Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

[CoD MW3] General News and Discussion

1…6667697172…150

Comments

  • #2042
    2smiggy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,341 ✭✭✭✭2smiggy


    i was wondering about the graphics, hopefully they were just lowered for a small download ! i was playing on a 46" screen and i sit fairly close playing games. it was this , and having difficulty picking out enemies that put me off a bit.

    after a while i to to enjoy bc2 , after no liking it much at the start


  • #2043
    Thomasheen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 571 ✭✭✭Thomasheen


    141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »
    I like the beta too. Probably not the best choice of map though. Very small for Battlefield. Trying to attract the CoD community EA?

    Yeah no vehicles either which is a big part of battlefield.


  • #2044
    Magill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,732 ✭✭✭Magill


    aye, I think it was a really ****ty map to release with the beta aswel tbh...

    Its like having 3 cod maps inside one map, far to many choke points and i can see it being a bit of a problem if you come up against a group of players that know what they're doing, BF is best in big expansive maps... at least BF2/1942+3 was. Im looking forward to those type of maps, with tanks/planes and choppers on the go.

    The thing with it being a beta... its almost too late for it to be effective... on one hand it leaves a lot of work to be done before deadline day (Probably only a couple of weeks at max)... and if this beta build is an old build of the game it almost makes the testing pointless.. so for me.. i think dice are using it almost as a demo (Like a lot of studios do these days) so it probably wasn't a wise decision to have it so buggy. While the beta gives me the same feeling that the UC3 beta gave me (Bored very quickly), Im optimistic for the final game because the actual gameplay is quite solid imo....


    Its a good thing that there are ALOT of MP shooters coming out in the next 6 months or so tho because i can't see MW3 holding my attention for very long either !


  • #2045
    This content has been removed.


  • #2046
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    Its a beta so bound to be full of bugs, the graphics are glitchy as hell, was putting me off buying it initially but after playing it for a while and getting the feel of it I like it, I like how you dont just pop up and down going prone, it has context and you see your arms push you off the floor to stand up, nice touch.

    one thing though, the flashlight/lasersights blinding you? gamebreakers. take them out now dice.


  • Advertisement
  • #2047
    This content has been removed.


  • #2048
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    AGB_Ghost wrote: »
    I agree, the lasers are a huge help when using sniper rifles but them blinding you is very unlikely and if it does occur it will be for a split second, the lights are way to extreme.

    its ridiculous in the underground level, two guys running at you with them and the whole screen goes white, cant see a thing.


  • #2049
    Magill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,732 ✭✭✭Magill


    How do you turn on your flash ? Actually be pretty funny blinding your own team (Its anoying as **** when it happened to me).


  • #2050
    This content has been removed.


  • #2051
    This content has been removed.


  • Advertisement
  • #2052
    Nuri Sahin
    Site Banned Posts: 26,456 ✭✭✭✭Nuri Sahin


    Lasers and torches are the one thing that I really have a problem with alright.


  • #2053
    hypermuse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,178 ✭✭✭hypermuse


    El LoCo Ade wrote: »
    Lasers and torches are the one thing that I really have a problem with alright.


    I think they are a great addition to the game!! Think they look great and are quite realistic in the sense that it blinds you from seeing the enemy!

    I love it coz alot of retards dont seem to know how to turn it off so they just give their position away easily!!


  • #2054
    senordingdong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,673 ✭✭✭✭senordingdong


    AGB_Ghost wrote: »
    SPOILERS


    Achievements of MW3 read at your own risk.


    http://thecoddaily.wordpress.com/mw3-achievements/

    Meh...most of them are story based, and the rest are story based on a higher difficulty. Atleast Treyarch have some creative ones.


  • #2055
    hightower1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,210 ✭✭✭hightower1


    El LoCo Ade wrote: »
    Playing a beta and 100% slamming the game says it all about certain people here. Quite obvious many here will not give BF a chance whatsoever , as they'll be frankly rubbish at the game playing it like COD ... when in fact they're clueless when it comes to COD as well :) Unwillingness to change or adapt springs to mind once again.

    Clearly your bit of a BF fanboi but I think you misunderstood me, I dont think its a bad game per say, just from what the beta shows and plays like (which is representative of the majority of what the end product will be like) it doesnt live up to the hype. I'll still be picking up my pre order but I wont be totally hooked on this TBH. The controls are too loose, the graphics are poor (while they will be brought up a tad for full release realistically its not going to be a whole other level apart) , the sound design is the same too.

    I do however like the fact that it rewards a slower more tacticle style of gameplay which is something mw2 lacked but then again that has been addressed with mw3 as we have seen from support features / rewards so bf3 doesnt sway me there. The only thing it has going for it over mw3 at this stage based on what we've seen is larger maps and vehicles - imo halo had that years ago but it didnt do much good for that series up against cod now did it?

