Yay or Nay on MW3

Deleted User wrote: »

Lol, no disrespect intended, i don't think COD MP players are gimps .

I think COD's multiplayer is like bovril-you either love it or hate it. I'm the latter, but i have no beef at all with people who love it, if you like RPG style, "build your character class" mixed in with your shooters you're definitely going to appreciate it more, i just don't think that how it's set up suits my personal taste in shooters, and the things i like them to reward you for doing.

I just enjoy shooters that chuck everybody into a level battlefield a lot more, where the weapons and things are more or less set, and your ability to get them, skill with handling them and your knowledge of the map is the biggest factor in how you do. COD feels like the opposite of that, where if you don't have the right loadout going in to the game, very often it doesn't matter how good you are on the trigger, you're at a distinct disadvantage. It feels like it's as much a game of luck sometimes as a game of skill, and there's nothing worse than finding yourself constantly getting owned by a worse player with a better perk or killstreak that you haven't yet got access to. It's frustrating, particularly when you're playing with random online players, and don't have a solid team strategy or voice communication to fall back on.

A good example is something like sniping in COD. In many other FPS games, the location of a sniper rifle is predetermined on a map. it's a power weapon, and the designers have given a lot of thought to game balance, sniper spawn locations, and loads of other stuff, with a goal of creating an even match and consideration of where and how the sniper can be used. There may be only one sniper rifle available, and getting it gives you a genuine tactical edge that you have to earn. Anybody on the battlefield can get it, but they have to work for it, often using teamwork, and once you've got it, using it well and holding control of the map with it is where you can earn your advantage.

In COD, anybody can load up a sniper class, with all sorts of invisibility and stealth perks and upgraded weaponry, and sit anywhere on any map, which hasn't been carefully put together with game balance and weapon placement in mind, quietly wiping people out unseen. It's great fun for the sniper, not so much for everyone else. That stuff is what i don't enjoy about COD (by the way, m not just picking on snipers in particular, the same applies to a range of weapons, perks, and tech in the game). COD MP is more about loadout and perk advantage from the offfset than actual trigger skill and firefight savviness a lot of the time. That's why i don't enjoy playing it.

It's only personal preference though. I don't do the fanboy thing, just cos it's not my cup of tea doesn't mean it's not valid, and for what it is it's very well put together, and very popular, it's just not for me.

Deleted User wrote: »

My verdict is in on this one, Singleplayer is an absorbing experience, with a few very enjoyable sections and some good action that strikes a nice balance between tough and fun, and a satisfying conclusion to the story in the trilogy. It's too short, by at least a couple of hours, but that's par for the course with COD's story mode.

It was nice to be looking down the sights of an AC-130 spectre gunship again too, that's something that was noticeably missing from MW2, and was one of the most fun parts of this game.

Spec ops mode is probably the most fun i had with the game. The range of missions and gameplay in it gave me at least as much fun as the story mode, and the survival mode versus waves of AI is fun, but ultimately suffers too much from the lack of 4 player support to offer a lasting experience. It's a shame, because a 4 player vs. AI mode would have really been a fantastic inclusion and would have created a lot of replay value, possibly more than anything else in the game, at least for those who don't adore the multiplayer competitive modes, like me.

As it is, the 2 player limit makes it seem like there's never enough team strategy going on to utilize all the tech and options at your disposal, and as a result, games seem to lack that "fun factor" of something like Gears of war 3's horde mode, or to a lesser extent, Halo Reach's Firefight, where you can co-ordinate tactics with your team and manage different specialisms and strategies to work as a unit.

Regarding the multiplayer competitive mode, I'm the wrong person to ask, because i really don't enjoy COD multiplayer, but it just seemed like more of the same to me-An unbalanced battlefield, full of perk whores who customize everything to the Nth degree, annihilating people like me who don't spend enough time on it to stay frosty. It's the exact opposite of "pick up and play" casual gaming. It's for the hardcore, unless you like being cannon fodder. There's nothing bad about that, if it's your cup of tea, but like much of the rest of the game, there was very little that was new or any different compared to it's previous iterations, so for me it just felt a little stale.

I appreciated the addition of the "support classes" that allow you to focus on supporting your team rather than going for kills, but on the whole, unless you're working as part of a well organized team, competitive multiplayer is still the same frustrating experience as it's always been for anyone who doesn't take their COD pretty seriously.

On the whole, MW3 is a very decent game. There's nothing particularly new or groundbreaking in it compared to the last one, it really could have benefited from 4 player spec ops and co-op modes, and it is most definitely "more-of-the-same", but for anyone who enjoys a good shooter, it's worthy of a buy and has enough replay value to keep you happy whether or not you're into competitive online play.