Fallout Studios Forums

And apparently Blizzcon costs the same so it ain't much of a difference with that.

 Stinger, on 30 Jun 2011, 15:04, said:

That's AMAZING. Think of how awesome all that would be . Points to Activision, for a change.

Everything I've seen about MW3 doesn't exactly excite me terribly. I'm still looking more forward to BF3 actually.

http://yfrog.com/z/kgnceiaj

Chyros, you'd better hope this screen of the game's Survival Mode isn't indicative of the direction they are taking in multiplayer because we see flash bangs, 3 x frags and claymores available to the player.

We can only speculate at this time...

Bleh no matter how many changes they make to this game it still fells the same run and gun with a assault rifle :( its fun thou

 Stinger, on 6 Jul 2011, 17:49, said:

IMO since that this is like a mix of Zombies and Spec Ops, allowing multi-grenades and claymores does make sense actually, since it would be even harder to take down endless waves of guys with guns when you have only one grenade at a time, but that's just me.

 Zhao, on 7 Jul 2011, 4:36, said:

True, good story saves its ass, and some people who likes to slaughter other people in MP, like me

>Call of Duty
>Good story



The story for all of the Call of Duty games is pretty much the most generic and utterly predictable thing you'd ever see. Good story is something like Planescape Torment, or for an example in a more modern setting, FEAR.

Each to their own, I guess. I mean I'll probably end up playing the MW3 campaign eventually but there are far better singleplayer FPS games out there in terms of storyline.
Edited by Alias, 07 July 2011 - 06:14.

 Stinger, on 7 Jul 2011, 2:49, said:

In the MW2 campaign and Spec Ops the player always starts off with FOUR frags. So no, I'm not afraid of that happening at all.

 Alias, on 7 Jul 2011, 8:12, said:

You must think about 'atmosphere' and 'presentation' of storyline aswell. Opening of MW1 ( Execution ) betrayal of Shephard on MW2 , Chernobyl mission on MW1, airport mission of MW2, nuclear explosion at MW1 - 2, emp effect mission on MW2, and many more moments which is pretty memorable and awesome. Yes there is games with better storytelling but saying MW has a poor storyline will be not realistic , though I respect your opinion

and I am sure MW3 will have same good storytelling aswell.
Edited by General, 07 July 2011 - 08:48.

 General, on 7 Jul 2011, 18:47, said:

I'm not denying how immersive it is - Call of Duty 4 especially, however the structure of the story itself is pretty bland. Since you seem to like atmosphere I really recommend you play FEAR, it is probably the second-most immersive FPS I've ever played (after our lord and master Bioshock) and the storyline is very well developed and most of the twists are very unexpected as well (again, like Bioshock). Looking back on FEAR it was probably too ahead of it's time when it was released.

With Call of Duty so many things happen you tend to get lost in the barrage of explosions because the target market (I'm not saying we're in the target market), aka 12 year olds, cannot hold their attention on something longer than 15 seconds. Whereas in FEAR the moments are used far more sparingly and it becomes very eerie because you really don't know when the next thing will happen, with Call of Duty all you need to do is look around a corner and there'll be an explosion.

 Stinger, on 7 Jul 2011, 1:49, said:

Only speculate? The equipment you could carry in spec ops or nazi zombies wasnt an indicator of what you could carry in multiplayer, I seriously doubt this game mode is either.

From 402 twitter when someone asked about that picture:

@Nelson2030 This is Survival mode of Spec Ops, brand new wave based mode that never ends till you die. Buy upgrades & change tactics on fly.

Someone asked about seeing cod-points:

@ThemanJordo No you don't.
You see Spec Ops Survival currency, used to buy killstreaks, gear, weapons, upgrades, ammo in that match only.

http://twitter.com/#!/fourzerotwo

 Wanderer, on 7 Jul 2011, 3:37, said:

Yeah, never was a fan of CoD point. I supppose that counts for one of my reasons not playing BO. However, buying upgrades & change tactics, that would be... MW3 equivalent of perk machines right? And then there's buying killstreaks... interesting.

That is only for the specop survival-mode

 Wanderer, on 7 Jul 2011, 11:10, said:

I know, but still.

Why the heck we can't blow enemies to pieces in MW3, they did a good job with it at Black Ops so why they turn it back to something worse, as I see from the trailers; war atmosphere is given but when you get hit by 50 cal or 7.62mm weapon; your body parts tend to get blow but what we see is just a red spray coming out of the impact area

They're lazy with the gibbing anims maybe.

 Destiny, on 9 Jul 2011, 1:18, said:

Seems like lulz that when Treyarch reused some stuff like animation from MW2, IW do not reuse some of Treyarch's relatively more realistic stuff, like as you said, gibbing animation =/

 Admiral FCS, on 9 Jul 2011, 10:31, said:

In fact IW have a tendency to actively avoid Treyarch content and ideas.

 Chyros, on 9 Jul 2011, 9:54, said:

I'll be happy if they stay away from Trey's kennels tbh.

 Wizard, on 9 Jul 2011, 10:57, said:

Indeed. Personally I don't mind either. Treyarch have in all their CoD games done almost nothing well at all - they're like a sign of anti-quality.

Activision brought Treyarch in to make CoD-games on the empty years that IW was planning their next game. IW didn't like that and they've made the point many times that they are the real CoD-makers.

One thing Treyarch fixed in Black Ops was haveing attachments like extended mags actually shown on the guns (and having realistic mag capacities). That's one thing I hope IW to take over from Treyarch.

People keep bringing up the whole "MW3 is made by Infinity Ward" as a pro, but MW3 isn't just being made by IW, its being made by three different teams. Its obvious why thats happening though as the majority of IW jumped ship.