637 replies to this topic

[Chyros]

Holy fucking moly, that movie was extremely maximally awesome!

Shirou, on 5 Mar 2011, 12:02, said:

This game will be incredibly noob-catered (not saying BF3 won't be either because of its multiplatformality) so yeah MW-rehash nr 3. Too bad they didn't go for a more daring approach, but I guess with the strong competition of BF3 all Activision's financial advisors could muster was ''milk!''

Yes, that's the thing I fear most. More noob stuff and therefore less balance and more laming.

[deltaepsilon]

Nicely written article regarding IW decision to re-hash the same engine

[Wizard]

"counter productive" = less profit

[Chyros]

deltaepsilon, on 8 Mar 2011, 12:13, said:

Nicely written article regarding IW decision to re-hash the same engine

Wow, biased article much?

Anyway, I only like that it's less complicated. It does away with bullshit like projectile bullets and other nonsense that only serves to make gameplay slow and annoying. If they added all that bullshit I wouldn't buy. CoD works so well because it's based around simple core mechanics that work perfectly for a shooter. Changing them could only make the game worse.

[Camille]

Chyros, on 8 Mar 2011, 16:12, said:

deltaepsilon, on 8 Mar 2011, 12:13, said:

Nicely written article regarding IW decision to re-hash the same engine

Wow, biased article much?

i agree.

anyway, i really don't know what to think of this. my opinion is that it's either going to be bad as fuck or... slightly better. they're going to have to do some crazy stuff to convince me off of MW2 (which i still play). i can't possibly imagine what they could add to make the game more interesting.

[Chyros]

Camille, on 8 Mar 2011, 20:31, said:

Chyros, on 8 Mar 2011, 16:12, said:

deltaepsilon, on 8 Mar 2011, 12:13, said:

Nicely written article regarding IW decision to re-hash the same engine

Wow, biased article much?

i agree.

anyway, i really don't know what to think of this. my opinion is that it's either going to be bad as fuck or... slightly better. they're going to have to do some crazy stuff to convince me off of MW2 (which i still play). i can't possibly imagine what they could add to make the game more interesting.

Me neither. To be honest, I think it would be better to just refine and rebalance MW2 than add a whole bunch of weird stuff that's prone to fuck it up. I approach this game with great skepticism.

[Raven]

What they should be do is to stop spamming COD titles every year and create something polished for all platforms.

Edited by Raven, 09 March 2011 - 04:20.

[Alias]

Raven, on 9 Mar 2011, 14:16, said:

What they should be do is to stop spamming COD titles every year an create something polished for all platforms.

Sadly, that can't be further from Activision's policies.

[deltaepsilon]

Chyros, on 9 Mar 2011, 2:12, said:

deltaepsilon, on 8 Mar 2011, 12:13, said:

Nicely written article regarding IW decision to re-hash the same engine

Wow, biased article much?

Anyway, I only like that it's less complicated. It does away with bullshit like projectile bullets and other nonsense that only serves to make gameplay slow and annoying. If they added all that bullshit I wouldn't buy. CoD works so well because it's based around simple core mechanics that work perfectly for a shooter. Changing them could only make the game worse.

Well first of all, don't assume that Battlefield is worse off because it forgoes some of CoD's mechanics - it's not meant to just revolve around mindlessly running around shooting people. So even though the projectile bullets thing isn't one of its finest points, I'll gladly put up with it if I'm getting a game with considerably more depth and variety than what the CoD series has been offering since 2007.
Secondly, DICE developing a new and advanced engine certainly isn't particularly profitable, considering Activision's successes with CoD, but it might be because they actually want to make a great game that will serve as more than a money printer for them.

If you want another CoD game that doesn't change much of its formula, that's fine, because it's clearly your preference. But I brought up that rather biased article primarily due to this rather apt analogy:

Quote

It's funny because it reminds me of Activision being a sleazy pimp that sends out a fat, unclean, unwashed, haggily old prostitute with dollar bills hanging out of every orifice that takes money from casually inept consumers who think that’s the best way to get thrills every holiday season. At least the smart marks have realized that CoD is haggily and old.

I'd like to think you're certainly not this "casually inept" customer the article speaks of, but the fact that you'd be happy with Activision re-hashing their favourite cash cow once again, with minimal variation, makes me question how much that analogy applies to you.

[Kalo]

Chyros, on 8 Mar 2011, 16:12, said:

If they added all that bullshit I wouldn't buy.

