[CoD MW3] General News and Discussion

Snake Plisken

SO who's entering a clan into the competative matches? I've got a select set of friends who are going to give it a go for the crack

CptMackey

Snake Plisken wrote: »

SO who's entering a clan into the competative matches? I've got a select set of friends who are going to give it a go for the crack

If I could get my lot motivated and get em to turn on their headsets then I'd have a go

Doge

Thomasheen wrote: »

It's launch trailer time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xjCdN_rWCE

240p We Meet again.

Wait...

THAT'S 720p ????!!!!!


Oh COD,

how you have fallen so far behind!

Leeg17

waveform wrote: »

240p We Meet again.

Wait...

THAT'S 720p ????!!!!!

That's playing in standard 360p, is it not?

Doge

Leeg17 wrote: »

That's playing in standard 360p, is it not?

I watched it on youtube in 720p fullscreen, I was just a little unimpressed with the graphics especially when comparing it to BF3.

Then again, since the engine hasn't probably changed in anyway since MW2, I shouldn't have expected much.

Leeg17

If it ain't broken, don't fix it... that's my motto

Also, comparing two very different games so closely both of which I'll buy/play and will be very good in their own ways, is pretty pointless IMO.

Edit - To add, Bf3 discussion is welcome here, as long as it doesn't descend into a CoD/BF bashing thread.

iMuse

waveform wrote: »

I watched it on youtube in 720p fullscreen, I was just a little unimpressed with the graphics especially when comparing it to BF3.

Then again, since the engine hasn't probably changed in anyway since MW2, I shouldn't have expected much.

Its a trade off, It runs at double the framerate of battlefield on consoles and doesnt need installs of texture packs to look decent.

Thomasheen

waveform wrote: »

I watched it on youtube in 720p fullscreen, I was just a little unimpressed with the graphics especially when comparing it to BF3.

Then again, since the engine hasn't probably changed in anyway since MW2, I shouldn't have expected much.

To be honest I think MW3 looks better on the console than BF3 does on consoles. Obviously BF3 on PC is miles ahead

Doge

Leeg17 wrote: »

If it ain't broken, don't fix it... that's my motto

Also, comparing two very different games both of which I'll buy/play and will be very good in their own ways, is pretty pointless IMO.

A comparison isn't pointless when you make a complaint about the graphics imo.

The engine badly needs to be updated, they're flogging a dead horse at this stage.

I've played all the CODs since the very first game came out, as you may very well have yourself.

I'd actually rather play one of the early CODs rather than Battlefield 2, so I'm by no means a BF fanboy.

I am just sick of playing the same engine at this stage, the cartoony graphics, and especially the feel of the game, they really need to do something innovative for MW4,
otherwise most people should definitely be tired of their releases at that stage.

In a visual sense it still does look epic though, the scenery / setting is great.

Imagine a Frostbite engine game with the same plot and setting, now that would amazing!

Mr. Rager

waveform wrote: »

A comparison isn't pointless when you make a complaint about the graphics imo.

The engine badly needs to be updated, they're flogging a dead horse at this stage.

I've played all the CODs since the very first game came out, as you may very well have yourself.

I'd actually rather play one of the early CODs rather than Battlefield 2, so I'm by no means a BF fanboy.

I am just sick of playing the same engine at this stage, the cartoony graphics, and especially the feel of the game, they really need to do something innovative for MW4,
otherwise most people should definitely be tired of their releases at that stage.

In a visual sense it still does look epic though, the scenery / setting is great.

Imagine a DICE engine game with the same plot and setting, now that would amazing!

The graphics look great, maybe not BF3esqe, but this is, at the end of the day, a console-made game. BF3's footage so far has all been from high end PCs, IIRC.

TBH MW3 will probably outshine BF3 on the console graphics wise. I'll be getting both though

sierra117x

waveform wrote: »

I watched it on youtube in 720p fullscreen, I was just a little unimpressed with the graphics especially when comparing it to BF3.

Then again, since the engine hasn't probably changed in anyway since MW2, I shouldn't have expected much.

dont get mixed up between console and pc versions though because console is hardly miles ahead

Doge

So basically the footage in that launch trailer would have been rendered for the console version?

Are ye positive on that?

I admit I did assume it would have been rendered from the PC version, as I expected they would try and show off the game as best they can.

iMuse

waveform wrote: »

So basically the footage in that launch trailer would have been rendered for the console version?

Are ye positive on that?

I admit I did assume it would have been rendered from the PC version, as I expected they would try and show off the game as best they can.

