ping and other people playing as well.

9-10 hours would be double the single player of the first game, can't really see the problem, no point in shoehorning co-op in unless it's absolutely necessary. FPS's these days rely moreso on the multiplayer anywayand COD4 is unaminously the busiest FPS console online experience so I wouldn't worry about the ping or having to find players

NiSmO

This post has been deleted.

FreeOSCAR

NiSmO wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hopefully not.

IMO The reason MW1's multiplayer was so good was because there was no vehicles at all in it.

humanji

I'm kind of with Liber8or here in that I've a sinking suspicion that they focused on the multi-player and the single-player will be an after though. Hopefully I'll be proven wrong.

Moiph

Mother of divine sweet mary that looks absolutely deadly

Single Malt

9-10 hours of singleplayer is more than enough, provided that is 9-10 hours of quality gaming. I have played games that last many more hours, but they do get boring and repetitive.

Liber8or

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear.

When Modern Warfare 1 became a massive hit, it was the multiplayer aspect that appealed to everyone. Ask anyone playing it now, they regard it as one of the best, if not the best, online shooters available right now.

So Infinity Ward have recognised this and adapted to appeal to those who will buy their future games.

They break-away from the Call of Duty name, they establish Modern Warfare as their title, they say the Single Campaign will be reduced to around 9-10 hours and are not going to employ a Coop feature. They are transforming what was Call of Duty 4, into Call of Duty "Multiplayer"...with a single player experience.

I have nothing against Multiplayer games, I think they are fantastic. I am a big fan of Gears 2 online, but I really loved the Single Player experience in Call of Duty 4. Unfortunately, this trailer just shouts "Big, massive, filmesque scenes to whet your appetitie" before playing online in "The most awesome multiplayer game ever".

If Infinity Ward have been established as designers of great multiplayer games, why not maintain focus on that and make the multiplayer even better for the fan base who will buy it for those reasons? They are out to make money afterall.

I guarantee we will start to see advertising campaigns that will highlight the multiplayer aspect more so than the single player one. Heck, I bet IW will have an E3 booth open to play the multiplayer come June 1st.

I am not slamming the game as a complete failure, as I am sure it will be a brilliant online shooter. But, I wanted a Single Player gamer with the option to play Multiplayer, not the other way round, by the looks of things.

AdMMM

this trailer just shouts "Big, massive, filmesque scenes to whet your appetitie" before playing online in "The most awesome multiplayer game ever".

I like things whetting my appetite.
I like awesome games.

I'm sold.

Twilightning

Liber8or wrote: »

They break-away from the Call of Duty name, they establish Modern Warfare as their title, they say the Single Campaign will be reduced to around 9-10 hours and are not going to employ a Coop feature. They are transforming what was Call of Duty 4, into Call of Duty "Multiplayer"...with a single player experience.

I don't know where you're gathering that information from, but Infinity Ward didn't market CoD4 as the definitive single player game you make it out to be. It was mediocre as far as single player games go. The storyline's been done a million times before; (Insert Western country here) has to stop the terrorists from (Insert Eastern-bloc country here) from launching a nuclear weapon. Stop them at all costs.

I admit there were a few key moments that held my attention in the single player, like the Chernobyl sniper mission and Mile High Club, but other than that, it was just one pointless drudge from one checkpoint to the next. The fact that enemies endlessly respawned at alot of points throughout the game didn't help matters either, especially on veteran difficulty. While we're on that topic; veteran difficulty, while challenging enough, pulled out every stop necessary to raise my blood pressure at every opportunity. It was just ridiculous.

Liber8or wrote: »

I have nothing against Multiplayer games, I think they are fantastic. I am a big fan of Gears 2 online, but I really loved the Single Player experience in Call of Duty 4. Unfortunately, this trailer just shouts "Big, massive, filmesque scenes to whet your appetitie" before playing online in "The most awesome multiplayer game ever".

Well the fact that Infinity Ward have already revealed to us the approxomite length of the single player campaign, I don't see any reason to bash the trailer really. The only expectations being set here are the ones you set yourself. I think everyone and their granny knows that the vocal point of this game is going to be the multiplayer, and I haven't a single problem with that.