As I recall, many people here said they would not buy Black Ops, yet they did. So I'm skeptical of this.


But by not developing a new engine, all you're going to see is CoD clones over, and over, and over. It's just going to be a repetitive cycle of a rehashed engine that's been worn out (And it already is oddly enough). It'd be like if Battlefield 3 was on the Refractor Engine from the majority of DICE games, it'd look awful and most likely play awful.


Now I'm not saying "Fix what isn't broken", but the whole idea of just leave it alone makes gaming what it is now. A TON of CoD clones and games that just don't do anything new, and if they do, they do it pretty badly.

[Chyros]

deltaepsilon, on 9 Mar 2011, 6:37, said:

Chyros, on 9 Mar 2011, 2:12, said:

deltaepsilon, on 8 Mar 2011, 12:13, said:

Nicely written article regarding IW decision to re-hash the same engine

Wow, biased article much?

Anyway, I only like that it's less complicated. It does away with bullshit like projectile bullets and other nonsense that only serves to make gameplay slow and annoying. If they added all that bullshit I wouldn't buy. CoD works so well because it's based around simple core mechanics that work perfectly for a shooter. Changing them could only make the game worse.

Well first of all, don't assume that Battlefield is worse off because it forgoes some of CoD's mechanics - it's not meant to just revolve around mindlessly running around shooting people. So even though the projectile bullets thing isn't one of its finest points, I'll gladly put up with it if I'm getting a game with considerably more depth and variety than what the CoD series has been offering since 2007.
Secondly, DICE developing a new and advanced engine certainly isn't particularly profitable, considering Activision's successes with CoD, but it might be because they actually want to make a great game that will serve as more than a money printer for them.

Well, my point is, the whole point of CoD is to be a very fast-paced shooter. People buy it because it's that. The Battlefield mechanics would make it worse because it would turn it into something that it isn't, just like adding CoD mechanics to BF would make that one worse.

Quote

If you want another CoD game that doesn't change much of its formula, that's fine, because it's clearly your preference. But I brought up that rather biased article primarily due to this rather apt analogy:

Quote

It's funny because it reminds me of Activision being a sleazy pimp that sends out a fat, unclean, unwashed, haggily old prostitute with dollar bills hanging out of every orifice that takes money from casually inept consumers who think that’s the best way to get thrills every holiday season. At least the smart marks have realized that CoD is haggily and old.

I'd like to think you're certainly not this "casually inept" customer the article speaks of, but the fact that you'd be happy with Activision re-hashing their favourite cash cow once again, with minimal variation, makes me question how much that analogy applies to you.

I kind of dread new titles because every consecutive title they have made the game more catered to the noobs. Lack of recoil, no idling, strawberry jam screen, damage disorientation, damageviewkick, snipers getting worse every installment, assault rifles getting better every installment, etc. All of these things were implemented purely and utterly to appeal to 12-year-old console noobs who don't have hair growing on it yet. Observation of trends within the series reveals that stuff like these things rarely if ever get reverted, and that by prediction, the next title will have all of this and more. Of MW2 at least I have a good idea how to rebalance and refine it, and I'd rather have that done to MW2 than another noob title come out.

Kalo, on 9 Mar 2011, 7:46, said:

Chyros, on 8 Mar 2011, 16:12, said:

If they added all that bullshit I wouldn't buy.

As I recall, many people here said they would not buy Black Ops, yet they did. So I'm skeptical of this.

Yeah, you're right. Next time I won't let myself be talked into buying a game by people I don't even like, as I did with BC2, remember?

Quote

But by not developing a new engine, all you're going to see is CoD clones over, and over, and over. It's just going to be a repetitive cycle of a rehashed engine that's been worn out (And it already is oddly enough).

Well, this is a direct consequence of it being developed on the xbox, further proving how dramatically terrible the growth of this series is stinted by consoles.

[Kalo]

Chyros, on 9 Mar 2011, 8:32, said:

Kalo, on 9 Mar 2011, 7:46, said:

Chyros, on 8 Mar 2011, 16:12, said:

If they added all that bullshit I wouldn't buy.

As I recall, many people here said they would not buy Black Ops, yet they did. So I'm skeptical of this.

Yeah, you're right. Next time I won't let myself be talked into buying a game by people I don't even like, as I did with BC2, remember?

I pleaded to you to get it because I felt the game was fun and I thought you might enjoy it, but you found it to be bad and not suited to your tastes. That's your fault, not mine.