Tbh I don't think there is much of a visual improvement from console to PC in regards to COD, Its a console game ported to PC. Whereas BF3 is built for PC so looks a ton better than on consoles

hypermuse

I really dont understand how you can compare graphics for 2 games, one of which is made and designed for a PC and one for a console...

Seriously?? How can or does MW3 look as good as BF3 when its just a port from a console made game!

BF3 looks amazing! visually stunning!! MW2/3 is nowhere near as good!! (going by trailers only obviously)


As for gameplay.. its just as silly as to try compared them when one is completely tactical orientated (BF3) and the other a more fast paced arcade still game!!

Just coz they are both FPS games doesnt mean you need to compare them!

Both games will be brilliant and both will be amazing but for completely different reasons!!

ugglasdav

hypermuse wrote: »

I really dont understand how you can compare graphics for 2 games, one of which is made and designed for a PC and one for a console...

Seriously?? How can or does MW3 look as good as BF3 when its just a port from a console made game!

BF3 looks amazing! visually stunning!! MW2/3 is nowhere near as good!! (going by trailers only obviously)


As for gameplay.. its just as silly as to try compared them when one is completely tactical orientated (BF3) and the other a more fast paced arcade still game!!

Just coz they are both FPS games doesnt mean you need to compare them!

Both games will be brilliant and both will be amazing but for completely different reasons!!

you mean BF3 looks nowhere as good as mw3? , bf3 runs nowhere near as smooth and has blocky gameplay. as for realism, bf3 looks like a cartoon from the 1980's while mw3 looks as real as you can get. im sure if you even showed a person who doesnt even play xbox or ps3 they would think in some cases that mw2/mw3 looks almost real

hypermuse

ugglasdav wrote: »

you mean BF3 looks nowhere as good as mw3? , bf3 runs nowhere near as smooth and has blocky gameplay. as for realism, bf3 looks like a cartoon from the 1980's while mw3 looks as real as you can get. im sure if you even showed a person who doesnt even play xbox or ps3 they would think in some cases that mw2/mw3 looks almost real

Personally I don't think so.. just opinion really!! If you look at BF3 on ultra settings its spectacular..

Granted its not as smooth as it runs at 30 frames/sec whereas MW2/3 run at 60 frames/sec (think that's right)..
but that's not what I said in my previous post.. graphics are better in BF3, but MW runs smoother! imo

Tallon

I don't understand why Sooo many people are obsessed with Graphics these days... The games should have longevity, not 1080p fúcking soil!

hypermuse

Tallon wrote: »

I don't understand why Sooo many people are obsessed with Graphics these days... The games should have longevity, not 1080p fúcking soil!

+1
true that!! pac-man is still legendary!!

would be much happier playing a game with **** graphics that has hundreds of hours of fantastic gameplay than a game that looks spectacular but has crap gameplay!

This content has been removed.

docdolittle

AGB_Ghost wrote: »

^ these are the graphics of Metal Gear Solid 1, possibly my most favourite game of all time, this game had more pixels than a 1000 hour drawing of Paris in MS Paint but even to this day this game still reigns as one of the best of all time, graphics doesn't make a game, story, gameplay and fun does.

It looks like voldemort is in the background :P

Still have that game beside me here :P

hypermuse

AGB_Ghost wrote: »

^ these are the graphics of Metal Gear Solid 1, possibly my most favourite game of all time, this game had more pixels than a 1000 hour drawing of Paris in MS Paint but even to this day this game still reigns as one of the best of all time, graphics doesn't make a game, story, gameplay and fun does.

defo one of my favourite games! remember my mam letting me rent it as a kid for one night and i literally spent the whole time from when I got home to when it had to go back!!

VampiricPadraig

Dunno why this is bothering me, but I don't know if I should get the Steam version of MW3 or get it on Xbox 360.

I know that both games are going to be €60 either way, but...i don't know guys. Help me out here lol

Headshot

VampiricPadraig wrote: »

Dunno why this is bothering me, but I don't know if I should get the Steam version of MW3 or get it on Xbox 360.

I know that both games are going to be €60 either way, but...i don't know guys. Help me out here lol

pc dedicated servers, consoles lagggggggggggggggggg

Doge

Tallon wrote: »

I don't understand why Sooo many people are obsessed with Graphics these days... The games should have longevity, not 1080p fúcking soil!

Couldn't say I'm obsessed with graphics tbh, I have came from the C64 days of gaming.

What does piss me off though is one a developer is lazy and doesn't update the engine after 3 releases, or improve the graphics somewhat.

The feel of the game will sway me also, going by past releases BF is far superior imo.

