While I'll probably just get BF3 this year for my annual FPS game, I might flock to this one. But probably not for a long time..seeing as I'll be more interested in Skyrim.

It felt more like one of those ghostwriter novels that are now published under his name than an original Tom Clancy. At least the real guy was somewhat adequate and correct in his use of politics and military tech, while the new guys who write under his name, just like in MW2, tie plotholes to insane pseudo-shocking twist to more plotholes through a fabric of AWESOMESAUCE USA MILITARY TECH!!1 and EVUL TERROR from the TORN COMMUNISTS/generic Muslim states/international crime syndicates.

The only COD game I've bought was MW1, and I really enjoyed it. I've just never gotten around to buying MW2. Do you think it's worth buying it, now that MW 3 is being released?

MW3 looks cool. The levels in Sierra Leone, Somalia and Czech Republic all sound interesting.

Love the irony of people on a Bethesda forum complaining about CoD's engine

I don't get all the heck people are giving Activision for making CoD games on a regular basis. I personally love the hell out of those games. The Treyarch ones are inferior IMO, but Activision makes dynamite games. And that whole "omg one game a year? they are just taking my money" is only even REMOTELY an issue if you are a multiplayer person. As someone who plays 80% for the single player, the more Activision CoD games, the better.

CoD 1 and CoD 2 were the first shooters aside from the Half Life series I could really dig. Modern Warfare redefined fun for me in games, World at War was kinda eh (treyarch just doesn't quite have that touch. its like they are constantly trying to outdo activisions ones) MW2 was win, and Black ops was ok, but it really felt a bit too on rails for me. LIke there were fewer levels you could just hop in straight from mission select to pwn ppl. Khe Sanh and Hue City were ok for that, but the rest had SO much scripted stuff, it really went a bit far.

By contrast, in MW2, you could hop straight into afghanistan, the burbs, the favela, heck practically any level for some good old fashioned dumb fun.

Oh, and plus I happen to be a gun nut irl, so it REALLY irked me how practically every other weapon you GET in black ops was anachronistic. First time I played Hue City and the spec ops dude tossed me a SPAS 12, I just sorta sat there with this pained expression whimpering "but...but.....its not 1983 yet......"

And on a final note, I remember MW1 and 2 multiplayer being a nice bracing challenge, but black ops multiplayer, i feel like im made of frigging paper. Like someone wielding a support weapon so much as sneezes vigorously in my direction, and i spew blood in a jet 15 feet high and keel over backwards -_-

EDIT:
I know the engine is from the late jurassic, it had no story, and the particle effects are horrible, but I STILL rate America's Army as among my favorite shooters ever. Nearly 100% perfect weapon realism, including random jams, the fact that you had to manually reload when you spent a full clip, instead of it doing it automatically, the ability to use hand signals, guns with REAL ammunition capacities, instead of fantasy capacities 30 rounds higher than they are IRL, and most importantly of all: no "dynamic ammo system" which is to say if you ejected a partial clip, the rest of the ammo in that clip was gone. you''d thrown it away, whereas every other game ever made, that ammo goes back into your general pool for that weapon. And don't make excuses like "but you saved the partial clip." When I have say 150 rounds left total, with 50 rounds a clip, and I fire 40 shots, reload, fire 40 more, reload again then fire 40 more and reload a final time and the last clip I put in has 30 rounds in it, despite the fact that my last 30 should be in 3 clips w/ 10 rounds apiece.....I suddenly lose interest in the game. Plus no respawning till a round ended, so people actually valued their lives and played defensively. None of this rambo-kamikaze-monkey-on-speed tactics that are the norm in B-Ops multiplayer.

MW2 is not a bad game, it has a decent single player campaign and mutiplayer. If in doubt rent it first and if you like it buy it B).
Plus

Just another COD.. I'm not going to buy an fps for some years, perhaps to a next-gen console where they might actually be something else than add-ons.

Eh, I don't know. Part of me kinda thinks the "leak" is fake.
I've always had fun with COD games, been playing them since COD2. Black Op's is my least favorite, and W@W was my second most favorite, with COD4 at the top.
As ridiculous as the game will be, as more of the same as it will be, I'll probably still get it, because for me it has this addicting fun factor.
As someone else in the thread said, Haters gonna hate.

Same here, I am totally excited. BUT I HATE MAP PACKS!!!! They are overpriced, add next to nothing to the game and a re nto worth the money, I bettter ge gettign all 20 of those maps with the game, then they can release their [censored] map packs for people who feel like paying money for useless content.



This, thats why I get it for Christmas, or just get both for Christmas.



Get it for Christmas




Battlefield series is better. IMO

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2011/05/14/first-modern-warfare-3-trailer-gives-us-chills.aspx

It's a shame the SP has gotten worse each game and is suffering because of the MP.

Also mention that Beth games are better on consoles instead of on PC.


But I'm not looking forward to this. Got rage and skyrim to play around this time and cod isn't challenging anymore.

Another cod game I'll probably be buying just because my friends do . Although if it svcks I'll just wait until they get tired of it and go back to black ops or MW2

I didn't read most of it, I hate single player spoilers but the multiplayer seems pretty cool. 20 maps, I just hope they're GOOD maps. Also what's with the bright maps? Seems every cod is getting brighter and brighter. What happened to the dark cod4 maps?

Also hope quickscoping is back to the way it was in Mw2, it really wasn't overpowerd as most people said because you had to be pretty good at it. I mean if you can't kill me with your fully automatic rifle when I have my bolt action then damn.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2011/05/14/first-modern-warfare-3-trailer-gives-us-chills.aspx

MW2 started WW3 in its campaign (Russia vs the US, Europe gearing up, Pakistan choosing sides?), so this is hardly surprising.

Oh? I didn't really understand the MW2 campaign all it was to me was shoot that guy blow up that place shoot this guy and find Makarov!

The stories are pretty convoluted.

Well lets hope MW3s campaign is at least understandable, but I doubt it. They only care about there multiplayer.

The story isn't hard to follow, unless your mind shatters because of all the holes before you are through. General Shepherd is so laughable that he'd even make General Ripper burst out in tears.

I'm excited to see what they do w/ destructible environments. Hoping for some new changes in gameplay, but not exactly expecting them.

As many have said, not sure where this series has any room to grow.

Well said.

This thing with the trailers being one for four major countries I like, but since there is major battles in each of London , NYC , Paris and I think Berlin I hope the SP will be longer. I think I will have to wait to see what happens. Hopefully I will get a longer campaign.

Unfortunately, their focus will continue to be MP and the SP will continue to be gimped.

I can always hope, maybe I will be surprised. And maybe if they do what you say they will make MP more balanced and bugs are fixed before the game is released. My opinion will only change when I see some gameplay.

Well they have good reason, I mean, what do the fans play most? Singleplayer? No, they spend months and months ( sadly) playing multiplayer so why put more work into Sp then Mp? Some people also NEVER touch the SP campaign so really they have good reason to focus on MP rather then Sp.