Chyros, on 9 Mar 2011, 8:32, said:

Quote

But by not developing a new engine, all you're going to see is CoD clones over, and over, and over. It's just going to be a repetitive cycle of a rehashed engine that's been worn out (And it already is oddly enough).

Well, this is a direct consequence of it being developed on the xbox, further proving how dramatically terrible the growth of this series is stinted by consoles.

This is true for all gaming, and another reason I dislike consoles.

[Chyros]

Kalo, on 9 Mar 2011, 10:22, said:

Chyros, on 9 Mar 2011, 8:32, said:

Kalo, on 9 Mar 2011, 7:46, said:

Chyros, on 8 Mar 2011, 16:12, said:

If they added all that bullshit I wouldn't buy.

As I recall, many people here said they would not buy Black Ops, yet they did. So I'm skeptical of this.

Yeah, you're right. Next time I won't let myself be talked into buying a game by people I don't even like, as I did with BC2, remember?

I pleaded to you to get it because I felt the game was fun and I thought you might enjoy it, but you found it to be bad and not suited to your tastes. That's your fault, not mine.

It is my fault, but it should serve to show you that my buying or not whatever it is they come up with is not your business.

Quote

Chyros, on 9 Mar 2011, 8:32, said:

Quote

But by not developing a new engine, all you're going to see is CoD clones over, and over, and over. It's just going to be a repetitive cycle of a rehashed engine that's been worn out (And it already is oddly enough).

Well, this is a direct consequence of it being developed on the xbox, further proving how dramatically terrible the growth of this series is stinted by consoles.

This is true for all gaming, and another reason I dislike consoles.

Well on that we can at least agree then .

[Pav:3d]

Modern Warfare 3 to get a June reveal

And IGN's sources say non other than Pixar will be animating the reloads.

[Libains]

In b4 Chyros has multiple orgasms over the reloads

Well, at least it shows that they're taking it seriously. Although tbh I'd rather they redo the running animations. Looks like a fast waddle last I checked

[Chyros]

Pav:3d, on 8 May 2011, 0:25, said:

Modern Warfare 3 to get a June reveal

And IGN's sources say non other than Pixar will be animating the reloads.

I love how they only put a big "3" in and yet everybody knows exactly what it stands for . Shows how big of a franchise it really is, come to think of it :o . And I fell for the pixar thing .

AJ, on 8 May 2011, 0:46, said:

In b4 Chyros has multiple orgasms over the reloads

Well, at least it shows that they're taking it seriously. Although tbh I'd rather they redo the running animations. Looks like a fast waddle last I checked

Actually personally I'd say the running animations are pretty outstanding on the MW franchise :o . Almost all other developers don't seem to know what to think of people running so they kind of make a little dance out them.

Edited by Chyros, 07 May 2011 - 23:44.

[Pav:3d]

Yeah they do have really good running animations as far as games go, I like watching the guys in front of me dart out and run with some sort of purpose.

[Pav:3d]

Seems Kotaku has got their hands on not only some leaked info but ALL the info, and are spilling it on their website:

Multiplayer Info

Details

Spoilers and video with artwork and voices

Set to release 8th November.

[Soul]

Those pics of the maps look like they still need a bit of touching up here and there.

Edit: Seems rather "Eh" to me.

Edited by Soul, 13 May 2011 - 20:44.

[Chyros]

Pav:3d, on 13 May 2011, 22:02, said:

Seems Kotaku has got their hands on not only some leaked info but ALL the info, and are spilling it on their website:

Multiplayer Info

Details

Spoilers and video with artwork and voices

Set to release 8th November.

The weapon renders look genuine as they got rails all over them again. The MP5 and AK-47 now look so impossibly ugly that despite them being by two most favourite weapons I doubt I'd like to use them, though . And too many obscure weapons aka BC2 syndrome. I like all this not.

[CJ]

Here we go again, Activision milking, episode 4.

[Pav:3d]

How are obscure weapons an issue? Surely you're tired of the same M16/AK47 setup we've all been playing since 2005, if anything it could use more obscure weapons.

[Camille]

the weapons actually look good IMO o:

[General]

Hm, story smells good, don't care much about weapon designs .

[Chyros]

Pav:3d, on 13 May 2011, 23:03, said:

How are obscure weapons an issue? Surely you're tired of the same M16/AK47 setup we've all been playing since 2005, if anything it could use more obscure weapons.

Personal preference. I like to play with weapons I've heard of before. Using weird weapons is like using alien technology to me - not something I get a kick out of.