cccdfern, on 10 November 2011 - 00:16, said:
well, according to metacritic, MW3 is getting a fair beating, so, if all these points you make are promoting the game as good, why are there so many posts, well everywhere that it was a disappointment and that it is getting bad user ratings (site ratings don't counts anymore due to some obvious 'bribery'). Not attacking your views, just commenting upon how others are viewing the game. Some were saying that to actually score the kill, you had to go and get the guys dogtags, this is quite ingenuitive and an interesting addition; but all these things that they (the developers) are thinking they are changing (forcing players to not camp etc), never seem to come out that well with the community and quite quickly the normal habits are what makes the game.
So, how is this a different experience to blackops and MW2? What game mechanics have changed, have they upgraded the engine, support, balance, et cetera et cetera.
Also, the future, what shall happen next? Modern warfare 4? covert ops? or something else miltaryish-armyish. How much longer can cod stay alive with its consistent multiplayer style? Will another game take over the batton as to that which other games shall follow (crysis 2 was basically cod, where as crysis 1 was amazingly unique).
ty for tolerating my earlier pointless posts.
Well first of all it's still a bit buggy. Some people are experiencing more lag than they should, and there are bugs floating around like one in which you get stuck in an animation after calling in a hardpoints (rare but it happens).
Second; the game draws from BO for inspiration, NOT from MW2. And as BO is the obviously inferior game, people dislike this (also the lowest score out of the three on metacritic, MW3 currently holds the highest).
The dogtag thing you speak of is a separate gametype called Kill Confirmed; this is TDM except you have to confirm kills (or deny them) by running over fallen peoples' dog tags. a very good gametype, it's the one we're playing mostly now.
The game also doesn't really force the player not to camp, as a matter of fact I'd say the maps support camping more than before. MW2 maps were both bigger and generally better designed. MW3 has a few very good maps though. The style of the maps has changed a bit; as in MW2 you could say something is an "SMG map" or a "sniper map" in MW3 they tried to make most maps accessible for all weapon types. There are still one or two "sniper maps" etc. however, and we found the series' first decent snow map!
The game's weapons so far seem weird. They kind of redefined damage classes here and there, and assault rifles and LMGs usually do the equivalent of 40-30 damage and SMGs usually the equivalent of 40-20. Sniper rifles are basically like before, all with stopping power on by default (except the SVD which now only seems to kill on headshots, making it again the weakest weapon in the game). Some things pop up; it seems we have something that looks like G18s akimbo (though it's not as powerful as the original, with steady aim the spread is only about twice as wide on FMGs akimbo). Assault rifles still rule for much the same reasons as in MW2.
The main thing people are, I suppose, people are pissed off about is how the developers thought they knew better than the tried-and-true formula and they pulled some really weird mechanics out of the hat. I'd like to look closer to confirm exactly what is going on but it seems like idling is dependent on how long you are actually in ADS (gets worse with more time) and like I said before, the monumentally stupid mistake of making people's footstep sounds not silent when in ADS, a cornerstone of CoD mechanics. This was done for balancing reasons but of course it's not worth it. I think they might also have taken some flak for the reintroduction of idling at all, which of course noobs can't handle. I disagree with the way they implemented it, but I'd much rather have it on everything than on nothing. MW2 ACR, I'm looking straight at you.
On the up side, the game feels much more interesting like MW2. Of course it's part newness, but then again the newness is also an obstacle as all maps are not known to players yet. The customisation has taken an immense step forward with the proficiencies (which are more balanced than I thought they would be - not fully balanced but there are a few choices usually) and per-class hardpoint setup which works in three hardpoint trees now. The hardpoints themselves are also better balanced (juggernauts are really hard to deal with, though). Everything does look better and more fluid, feel more alive (and the game pace is VERY fast) and also the sounds have improved dramatically. The most glaring stupidity of MW2 has been taken out (explosives are now quite hard to get kills with, there are no true G18s anymore, kniferunning is now a non-issue more than ever) and the matchmaking goes a lot faster (though as of yet it seems servers are slightly overloaded because everybody is experiencing lag, even hosts). And of course there is a the matter of dedicated servers (though these run unranked, a seriously uncool move IMO). The party system works excellent though.
It takes a bit of time to get used to the new feel of the game, especially as at the start the player is extremely disadvantaged by the lack of choice in guns, perks, killstreaks etc. As always, the preset classes suck absolute arse squared, so until the player has unlocked Create-A-Class at level 4, there's bound to be plenty of cursing. The new gametypes take some time to get adjusted to, too, though they are quite good. It just takes a few games to get the feel of the new mechanics, maps, weapons etc. and then it's a pretty golden game.
Edited by Chyros, 10 November 2011 - 07:51.
0