Liber8or wrote: »

If Infinity Ward have been established as designers of great multiplayer games, why not maintain focus on that and make the multiplayer even better for the fan base who will buy it for those reasons? They are out to make money afterall.

As a company, it goes without saying that they're out to make money, but there's just as big a market out there for single player games than there ever was, which probably obligates them to include a campaign portion to the game. However, the fans of the multiplayer far outweigh the fans of the campaign, so they're not using up any more time than necessary to include the single player aspect. I'd rather they made a relatively short single player campaign and an outstanding multiplayer aspect, instead of adding another 6 months of development time to the game itself just because you wanted another 3 hours of gametime in single player.

Liber8or wrote: »

I guarantee we will start to see advertising campaigns that will highlight the multiplayer aspect more so than the single player one. Heck, I bet IW will have an E3 booth open to play the multiplayer come June 1st.

I fail to see what's wrong with marketing the aspect of the game 95% of people are going to be buying it for.

Liber8or wrote: »

I am not slamming the game as a complete failure, as I am sure it will be a brilliant online shooter. But, I wanted a Single Player gamer with the option to play Multiplayer, not the other way round, by the looks of things.

Then Modern Warfare 2 isn't really what you're looking for. There are, however, many other games out there that cater to your interests. Consider playing them instead. The rest of us, however, are just gonna sit back and enjoy the ride.

LD 50

NiSmO wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I think it was a snowmobile

keen

Looking forward to this, looks excellent.

I get more replay value out of online play then single so I'm hoping multiplayer is as good/better the COD4.

This and the new Flashpoint will keep me busy once released.

spooky donkey

You know I think multi player will be more of the same and all the improvments will be in single player. COD4 was exelent in single player and i think COD6 could just beat it. still COOP would have been nice thats the way for ward for these kinds game me thinks.

helimachoptor

I dont have COD4 but have WaW which I really enjoyed both the single player and multi player parts.

But the amount of time I have spent on XBL is unreal, as with all games I will play the single player first once thats complete I will move to the MP and spend many many hours on it

Trailer looks great.

RafoLordOfWars

Vetern cheevo No.5 ready and waiting!!!! Hyped for this game.:)

helimachoptor

The first screenshot looks like its from a scene in "The Rock" where the Seals come up from the sewer but the rebels hold the high ground.

Rev. Kitchen

All i want is COD 4 only all new and shiney and ill be happy.

No vehicles for me i think it ruins a game

RafoLordOfWars

Rev. Kitchen wrote: »

All i want is COD 4 only all new and shiney and ill be happy.

No vehicles for me i think it ruins a game

+1 for me!!!! The vehicles realy break up the flow of the game me thinks!!

clonedgamer

Glad everyone likes my find ill try to keep everyone updated! =P

RafoLordOfWars

A little breakdown thanks to GT.


http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gt-pop-block-modern-warfare/49766

Undead

FreeOSCAR wrote: »

Hopefully not.

IMO The reason MW1's multiplayer was so good was because there was no vehicles at all in it.

Nah it needs vehicles. defo.

FreeOSCAR

Undead wrote: »

Nah it needs vehicles. defo.

Defo doesnt. It wont sell 13 million copies and have a metacritic score of 94% again if it includes vehicles in Multiplayer. And you can quote me on that.

The good thing about IW is that they have gameplay balance down to a tee, another good thing is that they are not Treyarch.

For those looking to steer/fly/drive/handle tanks, helipcopters, planes, jeeps, segways, popemobiles, kites, blimps, limos and most importantly Bandwagons......Bad Company 2 will be out this Xmas aswell for you to enjoy

RafoLordOfWars

ha ha popemobiles!!!! yad be pritty safe in one of those's.:D


Yea keep the drivin for Bad Company 2, leave the run'n'gun for MW2!!!

Also I would love one of these as a perk:D:D:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhDPoVm74To

Undead

FreeOSCAR wrote: »

Defo doesnt. It wont sell 13 million copies and have a metacritic score of 94% again if it includes vehicles in Multiplayer. And you can quote me on that.

The good thing about IW is that they have gameplay balance down to a tee, another good thing is that they are not Treyarch.

