P4: Gritty Reboot Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 It's absolutely the most asinine thing Ethan. If it's set to anything other than "Native", it basically plays in upscaled 540p. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maritan Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 If it's set to anything other than "Native", it basically plays in upscaled 540p. Hm, that's strange, I'm pretty sure that when I launched the game the first time this option was not present. Anyway, I'll try that, because besides crashing I have a big problem with stuttering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 For argument's sake though, Angry Birds and Cut the Rope are free or a dollar each. The big issue is that many gamers are on tight budgets, and $60 is a lot of money if the game is in fact just a rehash. I don't personally see it as such, but there it is. Going with the rehash route... When I see screenshots and such of MW3, its pretty damn hard to see the difference from MW2. Then again, the same can be said of Uncharted 3 and 2... which by all accounts is an amazing game. I however can't see COD games as quality games that are worth $60 when it comes out every year without looking somewhat different. It makes it seem very basic. Not saying basic stuff are not good but for $60 a pop brand spanking new... On a sidenote, Uncharted 3 is a few years removed from U2 and U2 set the quality to be high, very high. So its worth the $60 imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 They're not worth $60 to me, but I can see if you're someone who plays the multiplayer constantly all year until the next one comes out then $60 for a year's worth of entertainment isn't too bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P4: Gritty Reboot Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 Yeah, I mean, I couldn't tell you the difference between FIFA 2005 and 2012, but I'm sure series fans could. And just because a core game is relatively static doesn't mean the update isn't worth it for those who follow the franchise. For what it's worth, there are two particular missions in the singleplayer that are easily the best and most inventive in the series since Red Square in COD1. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P4: Gritty Reboot Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) Regarding building thing, someone threw this up on Reddit. http://i.imgur.com/Rqrm9.jpg Haha I was laughing at a lopsided Ron Paul poll at the same time. Those crazy Ron Paul poll bombers. Here's the link I meant to post: http://imgur.com/a/G2865#0 Edited November 10, 2011 by P4 (Pentium not Persona) I'm an idiot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I don't get it. Just to make sure this is the image he linked: http://i.imgur.com/Rqrm9.jpg (in case he changes it, not first randomly wrong link today) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think why the MW3 one is getting so much attention is that building was and is an icon. The BC2 ones... not so much since they're all pretty much the same within the same game. Besides, I blow them up before I get much of a look at them. And now I am colored intrested at P4 saying how good two missions were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P4: Gritty Reboot Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 I think why the MW3 one is getting so much attention is that building was and is an icon. The BC2 ones... not so much since they're all pretty much the same within the same game. Besides, I blow them up before I get much of a look at them. And now I am colored intrested at P4 saying how good two missions were. There is a sandstorm mission in Africa that forces you to shoot at silhouettes and flashlights. It's bizarre and crazy and awesome, really innovative and fun. There's also a Normandy-esque invasion of Hamburg, big huge explosive battle on the beach and a push through the town. If nothing else it's just loud, dozens of soliders, insane fun. Early couple of missions are far too linear and on-rails, but overall level design is quite nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P4: Gritty Reboot Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 And my singleplayer review is up. I quite enjoyed it, in spite of its moments of linearity and flashes of excess. http://deltagamer.com/20221/review-call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-singleplayer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vile Posted November 18, 2011 Report Share Posted November 18, 2011 Someone should totally play CoD4 with me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vargras Posted November 23, 2011 Report Share Posted November 23, 2011 Activision CEO compared Call of Duty to The Hurt Locker and Black Hawk Down. Brb laughing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyp2121 Posted December 4, 2011 Report Share Posted December 4, 2011 I am not getting Modern Warfare 3, just going to skip it this year. *sees Giant Bomb's quick look* *goes out and buys game* Fuck, i did it again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted December 4, 2011 Report Share Posted December 4, 2011 And my singleplayer review is up. I quite enjoyed it, in spite of its moments of linearity and flashes of excess. http://deltagamer.co...-3-singleplayer www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/28/why-modern-warfare-3-remains-an-un-game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maritan Posted December 4, 2011 Report Share Posted December 4, 2011 (edited) www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/28/why-modern-warfare-3-remains-an-un-game I like RPS very much, but that's probably the most stupid article I've ever read there. Edited December 4, 2011 by Maritan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted December 4, 2011 Report Share Posted December 4, 2011 You should try reading the one he's responding to then 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgi Duke of Frisbee Posted December 4, 2011 Report Share Posted December 4, 2011 That whole "ungame" business was dogshit. I don't have any interest in Modern Warfare 3 at the moment, but just because it's a linear corridor shooter doesn't make it something that isn't a game. The term is RPS' attempt to be rather cute and cloying again, and judging from the parrots in the RPS comments section, they've largely succeeded. Now all those idiots are chirping "ungame" along with "manshoot" and the other ridiculously dumb terms RPS "coins". When it comes to Internet circlejerks, RPS is among one of the most insufferable. Don't get me wrong, they do write some pretty great articles. It's just that there's this sense of elitism there that I can't stand. