Modern Warfare 3 Gameplay Trailer

[msdos]

when it comes down to it, all you do in these games is run around in a sandbox and shoot or throw stuff.

BF is different in that it's less sandbox and you can get in vehicles and blow up buildings.

CoD is only good on hardcore mode. everything else is garbage, other than gun game and the mini stuff (counter-strike esque)

i miss the old medal of honor series. not only did you feel like you could work together well with your teammates, but you could actually have real stand-offs and fire fights with the leaning system.

gears of war comes to mind in terms of mobility and being able to utilize cover. but in these other FPS, you can barely utilize cover and mobility is honestly at a minimum, other than going prone and the black ops dive, it feels like lateral golden eye movement.

i'm a fan of Ghost Recon, hopefully i can pick that up soon.

[Mawnix]

Well, considering E3 is next month..that'll be its spotlight, especially at the Microsoft conference.

/also pray for KH3.

[AdrianCC100]

No worries, my comment was in general. I dont shit on peoples opinions. I just get worn out seeing people compare the two like it is impossible for 2 games to inhabit our lives simultaneously.

If you don't like people bashing a game, don't read the thread. Get over it.

[Syatek92]

Makorov is alive? or is it just the same voice.

Lol he never died in MW2...

[Vekrah]

I'm excited for it. It may be a rehash of games they've come out with before but I've liked the Call of Duty franchise. I've got plenty of friends who will be playing and the entertainment value I get from the 60 bucks makes it a buy.

NOTE: I'm not saying that it is better or worse than BF3 may or may not be. Anti-flame disclaimer.

[Dexiefy]

activision logo is reason good enough to not buy it ;o
firstly it will be overpriced for single player game only and multiplayer wise it will take the same course as black ops... aka few maps every few months for which you have to pay...

[Deleted]

meh, I'll probably end up buying it for the same reason i bought the other ones after CoD MW1, everyone else did. The gameplay looks really stale and over used now...seriously, firing from an AC-130 again? or using a mounted minigun on a rail shooter, but no! your in a helicopter this time oooooh and rappelling down a building yay so much fun!

hopefully E3 will show of some cool new tech or gameplay feature they having quite let out there, but i highly doubt it will.

and honestly how ludicrously over the top can the MW storyline get? MW1 seemed all realistic and believable, MW2 went " lets make some good that people like and add fairys and unicorns to it, thats what we need!"...

end O' rant

[nutty323]

hopefully we get at least 10+ of story mode this time around. mw2 was like 6hrs maybe idk but it was really short. build up the story like the first one which made it pretty good. obviously fix online play and add dedicated servers too for PC. (cbf w/consoles feels weird to me)

BF3, MW3 or Ghost Recon etc. don't matter to me as long as they are quality and worth the price. I <3 fps games

as some have said the last part is pretty chilling. I just can't imagine a full scale war on US mainland, although its in the realm of possibility.

[JustintimeSS]

If you don't like people bashing a game, don't read the thread. Get over it.

gahh, try reading the whole thread next time instead of stopping at one post and replying. Not to mention, your reply to me doesn't even make sense. It's not even in the same context as my comments.

Your cool statement has been recognized, feel free to play in traffic once again.

[Scottishpaladin]

Lol not impressed atall... Really, it looks exactly like MW2... I think MW3 will still be good but jesus BF3 i gonna go BAM yo dead fool.

Yours faithfully,
An old CoD fan boy

[Iamsylar]

Looks pretty cool, bit i'm still a Battlefield-player, so easy choise for me!

[Deleted]

I don't understand all the hate, at the very least with a Modern Warfare game you know what you're going to get.

The Multiplayer will be incredibly active for well over 6 months, with accessible game play where team work isn't necessarily vital to win whilst playing with randoms, and a nice little bit of customisation and fun mechanics.

I'm not complaining really, when it's out i'll have a nice casual shooter I can jump on when i'm tired of everything else, get a few friends rounds with some beers, etc.

What more do you want from this franchise? I don't think anyone, including Activision, is expecting this title to bring anything particularly groundbreaking or innovative. It's cheap, addictive fun, where you can run around no-scoping 16 year olds from Sweden and hurling abuse down your microphone. What more could you want?

EDIT: By cheap, what price would you put on loosely 6 months of online shooter entertainment?

[Edge-]

So...where was the actual gameplay?

[Sgtsparkles]

EDIT: By cheap, what price would you put on loosely 6 months of online shooter entertainment?

An actual price? I have no idea. However, I paid 20$ for the orange box, and on my current steam account and my old one, am working on 2k hours played in TF2, over the course of years it remains the most dynamic and human interactive fps I've ever played. That's before time spent on half life as well.

60$ for what CoD delivers and 15$ for shoddy map packs is preposterous. Cheap is not a word that can be put anywhere near Call of Duty.

I can't speak for all PC Gamers, but I think at least one thing we'd like from the CoD franchise is reality in the pricing. It wouldn't receive half the hate it does if it wasn't so obviously oriented at milking money from it's consumers. You can be very profitable without milking the nipples of as many players as possible, and you can still produce a great looking game without having to worry about it cutting into your profits. CoD looks barely above shit, and it could look so much better for the money that's poured into the project. Instead it's put into advertising.

Basically, in this day and age, CoD is all about being a whore.

[Deleted]

I really dont understand why more people dont see it this way. I cannot grasp why they MUST compare two games

Unfortunately that's how today's generation works. You either hate A and love B or vice versa. There is no middle.

Same thing can be said for soda (coke vs. pepsi), music (rock vs. hiphop) and games (which strangely enough in this situation are in the same genre).

Stay classy MMO-C.

[Sgtsparkles]

Stay classy MMO-C.

While that's very true in the case of most things, the CoD vs Battlefield is a little different. The FPS genre is extremley crowded and is known for a lot of crappy, uncreative entries. CoD is popular, but it adheres to all of the negative FPS stigmas, and is largely popular because of extensive advertising. Instead of pouring the money into a prettier game, an innovative game, a better functioning game, or a cheaper game, they pump out the same overpriced package year after year. The other playerbase, battlefield, as well as almost all PC gamers, can't stand it's success. It's frustrating when such repetition makes so much money with so little effort.

In that regard, it is difficult for anyone else to respect CoD players and keep it as it's own game, when it's really just a generic copy of itself over the last several years. That is why people cannot just leave CoD be, they want to compare it to a game that does things different, and is much more respectable.

[Deleted]

BF3 comes with Destructable environment, MW3 just comes with scripted scenes.

thanks, no hard choice