News Modern Warfare 3 trailer released

8th November? or 11th August?
If it's November then it's days after BF3's release, which could prove interesting, 2 competing games released in the same week.
Looks very 'run n gun' almost single player type action, just add aliens and it could be crysis.

 

So.. where was the actual game play footage?

 

Yep that looks exactly like MW2. Loads of quicktime style events. I think I'll pass.

 

I'll buy and play them both. MW3 for the Hollywood blockbuster action game moments and BF3 for the online war action. I'll finish MW3 and no doubt think "that was a load of fun!"

I'll no doubt be playing BF3 for a long time after that.

Why does everyone keep comparing them? To me they are totally different things. Both enjoyable for different reasons.

 

On Steam MW1 is still £20, MW2 £30, COD1 from 8 years ago is £15. Why are people putting up with this?

 

I... I... I don't know. I can see either a postage stamp, or the top left quarter of the picture. Should we take it that no, you're not going to fix your video player? Or, perhaps, and much more sensibly, use a third-party one?

In any case, I think we can hazard a guess that it's another press-circle-to-win first-person shooter, which is apparently the only sort of game it's legal to release these days. Even if you're releasing it for PC. And therefore there is no "circle" button. If this stuff was any more generic, it'd stand out just for how generic it is. And then it'd stand out from the crowd. And who'd possibly want that.

 

It looks just like MW2 again. Also most PC Games cost £29.99, this'll cost £39.99, I'm not going to pay a premium £10 more for a poor buggy launch and then be expected to pay £10.99 per map pack. F*** you Activision!

 

Explosions (check)
Vehicles X crashing in building X (check)
Famous city X destruction (check)
World war X scenario (check)
Costumer playing a character based on a great plot (che.... eh.... uhm.... wait! did we needed that?)

 

You are more than likely right.
I haven't played MW3 for some time now...

Got sick of small whining moaning kids.... the words Noob & Hacker.. every single match
All because you was kicking there arse.
I am a BFBC2 player & this you don't see.. ok the odd Noob but its meant in jest.

BF3 will be the real players game - DrBobD34th (Gaming name)

 

Th3r3's a sp3cial plac3 in h3ll for p3opl3 who r3plac3 l3tt3rs with numb3rs.

 

Call of Duty is the perfect example for me of a game where I'd like the sp & mp to be split out.
The sp of Modern Warfare 2 was a thoroughly entertaining 5 hours. But 5 hours is a **** length for a sp campaign, especially in a game that cost £30 or more & I didn't like the mp, partly because I hate lag & partly because I don't particularly enjoy playing games of skill and/or tactics with children, morons, noisy people or the mentally retarded & there was nobody else online. Ever.

 

Got MW1 loved it and played it lots, got annoyed by lack of dedicated servers in MW2 so didn't buy it (or play it). Got distracted by BFBC2 and tons of other games. Now I look at these very expensive games and think I can live without being ripped off to pay Kotick's bonus so haven't touched them and tbh probably never will.

 

I wonder if there's gonna more more quick-time events? Frak'in hate those things.

 

Yay, another rushed port rehashing an aging engine. The new CoD per year situation offers nothing new and they overprice their games because they know they can since everyone mindlessly gobbles it up. It's just a big race between BF and CoD now and personally I'd rather wait 10 years for something epic (Half-Life 3?) than have mediocre content delivered regularly...

 

Looks like ****. Guaranteed to be the biggest thing ever. NEXT.

 

as for all games i like to wait for it to be actually released and for reviews to start coming in, before i make any judgement.

graphics wise though, it looks perfectly acceptable, i'm not overly worried about cutting edge graphics, its always a bonus for a game to have high graphic standards, but for me there are more important things to worry about.
example, fallout new vegas, loved the game even though the graphics are clearly years behind, i really can't say i ever thought "this game would be better if the graphics were better".

 

Thank you! They are 2 completely different types of FPS and therefore are uncomparable. Even the head of DICE said he hates how the 2 games are compared as if direct competitors.

One is an arcade shooter, the other one tactical. Both fun for different reasons.

 

to me black ops felt (and still feels) like a fisher price product, if Hasbro made war games, BLOPS would be it. its just so shallow and meaningless, even when you're playing objective based games modes. so i've decided not to buy another CoD game. I'm bored of them and BF can offer me more in the way of something that makes you think.

maybe i've just grown out of it

 

guarantee that all those "cool looking" explosions are scripted and now you have seen them, they wont impress you at all in game. They wont have destructible environments like in BF3, infinity Ward will call "boxes in the corner of the map that can blow up" destructible environments.
BF3 looks so much more fun, bigger maps, better tactics, real destructible environments.

unfortunatly all the console kiddies will buy MW3 anyway and I am sure it will be a huge hit for them. I dont really care about COD anymore anyway, I have had enough of the 2 games that I actually did buy.

I still play BFBC2 very often and I still enjoy the hell out of it. Blowing up buildings properly just never gets old.

 

Do you expect the entire FPS genre to adopt destructible environments as a standard feature just because one game has it? It's not a simple advancement in technology, it is a huge change in game rules that doesn't suit a twitch-based game like COD IMO.