Question: Is anyone else tired of hearing about how much MW3 sucks?
i am tired of hearing about how sh*tty MW3 is because it is to similar to the other CoD games. isnt it the point of a franchise to create a game that is enjoyable and tweak it and keep the same feel as the other games in the franchise. nobody said anything about how repetitive games are until BF3 fanboys needed a reason to bash CoD. nobody said anything about how repetitive Halo 1 2 3, Gears of War, and Assassins Creed were. if you enjoy a game thats fine, if you dont thats fine also but stop bashing a game because you dont like it or its the rival game of the game you like.
Answer:
MW3 sucks
Honestly I'm not a FPS fan. Well a huge one anyway. I received Battlefield 3 as a gift, and decided to go with it. Because it seems on everything I read, Battlefield 3 is rated just a little higher than COD MW3. I don't try to bash any game. Because I know every game has its good points. That being said, Assasin's Creed is not repetitive. Or if it is its meant to be. They're direct sequels. Who wants to play a sequel to a game that has an entirely new game control scheme and gameplay mechanic?
Completely agree with you here. Honestly, Battlefield fanboys have become some of the most annoying people at the moment. Battlefield is also a good game, but the fact is, that franchise doesn't change much either. Fanboys just like to think it does because it had a bit more depth than most online shooters in the first place. Bad Company 2 was a big step up from the previous games, but Battlefield 3 changed almost nothing, and THAT's the one the fanboys are getting pissy about. If anything, it was a bit worse than Bad Company 2, because the online was laggy and the campaign wasn't as good.
And yeah, like you said, it's not supposed to make any drastic changes because that would ruin the feel of the series. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Somebody else here already said that what they should actually do is try to improve it as much as possible; thing is, for what it's trying to do, the CoD games' formula is pitch-perfect, that's why they always get such good reviews in the first place.
So basically, yes, it does get tedious hearing people say MW3 sucks, because it doesn't - it just hasn't changed, and even then that's not a bad thing.
when you went from world at war to mw2 werent you blown the **** away? then mw2 to black ops it was alright nothing great just another shooter to pass the time till mw3. NOW THAT GAME SUCKS thank god i didnt pay extra for elite. heard the servers since launch day of elite are still down. and people are PAYING EXTRA. thats why that game is garbage.
I'll put it this way. Call of Duty has been practically the same for 8 games, and they haven't brought anything new to the table except different guns, different battles, and different times.
Halo, its main competish, has turned it into an RTS at one point, and it brings a whole new way to play to the table. Assassin's Creed isn't a FPS, so it is irrelevant.
And fanboys/fangirls bash. Deal with it. Look at Harry Potter and Twilight.
MW3 sucks
no it simply sucks that it never gets old
The pount of a franchise isn't to keep the core feeling it is to improve it as much as possible. CoD doesn't do that. I like CoD but I don't want to dish out $60+ dollars for something I own. The campaign although fun is ridiculous and completely unrealistic as is the rest of CoD. I would have no problem with that if Activision didn't scream realistic in every ad and press conference. They reskin maps, guns, and perks to the point where I feel nothing has changed. The developers have ni sense of balance and do nothing after the release to balance, the last and only patch I can remember for balancing was MW2 and the Modells. If you look at Halo, GoW, BF3 etc they all change dynamically. They don't just reskin they change the games. Halo's armor abilities, Battlefield and Frostbite 2.0, etc. People are gonna buy and enjoy CoD, that's fine I'm not one of them. There will be excess flaming in this topic I guarentee but I've stated my opinion and supported it so I don't care.
Im not, cus I hate all of the multiplayer COD's except for Modern Warfare 1 (COD4). Its simple and by far the best. The company didnt try too hard to max every opportunity and feature which is how they've ruined the newer MW's.
BF3 looks amazing, my brother's played it and it looks truly original and fresh where as COD is being repeated and not updated, just tweaked.
Its a shame though that no attention or security has been developed in COD4, all it is now is a hacked game, sooner or later someone will hack the entire system and Activision/infinity ward or whatever is in charge now will be shut down hopefully.
It DOES suck. Its the same thing as mw2. There are parts of maps which are identical to mw2, but with different things on them.
On top of all that the graphics suck, the story line is the EXACT SAME(start with big group of people. Main character dies(soap&ghost). You are all commando with another person, and main antagonist(Shepard and makarov) dies) The audio is out dated, and gun shots are the same sound for every gun. The maps are miniature, your whole team quick scopes, and there is no bullet drop. Kill streaks are achieved every second. Everyone camps if there not running knifing or quick scoping. Drop shooters, enough said. No teamwork or skill is required. Perks, you can be pretty much a tank. Making an incredibly unrealistic game, and adding super powers to it, believe it or not, does NOT make it better. That is only a few reasons.
And Sakif, 1943 doesn't have a campaign.
Bro, i am with you. I am really tired of all the BF3 fanboys bashing MW3, it's a great game, where BF3 is full of campers and in the end of the match you hardly get 10 kills, while on the other hand MW3 has fast paced action on every corner, kill streaks, perks etc.. Of course there are faults in MW3, you can't expect it to be PERFECT, that's just too much to ask. While on the other hand BF3 is a really good game with all it's good things and all. I personally have played both of them and they are 2 VERY different games and in my opinion only idiots will complain them, if you want to camp,be a team player, get 0 deaths and all, play BF3, and if you want to experience some fast paced action, kill streaks, be a lone gun, get perks etc, play MW3
and as for the campaigns of the both games, I like both of them, I prefer MW3 campaign better because of the story line, it has been going on since Modern Warfare, while on the other hand I am SURE that most of the BF3 players haven't played Battlefield Bad Company or Battlefield 1943.
I prefer MW3, because I like that fast paced action, i like to run around with an assault rifle or smg and just have some fun rather than being a team player. But in the end it all comes down to personal preference, choose whatever one you like, but just don't hate on other games of the same type, that's gay.