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted December 4, 2011 Report Share Posted December 4, 2011 It would never have been an issue if it wasn't for Kotaku AU decided to have a pick at small elements of the RPS review and completely miss the point. (even funnier that they commissioned an EDGE writer to do it too ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P4: Gritty Reboot Posted December 4, 2011 Report Share Posted December 4, 2011 He's welcome to his opinion of course, but the argument over "un-game" is a silly semantics debate. It's clearly a video game (most of it anyway--you could argue that the canned events and in-game cinematics are not) that does a great job at what it was designed for. Kotaku AU kicked the whole thing off but RPS probably should have just left it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted December 5, 2011 Report Share Posted December 5, 2011 Not sure why they should have just left it hanging, especially when the Kotaku AU thing was both pretty absurd and seemingly not responding to the RPS review at all but some generalised COD hate. For example as the K-AU piece ranted on about critics complaints of a lack of freedom, but as RPS rebutted he never said anything at all about a lack of freedom nor would he particularly want one in a COD title. tbh I think it may have being dropped had it not being for the "you played the game wrong" complaints too. you could argue that the canned events and in-game cinematics are not which is what he did... edit: (I've also just noticed that Duke also mentioned the "because it's a linear corridor shooter") srsly second n third paragraph: The core of your response is to explain that I was wrong to demand more freedom from a game such as Call Of Duty, that I condemned linearity, refused to cooperate with it, and that I therefore played the game wrong(ly). The problem is, I didn’t say any such thing at any point. In fact, the words “freedom” and “linear” don’t appear in the entire two thousand words. The nub of the core of my problems with Modern Warfare 3 have nothing to do with desiring open-world freedom nor railing (geddit) against linearity, hence my mentioning neither. They have to do with that it’s barely a game. It is, as you suggest, a rollercoaster. Except I would qualify this and say it is more like one of those water rides, where you sit in the slowly drifting boat as it wends its way past a series of animated dioramas, please keep your arms and legs inside the boat at all times. No standing. Apart from when you should. (and so on so forth, cos it's not just limited to those two articles but..well the whole thing) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P4: Gritty Reboot Posted December 5, 2011 Report Share Posted December 5, 2011 Yeah but I'm not sure what notable distiction there is between "a rollercoaster" and "animated dioramas" and linearity and lack of freedom. Isn't that the same complaint? In most areas of MW3, you have the option of which of a dozen guns to carry, whether to charge up the middle, take the left or right, risk taking the charge or pick off enemies from a distance, etc. It's nowhere near the freedom offered by lots of other games, but it's far from the description Walker gives it--aside from the scripted sequences of course, which were in my opinion the worst part of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maritan Posted December 5, 2011 Report Share Posted December 5, 2011 (edited) It would never have been an issue if it wasn't for Kotaku AU decided to have a pick at small elements of the RPS review and completely miss the point. (even funnier that they commissioned an EDGE writer to do it too ) I think that original article(MW3 review by RPS) was bullshit too. I guess sometimes game journalist ceases to be a gamer and becomes one of those pseudo-elitist critics. Also, EDGE writers are faggots. Edited December 5, 2011 by Maritan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted December 5, 2011 Report Share Posted December 5, 2011 I quite liked the review. It recognises that CoD MW3 is a highly polished, technically well executed example of its genre. The reviewer just didn't like the singleplayer because it was more of an interactive movie than a game. He raises good points with regard to the follow thing. Why not just have a destination marker and have your squad follow you? Why not allow you to open doors? Before anyone else points it out, yes, CoD is the enemy. However, I'm no fan of MoH or BF3's singleplayer either. I'd be happier if it was replaced with an offline bot mode with split screen for up to four people. At least that way you could get some practice with the jets, helicopters and other new-fangled gadgets without burning up your teams precious resources and drawing the ire of all the professional pilots out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted December 5, 2011 Report Share Posted December 5, 2011 Yeah but I'm not sure what notable distiction there is between "a rollercoaster" and "animated dioramas" and linearity and lack of freedom. Well as an example HL2 is pretty damn linear. He's certainly not asking for something like Just Cause. It's a corridor shooter, you're certainly going to go from A to B and that is expected. Last one I played was MW2, so don't really want to be saying too much, though I've certainly seen Black Ops and that is a good example of the difference between just being linear, and being a boat ride. If the game masturbates for 15 minutes something is deeply wrong. MW series has pretty much always been about showey set pieces and scripted events. Given the levels of absurdity MW2 took it too, MW3 going further wouldn't surprise me. (They even copied Team America so..errm..yeah) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted December 5, 2011 Report Share Posted December 5, 2011 I disagree with calling it an "ungame", but I don't necessarily disagree with the underlying criticism of that. If you really look at Call of Duty it's basically a really high production value, very cinematic version of Duck Hunt. But Duck Hunt is clearly a game, and so is Call of Duty. But I also think a lot of people are misunderstanding the criticism. He wasn't criticizing it for being a corridor shooter, he was criticizing it for spending so much time not even being that; for making you sit around and look at pretty things, or wait at a door while your squad yammers on. Thank link Dean posted while I was writing illustrates it perfectly: you don't have to do anything in CoD, the game progresses with or without your involvement. (Granted, at this point I'm criticizing CoD in general, not MW3 specifically.) That's why RPS called it an ungame: because the game makes it feel as if the player is just watching the action, rather than a participant. It's a movie that allows you to control the viewing angle, and has an engaging, but entirely optional, shooting game built in. I still enjoy playing Call of Duty a lot, but I recognize that that's a very valid criticism. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.