    Like I said, I'll be getting both, both are good games I just feel one is AA while the other went the extra mile to be AAA. They play differently but the cod killer title people had put on it previously seems a bit laughable now.


  • #2056
    Flecktarn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭Flecktarn


    Please could the BF3 discussion stop, I don't mean to preach or back seat mod but it is completely off topic!


  • #2057
    Mr. Rager
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,958 ✭✭✭Mr. Rager


    hightower1 wrote: »
    Clearly your bit of a BF fanboi

    tumblr_ldp3jukzHo1qb9a2wo1_500.png


  • #2058
    hypermuse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,178 ✭✭✭hypermuse


    I think I'm more excited bout BF3 than MW3..

    MW3 will not be that different from MW2 except the annoying perks removed and other annoying perks added!

    I'm in general a FPS shooter fan I genuinely think the BF produce much better games than the COD line. They are better games, more tactical and more team based.. but COD is more fun coz of its fast action etc...


    Have to agree its ridiculous people slating the beta.. yea its not super great but its far from a finished product...

    Think BF3 will be more of a pleasure to play than MW3!


  • #2059
    Magill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,732 ✭✭✭Magill


    hightower1 wrote: »
    Clearly your bit of a BF fanboi but I think you misunderstood me, I dont think its a bad game per say, just from what the beta shows and plays like (which is representative of the majority of what the end product will be like) it doesnt live up to the hype. I'll still be picking up my pre order but I wont be totally hooked on this TBH. The controls are too loose, the graphics are poor (while they will be brought up a tad for full release realistically its not going to be a whole other level apart) , the sound design is the same too.

    I do however like the fact that it rewards a slower more tacticle style of gameplay which is something mw2 lacked but then again that has been addressed with mw3 as we have seen from support features / rewards so bf3 doesnt sway me there. The only thing it has going for it over mw3 at this stage based on what we've seen is larger maps and vehicles - imo halo had that years ago but it didnt do much good for that series up against cod now did it?

    Like I said, I'll be getting both, both are good games I just feel one is AA while the other went the extra mile to be AAA. They play differently but the cod killer title people had put on it previously seems a bit laughable now.

    I agree with some of what your saying, the controls are a bit "Loose" compared to CoD's.. at least on console. While i wouldn't say the graphics are poor.. but for such a late beta.. they're aren't really up to what dice and the fanboys have been making them out to be and certainly fall short of the bench mark console shooters, Killzone + Crysis.

    I don't know what you mean by the sound design (Im guessing that its the same as BC2 ? or do you mean that its poor). I think its fine and the backnoise is pretty good aswel imo, i guess the actual gunsounds from your own gun are pretty weak tho and would have been better if it sounded more beef'd up i guess.

    I've always been of the opinion that BF will never be a CoD killer tho, its just not similar enough to take the casual fanbase away from CoD. I certainly wouldn't consider MW3 to be a AAA game tho and i certainly don't think the IW have gone that extra "mile"... MW2.. imo was a 7 or 8/10.

    I do wish i had a PC .. because i really believe its going to be so much better on PC than on console.. for many reasons and will no doubt kick the **** out of MW3 in not only gameplay but sales aswel. BF2 was better than ANY CoD game on PC imo.


  • #2060
    Leeg17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,127 ✭✭✭✭Leeg17


    Can all BF3 discussion take place in the Battlefield Forum or in the Off Topic Thread.

    Any further discussions besides those about Mw3 will be deleted and posters infracted/banned. Consider this a final warning.


  • #2061
    zero19
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,641 ✭✭✭zero19


    So. I hear MW3 is coming out soon...


  • Advertisement
  • #2062
    Tallon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,565 ✭✭✭✭Tallon


    zero19 wrote: »
    So. I hear MW3 is coming out soon...
    It already came out..

    Gay_nazis.png


  • #2063
    iMuse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,975 ✭✭✭iMuse


    Possible 6th prestige emblem


    168x0ye.jpg


  • #2064
    senordingdong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,673 ✭✭✭✭senordingdong


    Is there any indication that they are going to improve the matching system?


  • #2065
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    ^ can see myself playing that as much as the mp, looks fun


  • #2066
    yimrsg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,340 ✭✭✭yimrsg


    Yeah it looks like a good time killer. It's such a tease that spec ops is only 2 player. Either they've got 4 player spec ops lined up as possible dlc or they really fecked up and couldn't do it in time.


  • #2067
    Tallon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,565 ✭✭✭✭Tallon


    Thats what I played with FatPaulie at GAMEfest

    It is very much enjoyable :D


  • #2068
    yimrsg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,340 ✭✭✭yimrsg


    141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »
    I doubt it. If there was 4 player spec ops the game mode would require more AI to keep it ballanced. More AI = More wear on the engine and would most likely run less the 60 fps unfortunetly.