You just can't feel the weapon in the COD releases, they pack very little punch.

Explosions and getting shot seems far more scarier in BF.

rolexeagle1

developing a new engine costs big big bucks and IW probably wouldn't have time having to release a game every 2 years. I'm sure they will have something mega for the next generation of console.
There would be no point in making a new engine for the current console's as they are pretty much streched to the limit with current high end games ATM.

Leeg17

waveform wrote: »

Couldn't say I'm obsessed with graphics tbh, I have came from the C64 days of gaming.

What does piss me off though is one a developer is lazy and doesn't update the engine after 3 releases, or improve the graphics somewhat.

The feel of the game will sway me also, going by past releases BF is far superior imo.

You just can't feel the weapon in the COD releases, they pack very little punch.

Explosions and getting shot seems far more scarier in BF.

No offence, and going by all your posts in the Battlefield forum;

Ah I know, I was just taking the piss and giving COD yet another dig in the balls!

So basically what gamestop are saying here is:

A PRE-OWNED copy of Battlefield 3 is worth £40.98 to them

And a BRAND NEW copy of MW3 is worth 99p!!!


Hehe, even gamestop can see how ****e COD is in comparison!

Grrr, disappointed they're using highly marketable and ****ty rap music like the COD trailers!

"Thats funny because the oldest call of duty player is 11."

heh!

You're going to see CoD in a way different light to BF before it's even given a chance. Personally, and as with many of the posters above, gameplay far supersedes graphics in importance in a game for me. It's no secret that the feel of BF is realism, and that of CoD is an arcade shooter, and the graphics definitely reflect that. I'll wait until I buy both games after release to come to a conclusion as to what I prefer, and even then it'll be weeks/months before I can say that with some confidence.

Anyways, this is a Mw3 thread in a CoD forum, so keep the jibes about the franchise to another forum, or better yet yourself.

GEasy

iMuse wrote: »

Its a trade off, It runs at double the framerate of battlefield on consoles and doesnt need installs of texture packs to look decent.

PWND

Balfie

waveform wrote: »

Couldn't say I'm obsessed with graphics tbh, I have came from the C64 days of gaming.

What does piss me off though is one a developer is lazy and doesn't update the engine after 3 releases, or improve the graphics somewhat.

The feel of the game will sway me also, going by past releases BF is far superior imo.

You just can't feel the weapon in the COD releases, they pack very little punch.

Explosions and getting shot seems far more scarier in BF.

Maybe so, but COD has alot better life than BF does, people still at this stage are playing Black Ops, videos still go up from the huge commentators to do with black ops! I haven't seen a BC2 video in god knows how long.

Xcal had some BC3 videos up recently from the beta, then once again BF will have its 2 months or so in the sun while people are still playing COD next november waiting on the next cod to come out.

We all know that cod out lasts BF by a country mile, so if ya wanna bash on COD like it is obvious that ya are doing like Lee's post ^ above, then do it somewhere else. This is a Call of Duty forum. Not that battlefield forum. Try keep your bashing to yourself otherwise you are gonna piss some people off in here.

Mr. Rager

waveform wrote: »

I'd actually rather play one of the early CODs rather than Battlefield 2, so I'm by no means a BF fanboy.

Nice try, we're not so easily fooled here at the COD forum, because, contrary to popular belief, we're not all "eleven"

Trying to look cool in front of all your BF buddies 'cause bashing COD is cool over there at the "gentlemens' club?"

Magill

waveform wrote: »

Couldn't say I'm obsessed with graphics tbh, I have came from the C64 days of gaming.

What does piss me off though is one a developer is lazy and doesn't update the engine after 3 releases, or improve the graphics somewhat.

The feel of the game will sway me also, going by past releases BF is far superior imo.

You just can't feel the weapon in the COD releases, they pack very little punch.

Explosions and getting shot seems far more scarier in BF.

Valve have been using the source engine for nearly 8 years...

As for the feel of the game... are you playing the same games that everyone else is playing ? CoD weapons pack little punch compared to BF ? Seriously ? I understand the graphics agrument (If its on PC) but that is just pure BS, BF weapons have felt like your shooting plastic pellets since BC, maybe its different on PC but it still had that weightless feeling to the gunplay in BF3 Beta.. at least for me... if we're arguing about game engines, that is my big gripe with frostbite and as its looking atm frostbite 2, it just sort of feels weak ?

Seriously... i hope both games are good but people just bash CoD these days because its become the cool thing to do. BF fanboys have become so obsessed with the cod bashing these days aswel, bit ridiculous really.