For those looking to steer/fly/drive/handle tanks, helipcopters, planes, jeeps, segways, popemobiles, kites, blimps, limos and most importantly Bandwagons......Bad Company 2 will be out this Xmas aswell for you to enjoy

You have to actually be like...important..or for people to care what you think, in order for people to quote you :rolleyes:

Anyways nah i think it could use a small touch of vehicles,not jets, boats or tanks etc. just small vehicles,jeeps, bikes, emmm, snowmobiles!

A small handfull of maps with vehicles, majority of maps without.

Sorted:)

CiaranC

Undead wrote: »

You have to actually be like...important..or for people to care what you think, in order for people to quote you :rolleyes:

Anyways nah i think it could use a small touch of vehicles,not jets, boats or tanks etc. just small vehicles,jeeps, bikes, emmm, snowmobiles!

A small handfull of maps with vehicles, majority of maps without.

Sorted:)

The maps are tiny in COD4, if they are the same size theres no need for jeeps etc.

BlitzKrieg

Undead wrote: »

You have to actually be like...important..or for people to care what you think, in order for people to quote you :rolleyes:

Anyways nah i think it could use a small touch of vehicles,not jets, boats or tanks etc. just small vehicles,jeeps, bikes, emmm, snowmobiles!

A small handfull of maps with vehicles, majority of maps without.

Sorted:)

The issue there is that in game balancing, especially multiplayer, vehicles, even basic support ones like jeeps tend to throw spanners in map design and gameplay and rarely work the way the developers intended

unless

The developers work from the get go with vehicle intergration as a core gameplay mechanic full stop and even then other aspects run the risk of being under appreciated or developed.

Look at the obvious examples

Talk to anyone about the original BF1942 and they will tell you that vehicles dominated the game, if you were not in a tank or a plane then you were not very usefull at all. Dice spent the next 3 games in the series fleshing out the infantry roles more and more until it finally has reached some level that a player on foot is not overshadowed by a vehicle.

Thats a game that started off with the notion as vehicles as a central premise and the infantry gameplay suffered greatly for numerous iterations until they got the balance right.

In contrast I do not need to bring up Counter Strikes little foray do I? Single handidly wiped out CS-Siege as the most popular map because they thought it needed vehicles. Only the APC got abused and kept getting used to block passages and doorways as it would consistently glitch. The vehicles never got used for what they were designed for, and they added nothing substantial to the gameplay.

Its no surprise that source cut them out completely.

Halo still suffers vehicle abuse in its online gameplay and thats after 3 games rebalancing infantry/vehicle roles.

To balance in vehicles in anygame requires a complete rebalance of all the other aspects of the gameplay, even small ones like jeeps or snowmobiles.

The counter strike example is very poignent because that was a game that was popular for the same reasons as COD4, very tight run and gun gameplay, when vehicles were introduced in the manner you have described, only transport in a few maps, the community's response was to shun those maps that had vehicles added. Cs-Siege went from being the de facto counter strike map to being cut from all maplists and pretty much forgotten. If vehicles do not meld with the gameplay already established the same will happen in MW2, they will veto all vehicle maps and all that extra work will be for nothing and when a MW3 comes around you will most likely find the vehicle maps will be all cut from the game.

Its very difficult to implement vehicles and when you do its very much an all or nothing strategy.

The only game series I can think of that has vehicles but they also have a strong infantry only aspect is probably the Unreal Tournament series and that has only been a recent development and is still a rocky road they are on.

Keith186

Caught this trailer a couple days ago, it look awesome. Hope it lives up to it.

Soby

Vehicles in Single Player -Yes
Multiplayer- Noooooooooooooo..Look at WAw..Tanks ruin it

SuprSi

That trailer looks far too high-def for an Xbox - I reckon that's the PC demo. Still looks good though.

jabbathehurt

Check out this cheeky kill on COD5! :pac:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YqIbDn1NW0



*sorry if ets already ben dunne!

Undead

jabbathehurt wrote: »

Check out this cheeky kill on COD5! :pac:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YqIbDn1NW0



*sorry if ets already ben dunne!

Jesus!

I had to mail that guy on Live..like..how are you that sh*t lol

Single Malt

SuprSi wrote: »

That trailer looks far too high-def for an Xbox - I reckon that's the PC demo. Still looks good though.

Its neither. Its in engine cutscene footage. Pc xbox ps3 will all feature that, except texture resolutions will differ. The trailer shows no actual gameplay, ie the first person view and hud.