    Completely disagree with you there. Those videos you posted had 20-30 enemies on radar at a time, it doesn't take much more effort to up the enemy health/decrease player health or modify weapon damage accordingly to make it challenging for 4 players given a limit of 30. You could have enemies set at a constant number of 30 and have near instant respawns to give the illusion of fighting a bigger number.

    Previous games have managed to do a kind of 4 player co-op either through system link up or online; Halo, GOW, Left for Dead, Black Ops, Battlefield BC2. Graphically it looks like it hasn't moved on much from mw2 (still looks ok) but with the same number of players as mw2's spec ops it says to me that either we were unable to do it (which shows them up as inferior to the makers of the above games) or didn't want 4 player spec ops at this time (in which case they're using it as a possible lure for elite). Either they'll release 4 player co-op as a dlc or they took the lazy route in development.


  • #2069
    yimrsg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,340 ✭✭✭yimrsg


    141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »
    I still find it unlikely. According to Bowling it would ruin the cinematic experience. He often talked about how important it was to keep that 60fps frame rate and im guessing this is why they wont allow 4 player. If they add something and it drops the frame rate they wont do it.
    I know its a different developer ( same engine?) , but have you ever noticed how zombies would lag at the peak of a round with 4 players and a sh1t load of zombies?

    This would'nt work. I dont think you or I would like enemy AI spawning right next to us.

    Just my guess.

    Edit : Had a look on the interwebz.



    All i could find on the matter.

    Zombies would slow down because of the matchmaking issues which Treyarch continuously alter and never perfect and because there are often what I'd guess to be near 100 zombies on screen at a time, that I can understand.

    Had mw2 gone for system link 4 player then that would have appeased me somewhat but they didn't even do that. To be honest that clinging to 2 player for cinematic experience purposes is just wordspin from Bowling and to me seems like a cop out. Other games have managed to push the boundaries, these guys just sat still. They had plenty of time in development and there were 2 companies working on the separate aspects of the game, maybe between the divison of labour of the 2 companies working between single and multiplayer, special ops was low priority.

    I had massive hopes for spec ops but they've fallen well short:

    In feb
    Alternatively why not do some of the campaign in multiplayer? The assault on the oilrig or the prison to rescue you-know-who would be amazing. A player goes into second chance & will need reviving by a teammate will force players to work together. Incorporate a teammate full time in the AC130, mortar or any vehicle or have a laser designator for armoured targets. Make it fully customisable with the weapons, opponent difficulty, and allow for players to leave / join as they wish and you can have my wallet.

    In june
    My real hope for single player is that we see Soap, McTavish et al come back in the special ops mode, the mile high club at the end of COD 4 was tough as hell to complete on veteran but I still loved trying. If we have flash backs to past missions like the Pripyat level included in a horde mode that would be amazing, combining the fresh feeling of a new game mode with the unbridled joy of playing some of the finest levels in a FPS campaign. Chuck in bits of Gaz/Ghost and the rest and people will fawn over it once more.

    It's far simpler to imagine once off set piece levels and use them for a special ops campaign where disjointed missions are accepted and even welcomed. You're a part of Task force 141, able to be on the ground anywhere within 6 hours. Hostages taken off the coast of Somalia, sabotage a Syrian Nuclear facility, Raid on the Kremlin. You'll be there for all of it.

    Were these missions integrated into a cohesive campaign would be near impossible as the story would make no sense. Imagine if Task force 141 did a Heat style raid on a bank or fought Dragons like in Reign Of Fire. Yes they're beyond the realms of possibility in reality but people don't mind playing Zombies. My only concern is that I think it's restricted to 2 players so it's already behind black ops zombies in terms of mutliplayer features. I feel this is the real area for COD to expand it's horizons where whatever situation real or imaginary, Task force 141 are sent in. Chuck them alongside King Leonidas in 300, send them into Jurassic Park to restore order. Endless possibilites.

    Likewise I'd hope there is arcade mode, rescuing Yuri from the house using night vision after sniping at a small army was another great mission that was great fun in arcade mode, all those 100's popping up after each headshot, ah bliss. I know it's paying for something that I've already paid for but when that experience is that good you'd be a fool to deny yourself the chance of reliving it all again. Halo had a scoring challenge for it's campaign and was open to 4 players so why can't COD follow?


  • #2070
    Thomasheen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 571 ✭✭✭Thomasheen


    Do ye think the story will end this game? Even though mw2's story was kinda non-sensical it was still fun and interesting because there's not really more they can do after World War 3


  • Advertisement
  • #2071
    This content has been removed.


Advertisement